Evidence of meeting #22 for Canadian Heritage in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was crtc.
A recording is available from Parliament.
6:50 p.m.
The Clerk
There are other days currently being explored. I am told Thursday is quite full, but it will take another 24 to 48 hours before we have a response from the services as to whether or not they can accommodate alternate days. We do know that we have Tuesday and Wednesday.
6:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
Okay. Thank you for that.
Obviously this is not something we can decide on until you get that information.
Yes, Clerk.
6:50 p.m.
The Clerk
Mr. Coteau had his hand up.
6:50 p.m.
Michael Coteau Don Valley East, Lib.
I have just a quick question in regard to four meetings. Can we accommodate two five-hour meetings past the constituency week? Would that be possible? It just seems like a big time slot. Is that easy to do or is it possible to do?
6:50 p.m.
Liberal
6:50 p.m.
The Clerk
I wouldn't be able to tell you if it's possible. If you speak to your whips, and they determine that that's what's happening, then that's what will happen. Beyond that, no, we don't ordinarily sit outside of our time slot.
6:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
Thank you.
Basically what we are told is that we could have two blocks of five and a half hours—are they, Clerk?—on Tuesday and Wednesday of next week, and you are exploring other days in case those days are not acceptable.
6:50 p.m.
The Clerk
For the constituency week, yes, it's five and a half hours. I believe there's the understanding that we will be taking a half-hour break in order to give the interpreters a moment. It's more of a health break in between. So it would be five hours of sitting over five and a half hours.
6:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
Thank you.
Mr. Julian, you are talking about the following week, the week that we get back, and whether there is an ability to also make up another 10 hours during that week.
It's my understanding, Clerk, that to do so, we would have to have hours extended onto our time. I don't know if you have explored that and what you've found.
6:50 p.m.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC
On a point of order, Madam Chair, before you go to the clerk, I should mention that I know that the whips are working on supports for interpretation. That's been a problem. I think it's quite likely that this will be resolved by the time we get to the first week back after the break week.
6:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
Thank you, Mr. Julian, for that information.
Obviously, we will have to try to find a time that's acceptable to everyone else, but the question of devoting the equivalent of 10 two-hour meetings for public hearings, and to do so within two weeks, is what Mr. Julian is suggesting.
So if I don't hear any....
Yes, Clerk.
6:55 p.m.
The Clerk
Mr. Champoux has put his hand up, and then it's Mr. Nater.
6:55 p.m.
Bloc
Martin Champoux Bloc Drummond, QC
Madam Chair, I don't know how recent the information from our clerk is. For my part, the information I've received in the last hour indicates that the time slots available in the next week have already been booked by other committees. In particular, I understand that the Standing Committee on Finance will be sitting all of next week.
So it seems that it is impossible to reserve five-hour time slots next week, but I would like to validate that information so that we do not go down either road without the most up‑to‑date information. I understand that the available time slots are going quickly and may already be gone.
6:55 p.m.
The Clerk
I had confirmation from my manager earlier this afternoon that those spots were reserved for us. I haven't heard anything different.
6:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
That clarifies again the Tuesday and Wednesday spots for five and a half hours each.
Does that answer your question, Mr. Champoux? Okay. Thank you.
Go ahead, John.
6:55 p.m.
Conservative
John Nater Conservative Perth—Wellington, ON
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you to the members of the committee for their insights so far.
First, in terms of the deadline for the witness lists, I think that's entirely reasonable. I don't see any reason why we can't have our witness lists in by the end of—
6:55 p.m.
Conservative
John Nater Conservative Perth—Wellington, ON
—today, frankly; or tomorrow, yes. I'm not concerned about that. I think we can go ahead.
As for Mr. Julian's suggestion of 20 hours for witnesses, I think that's reasonable. I think we can work with that. We'll see what happens towards the end of that period. I'm trying to be reasonable. I think the equivalent of 10 meetings is reasonable. I'll leave it at that.
I'm a little hesitant about devoting the equivalent of 10 hours on a constituency week next week. Speaking for our members on this side, we have made commitments in our constituencies. We are ending up a four-week session. We have four weeks after this. I know that my colleagues and I have commitments in our ridings, and many school visits, which can only happen on so many days. It's nice to see that they're happening in person again.
I would be hesitant to commit us to 10 hours during the constituency week. If we can find the resources during the following sitting week, I think that would be preferable from our point of view. To ask the other three members of this committee to give up or cancel what they've already got planned, or to ask non-members of this committee who may not have a background in terms of what the legislation will be, I think is asking a lot.
Again, we'll see what other people think, but it would be my preference to do this during a sitting week. I think it is reasonable to go with longer meetings. I think Mr. Julian has made a kind compromise. If we can work towards something on that, I think that's reasonable.
6:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
Just to clarify, you are agreeing to a deadline for witnesses by tomorrow, Thursday, at four o’clock eastern time, yes? That's fine.
I understand that the clerk—and she can clarify this for me—has a list of witnesses from the other parties. Would the committee like that list to be shared? If no one opposes the idea, we'll go ahead and have the clerk share the list that she has and then add Mr. Nater's list by tomorrow at four. Is there opposition? Seeing none, then I think we have accepted two very clear things.
The only thing we need to discuss now is what Mr. Nater is suggesting. John is suggesting that we can't do 10 hours next week. Again, the committee will have to discuss how to do this. We now have had the clerk tell us that she has managed to confirm Tuesday and Wednesday for five and a half hours, with half an hour being the break in between for a change of interpreters, etc., I gather, so we do have a bird in the hand.
I don't know about the following week and what we will get if we try to find the equivalent hours in that time. Again, as Monsieur Champoux pointed out, we're seeing many committees trying to grab whatever time and resources there are. That's one of the reasons why I would like us to make some decisions today. If we don't, if we snooze, we will lose the ability to get any extra time at all. I would like to hear this being discussed.
I have Madam Clerk.
7 p.m.
The Clerk
Mr. Julian has his hand up, Madam Chair.