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.
1:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Geoff Regan
Is there any discussion of this motion?
(Motion agreed to)
Mr. Fragiskatos.
1:35 p.m.
Liberal
Peter Fragiskatos Liberal London North Centre, ON
On the questioning of witnesses:
That witnesses be given ten (10) minutes for their opening statement; that, at the discretion of the Chair, during the questioning of witnesses, there be allocated six (6) minutes for the first questioner of each party, as follows: Round 1:
Conservative Party
[followed by the] Liberal Party
[followed by the] Bloc Québécois
[followed by the] New Democratic Party
For the second and subsequent rounds, the order and time for questioning be as follows:
Conservative Party, five (and that thereafter five (5)) minutes,
Liberal Party, five (5) minutes,
Conservative Party, five (5) minutes
Liberal Party, five (5) minutes
Bloc Québécois, two and a half (2.5) minutes,
New Democratic Party, two and a half (2.5) minutes.
1:35 p.m.
Conservative
Todd Doherty Conservative Cariboo—Prince George, BC
Mr. Chair, I have a question regarding the number of witnesses in a meeting.
I know in other committees when we have been jammed up with witnesses and the availability of witnesses, it has not been preferred that we reduce the amount of time to seven minutes. Do we extend the meeting, given that we may have a number of witnesses per meeting and that may jam up the entire meeting?
Do we want to deal with the number of witnesses per meeting that we'll be calling?
1:40 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Geoff Regan
That's a question you're asking the whole committee and that could conceivably be a separate motion or matter for the subcommittee.
Mr. Albas.
1:40 p.m.
Conservative
Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC
Mr. Chair, obviously it's a new Parliament, so we should start with this. If there begins to be a big issue, then we can always move a motion at some later point to amend our routine proceedings, but I'm satisfied that we can try it out, and if it serves the committee well, then we'll go with that.
1:40 p.m.
Bloc
Stéphane Bergeron Bloc Montarville, QC
As one would say in the computer field, this is the default.
As we have just mentioned, we may find ourselves in situations where we have a little less time. There could also be other situations. For example, when the Prime Minister appears, I would be very uncomfortable limiting his time to 10 minutes if he wishes to take more.
How are we going to handle this between us? We should discuss it now to avoid a deadlock in case the situation requires a change in this basic rule.
1:40 p.m.
Liberal
Rob Oliphant Liberal Don Valley West, ON
My understanding is that, generally, on parliamentary committees if there is unanimous consent to move away from routine proceedings, it is done on a meeting-by-meeting, case-by-case situation. The chair would test whether or not the committee.... If there are two panels in the same meeting, instead of two 10-minute periods, the chair and the clerk may offer advice to the committee that they take seven minutes or seven and a half minutes. If there is only one person that the committee wants to hear from, they may suggest to the committee that they want 15 minutes.
I have never experienced that as a problem in committees. Generally it's at the discretion of the chair and the clerk and generally there is just nodding, or nodding off, of the committee members as they make that decision. I have never seen that as difficult.
In the routine motions, we set the rounds. We're attempting in this motion to say that the government party takes 33% of the time. The Conservative Party, the official opposition, gets 33% of the time, and the NDP and the Bloc each get 17% of the time.
The government is showing generosity in allowing more time for the opposition than for the government side and that is the routine proceeding. When we get into meeting by meeting, case by case, then we trust the chair and the clerk to advise our committee and we will agree or not agree, but that is at the discretion of the chair.
1:40 p.m.
Bloc
Stéphane Bergeron Bloc Montarville, QC
I feel I must go back.
I understand completely what Mr. Oliphant is saying, but I also recall situations where government parties were less cooperative when it came time, say, to question the Prime Minister.
I am of the opinion that 10 minutes for a Prime Minister might not be enough. I would suggest that, for the opposition parties, the time proposed here to question the Prime Minister may not be sufficient either. I would not want us to find ourselves in a situation where, having tabled a request to increase the speaking time, we would be denied by the government.
1:40 p.m.
Liberal
Peter Fragiskatos Liberal London North Centre, ON
I hope we can get back to that word “consensus” here on the issue, but I think that it would be wise perhaps to send this matter to the subcommittee to examine. When it comes to witness time and this sort of thing, that's not unimportant. It's very important, but it's a matter specifically for the subcommittee to work out. At least, that's been my experience. Those matters are usually brought to the subcommittee's attention.
1:40 p.m.
Liberal
Rob Oliphant Liberal Don Valley West, ON
I was going to say the same thing. In my experience on committees we use this as our standard, as our base, and then as it needs to change, we need to change. I think that if the subcommittee is working well... Often, this won't even go to the subcommittee. The chair and the clerk will advise us and we'll make a very quick decision at the beginning of a meeting.
We're expecting to have a significant number of witnesses. We'll have other meetings with lengthy briefings. We're going to have lots of work to do, so I would like to take this as a start. If the subcommittee on agenda is looking at various meetings they may recommend to the whole committee that we make specific changes for meetings, but I also think the chair's job is to manage our time to make it most effective.
(Motion agreed to)
1:45 p.m.
Liberal
Peter Fragiskatos Liberal London North Centre, ON
On documents distribution:
That the Clerk of the Committee be authorized to distribute documents to members of the Committee only when the documents are available in both official languages and that the witnesses be advised accordingly.
(Motion agreed to)
1:45 p.m.
Liberal
Peter Fragiskatos Liberal London North Centre, ON
On working meals, so that we don't starve:
That the Clerk of the Committee be authorized to make the necessary arrangements to provide working meals for the Committee and its Subcommittees.
(Motion agreed to)
1:45 p.m.
Liberal
Peter Fragiskatos Liberal London North Centre, ON
On witnesses' expenses:
That, if requested, reasonable travel, accommodation and living expenses be reimbursed to witnesses not exceeding two (2) representatives per organization; provided that, in exceptional circumstances, payment for more representatives be made at the discretion of the Chair.
1:45 p.m.
Conservative
Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC
Just on this point, Mr. Chair, I would hope, though, simply because the work of this committee could have a very worldwide footprint, that we would try to use Skype and some of the technology that taxpayers have availed us of.
1:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Geoff Regan
Video conferencing, etc. Sure. Thank you very much.
(Motion agreed to)
Mr. Fragiskatos.