Evidence of meeting #1 for Canadian Heritage in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was move.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Peter Van Loan Conservative York—Simcoe, ON
It's entirely appropriate that it be voted on, but if there is an amendment proposed to that motion, which is what we have heard from Mr. Nantel, the amendment should be dealt with first.
NDP
Pierre Nantel NDP Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC
Mr. Chair, I think Mr. Van Loan is quite familiar with the procedures.
Thank you.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
Mr. Nantel, you're suggesting that there be four members to constitute a quorum.
All right, that is the amendment on the floor. May I call the vote?
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
(Motion agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
Now we will move on to the next motion, which is about the reduced quorum.
Liberal
Julie Dabrusin Liberal Toronto—Danforth, ON
I would like to bring that motion on reduced quorum, please.
I would like to move the following motion:
That the Chair be authorized to hold meetings to receive evidence and to have that evidence printed when a quorum is not present, provided that at least four (4) members are present, including one (1) member of the opposition and one (1) member of the government; and that, in the case of previously scheduled meetings taking place outside the Parliamentary precinct, the Committee members in attendance shall only be required to wait for 15 minutes following the designated start of the meeting before they may proceed to hear witnesses and receive evidence, as long as a member of the government and the opposition are present.
Liberal
Julie Dabrusin Liberal Toronto—Danforth, ON
I was going to say that it was adopted in the last Parliament.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
Yes, but we are now in this session, so we need to make this a new motion.
(Motion agreed to)
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
We now entertain the next motion, which has to do with time limits for witnesses, statements, and questioning.
Is there anyone who wishes to move this motion?
Mr. Vandal.
Liberal
Dan Vandal Liberal Saint Boniface—Saint Vital, MB
I will move on the time limits for witness statements and questioning:
That the witnesses from any one organization shall be allowed ten (10) minutes to make their opening statement. During the questioning of witnesses, there shall be six (6) minutes allocated for the first round. The order of questions for the first round of questioning shall be as follows: Conservative, Liberal, NDP, Liberal. For the questioning during the second round, six (6) minutes shall be allocated to each questioner and shall be as follows: Liberal, Conservative, Liberal, Conservative, to the exception of the NDP questioning after for three minutes.
There would therefore be a total of 50 minutes of question time.
That is my motion, Madam Chair.
NDP
Pierre Nantel NDP Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Frankly, I find that attitude pretty harsh. I'm very surprised. This is quite a turnaround from the sunny ways promised. Everyone's familiar with the schedule and knows that my time to speak is at the very end. Everyone also knows that the last questions very often aren't asked. As an NDP member, not only am I the last committee member to speak, but I'm also being given just three minutes. That's a complete joke. I refuse to believe that you can't do better than that. Honestly! That's terrible.
Liberal
Conservative
Peter Van Loan Conservative York—Simcoe, ON
I would observe that this issue did arise at the procedure and House affairs committee earlier, and they, having discussed it, came to an agreement on an approach they thought was essentially equivalent. They arranged for each part of round one to be seven minutes, so that two Liberals would get one more minute, the Conservative would get one more minute, and a New Democrat would get one more minute.
That all would get shaved off the second round so that the first three in the second round—Liberal, Conservative, Liberal—were five minutes instead of six minutes. The fourth Conservative was five minutes and stayed there, and for the New Democrat, the minute that was shaved off from there went up front, so they were reduced to two minutes.
That's what was agreed to at procedure and House affairs. Seeing that as balanced, we would be prepared to agree either to that or to the motion that's been made. It could be either one of those.
Liberal
Dan Vandal Liberal Saint Boniface—Saint Vital, MB
I'm wondering if the honourable member would be comfortable with adding an extra minute for the New Democratic Party in the second round.
Conservative
Peter Van Loan Conservative York—Simcoe, ON
The idea of what was done at procedure and House affairs was basically to keep the balance identical, which meant shifting some time from the back end to the front end and not actually allocating additional time to any particular party, thus keeping the numerically fair balance.
Pierre Nantel NDP Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC
Thank you, Ms. Fry.
I'd like to draw your attention to the decision the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs came to. Witnesses are given 10 minutes for their opening statements. A moment ago, Mr. Van Loan mentioned the 7 minutes, which are entirely appropriate.
I'm going to read what was decided in the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs:
…in round one, all slots would be seven-minute slots, with the order being Liberal, Conservative, NDP, Liberal; in round two, the first four slots would all be five-minute slots, and the order would be Conservative, Liberal, Conservative, Liberal; the fifth slot would remain a three-minute slot, and it would be [a poor] NDP slot.
That method has an advantage. If it's a member of the government party who speaks first during the second round of questioning, they could run out of steam. You may not realize this, but asking witnesses relevant questions is quite demanding. Very often, you're almost out of breath when you're trying to wrap up your questions. If, at the very least, we were to alternate with the other side by giving the Conservatives the first opportunity to speak, that would help. As things already stand, the NDP carries little sway when it comes to votes, and I can only lament that fact. But you will see that we have much to contribute to discussions on Canadian heritage issues.
I'd like to suggest something to you, Mr. Van Loan, or you, Mr. Vandal.
I see a problem with the Liberals still going first in the second round. A witness appears before the committee and spends 10 minutes telling their story. Then they are questioned by members in the following order: Conservative, Liberal, NDP and Liberal. And then it starts over again with a member of the government party. That doesn't strike me as a constructive exchange.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
Thank you, Mr. Nantel.
There is a suggestion by Mr. Vandal that he agrees with Mr. Van Loan's suggestion that we follow what the procedure and House affairs committee did, but that we add one extra minute for the NDP, which would give the NDP three minutes. Let us consider that amendment or that idea first and see how that goes.
Liberal
Julie Dabrusin Liberal Toronto—Danforth, ON
Just as a matter of clarification, it's our understanding that in fact three minutes was accorded at PROC to the NDP in the last round, not two.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
Yes.
Shall we entertain a vote on this?
(Motion agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Now we move to the distribution of documents, if someone wishes to move this motion.
Yes, Mr. Nantel.
NDP
Pierre Nantel NDP Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC
My apologies for interrupting. Would it be possible for the clerk to tell us the outcome of this conversation? It's a bit confusing and I'm having a hard time following.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
If you like, I could clarify, Mr. Nantel.
It will be 10 minutes for witnesses to make their opening statement. Then the round would be Conservative, seven minutes; Liberal, seven minutes; NDP, seven minutes; Liberal, seven minutes. Then the second round would be Liberal, five minutes; Conservative, five minutes; Liberal, five minutes; Conservative, five minutes; and NDP, three minutes.
That is what we have passed right now.
We're moving to the distribution of documents. Is there a motion?