Evidence of meeting #1 for Canada-China Relations in the 43rd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was work.
A recording is available from Parliament.
1:10 p.m.
Some hon. members
Agreed.
1:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Geoff Regan
We'll have to pause for a few seconds as preparations to televise are made.
1:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Geoff Regan
We're back in session.
We now need to deal with routine motions.
Mr. Fragiskatos, you have some that have been distributed, as I understand it.
1:10 p.m.
Liberal
Peter Fragiskatos Liberal London North Centre, ON
That's correct, Mr. Chair.
I'll just go through them one by one, if I may.
The first of these routine motions is as follows. It pertains to analysts:
That the Committee retain, as needed and at the discretion of the Chair, the services of one or more analysts from the Library of Parliament to assist it in its work.
(Motion agreed to)
1:10 p.m.
Liberal
Peter Fragiskatos Liberal London North Centre, ON
The next motion relates to the subcommittee on agenda and procedure:
That the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure be established and be composed of six (6) members: the Chair, three Vice-Chairs, the Parliamentary Secretary; and one other Member from the Government.
1:10 p.m.
Conservative
Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC
Thanks, Mr. Chair. Congratulations on your election. It's a pleasure to serve with everyone here.
I certainly believe that we need to have routine motions, but I would like to propose a small change. I propose the following amendment that, after the word “vice-chairs”, the comma, the words “parliamentary secretary” and the semicolon be removed completely. If you find the motion in order, I would be happy to give a rationale for it.
I've also been told that one would have to change the number of committee members on the subcommittee, so it would change from “six” to “five”.
1:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Geoff Regan
The motion to amend the motion is in order.
Is there debate on the motion to amend?
1:15 p.m.
Conservative
Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC
Yes. I think that for the government, having both the chair and a member from the government side—they could choose a parliamentary secretary if they liked—would probably be sufficient, in order to have a majority vote when making a recommendation from the subcommittee back to this committee. With six members, you could end up with a split. This would still allow the government to have its member, and it could decide whether it's a parliamentary secretary or not. I don't believe there should be a six-member subcommittee. The amendment should remove the parliamentary secretary.
1:15 p.m.
Liberal
Rob Oliphant Liberal Don Valley West, ON
I don't think we will argue this too strenuously, but we want to point out the arithmetic of this subcommittee. The intention is to mirror, as closely as we can, the makeup of the special committee in the subcommittee, which is already somewhat less proportionate on the government side than in the House of Commons, which the people of Canada elected.
When you look at the House of Commons as elected by the people of Canada, obviously there is a minority government. Obviously we understand that we want to keep that same balance on this committee, which all our committees, as they're struck, will maintain. However, we think the number six is actually quite fair and quite good.
The reality of the arithmetic is that when that committee meets there will be three members of the opposition and two members on the government side. It's three to two, with the chair obviously on the committee but not voting unless there is a tie. If there is a tie, that allows all members of the opposition to be engaged in this as opposed to just the official opposition. The other opposition parties are then able to express their desires as well and be equally accorded a position on this subcommittee.
We think it's very fair to ensure that we have representatives of all the parties with the weight that is important. We would argue that having two members of the government, three members of the opposition and a chair, who will not be able to sway the vote if all the opposition are on one side and the government is on the other side even if.... A tie is not going to happen unless one of the opposition parties supports another party, so we think it's a fair representation of the results of the last election, as indicated by the House of Commons. We think it affords an opportunity for the smaller parties to be fairly represented on the subcommittee.
1:15 p.m.
Conservative
Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC
I appreciate the member's remarks, but I want to say two things. First, let's put in perspective that the subcommittee really is there for scheduling, and any kind of decision from that body would have to be ratified by ours. At the end of the day, the committee members on this full committee are always going to get our way.
However, I would also point out, from speaking to people who have served in previous minority parliaments, that the practice for a subcommittee is to have five members, not six. We don't need to reinvent the wheel. We are going to be productive on this committee. We just don't believe that a parliamentary secretary needs to be named specifically to it. A parliamentary secretary can be named as a member of the government or someone else can be. It's the pleasure of the government to decide who will serve on that subcommittee.
I would just ask all members who believe that it should be five to vote in favour of that resolution and we can get on to the rest of the work of the committee.
1:15 p.m.
Liberal
1:15 p.m.
Liberal
Rob Oliphant Liberal Don Valley West, ON
I think a very important question is whether the official opposition will make a clear declaration that their intention is to work by consensus in this subcommittee as opposed to by voting. If we had an understanding that the opposition was in favour of all work at the subcommittee being done by consensus and reports made to the full committee being done by a consensus decision, then we would have no difficulty whatsoever with having five.
I have not heard from the opposition that they are actually willing to work it by consensus. If I could get a statement clearly recorded that this would be our working mandate for the subcommittee, then we would not have a problem with that.
1:20 p.m.
Conservative
Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC
I don't mean to belabour this to committee, but, again, whatever the subcommittee decides must be ratified by this body. Whether there is consensus or not, if there's not a consensus at this committee, the full committee, it will not proceed.
I also would remind the member that if consensus could be had with two Liberals in addition to the chair, then you could get consensus with one. Just make sure that person is eloquent and reasonable.
1:20 p.m.
Liberal
Rob Oliphant Liberal Don Valley West, ON
What I have asked for is a clear statement from the official opposition that they are prepared to work in consensus at the subcommittee. If I have a clear statement on the record that they are prepared to work in consensus, we will support the amendment.
1:20 p.m.
Conservative
Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC
All I can say, without knowing the members, is that I'm not going to tie members' hands, whether they be official opposition members, other opposition members or government members. Democracy is how we get things done when people don't agree. I would just leave it to those members. I have faith that they'll be able to do it, especially if there are five.
January 20th, 2020 / 1:20 p.m.
Bloc
Stéphane Bergeron Bloc Montarville, QC
Mr. Chair, in response to our colleague Mr. Oliphant's request, I would say that each and every member of the committee can rest assured that, for our part, we will work in full cooperation with all political parties.
I do not believe, and I stress, I do not believe this committee is the appropriate place for partisan wrangling. I think the purpose of this committee is to explore avenues for improved relations between China and Canada. I think it's imperative that we work in the spirit of collaboration.
If that is what our colleague is asking, I assure him of my full cooperation.
1:20 p.m.
Liberal
Rob Oliphant Liberal Don Valley West, ON
Thank you very much.
We feel exactly the same way. We want a spirit of cooperation in all our business here. I feel we need to have something that is appropriate for all parties, in committee and at the subcommittee as well. I think cooperation is important, but I also think all parties need to have the opportunity to demonstrate the same commitment of which you spoke.
1:20 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Geoff Regan
Seeing no other speakers, we have before us the motion to amend.
I think the members are familiar with what the motion to amend says, so I will call for the vote.
Those in favour of the motion to amend, please raise your hands.
Those who are opposed to the motion, please raise your hands.
I didn't see the hand of Mr. Bergeron.