Canadian Heritage Committee on April 4th, 2017

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

—or 10 days in which they can arrange their lives to come here. If we do it today and we expect to be moving tomorrow with witnesses, that's often difficult, unless they're government witnesses from the departments that we need to have come in.

I think you're absolutely right; we need to get all that done. This is where the clerk will be able to assist us, and hopefully the analyst will also give us a list of witnesses who he feels could fit the scope of our study when we're doing it. That's again a traditional thing to do.

Mr. Reid.

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I'm wondering whether it is the practice in this committee for one member to be able to ask another member a question without having to wait for the entire speaking order or seek unanimous consent to allow me to ask Mr. Vandal a question and have him respond to it; or whether that is not permitted, the way this committee works.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

I don't think we've ever come across that question. Everybody seems to be able to get their turn, and nobody has ever brought this up before. But Mr. Reid, it's your turn now, so if you wish to ask Mr. Vandal a question, please go ahead.

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON]

Well, the question is just that I didn't actually get a rationale I could establish for the maximum of 10 meetings: why that number, which I must say seems very limited indeed? I was hoping to get a response to that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Mr. Vandal.

[Dan Vandal, Liberal, Saint Boniface—Saint Vital, MB]

I think it's just a function of the tremendous amount of work that we have to do at this committee. We've been wrestling with the media committee—and maybe that's not the right term—for about a year and a half now. It's very important.

I have a sports and indigenous peoples report that's waiting; we have a museums report that is ongoing; we have a couple of other issues. They're all important. I think, given that this one is....

Mr. Anderson is bang on that there is a lot there. There is going to be some passionate discourse, but if we all bear down, if we're focused, and if we take some time early on—not today, but maybe Thursday—and nail down some terms of reference that are fair and encompassing, I believe we can do this in 10 meetings, and I believe that is why the extended hours are in there as well, as necessary.

It's going to be a challenge. I'm not saying it will be easy, but I think we can do it. It's very doable.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Does that answer your question, Mr. Reid?

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON]

I was seeking his rationale; he has provided it.

I wonder as well, just for purposes of confirmation, is Mr. Vandal merely discussing this right now, or should we understand that he has actually moved this motion? He didn't say those words. He may have intended to do so.

[Dan Vandal, Liberal, Saint Boniface—Saint Vital, MB]

I have moved it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

I read the motion into the record.

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON]

All right, that's fine. That's what I wanted to establish, that we are in fact debating the motion and that the motion is on the floor.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Madam Chair, if I still have the floor—

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Yes, continue, Mr. Reid.

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON]

I appreciate the importance of all these other items that are on the agenda here, but I will just state what I think would be obvious to anyone. This motion M-103 and the debate over it is the item that has dominated the news thus far this spring in parliamentary proceedings. No issue has attracted more media attention, more public interest. It is hard to believe, given the importance that the Canadian media and public have given to this issue—the importance that clearly others place on it—that it should be treated as something that has to be wrapped up so quickly. I think this just speaks for itself.

Additionally, I can't but notice the very substantial scope of this motion, which makes it inconceivable to me that we could do anything more than the most cursory—frankly, the most disrespectfully brief—treatment of this, were we to do it in 10 meetings. Remember, that's 10 meetings, including the actual writing of the report, the reviewing of the report, and so on, at least the way this is written right now.

This motion calls for us to deal with not merely Islamophobia, but all forms of systemic racism—all of them—and of religious discrimination.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Mr. Reid, I'm sorry, I hate to be rude, because I had given you the floor to speak, but the clerk has just informed me that there are four Conservatives at the table, and you have not been substituted in for any member, so in theory you do not have the floor unless you have unanimous consent.

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON]

No, Madam Chair, I think if you consult the rules—we went through this in the procedure and House affairs committee some time ago—the rules say that I can't move a motion and that I can't vote unless I'm substituted in for somebody, but not that I can't speak. In fact any member of the House can speak at any meeting. I realize this is something that doesn't arise all the time, but it is actually permitted.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

That is not how we have followed these meetings. I remember that when MPs tried to speak who were not members of the committee, we were not given unanimous consent by the Conservatives at the time, and so we did not allow it to happen.

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON]

But you can't actually.... My point is that the rules permit me to speak.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Now, if you are substituted in as a member, who is going to leave the table?

Larry, are you going? Is that what you're saying?

We cannot have five members—

[Larry Maguire, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

Madam Chair, why don't you decide?

[Kevin Waugh, Conservative, Saskatoon—Grasswood, SK]

Well, unless the purists come over to our scene, there are only four new seats at the table.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Yours are supposed to be three.

[Larry Maguire, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

I don't have a problem with that, Madam Chair, and I will step back and sub Mr. Reid in for me, if that's what you like—

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

He is substituted for you now.

[Larry Maguire, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

—but there is an opportunity to speak, not to move a motion, if we look at the rules of the House.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Actually, if you recall, we had this issue come up, and Mr. Van Loan, who is a guru with regard to rules, definitely told us that we needed unanimous consent. I checked, and it did say so in the committee rules.

I am just bringing this up because it was pointed out to me by the clerk that we had four Conservatives at the table, and if we were going to ask Mr. Reid to speak, he should have mentioned that he was not substituting for anyone.

It seems to me, without getting too technical about this, Larry, that you are ceding your position to Mr. Reid. Are you? We have a signed form to that—