Canadian Heritage Committee on Dec. 13th, 2022

[Chris Bittle, Liberal, St. Catharines, ON]

I have two separate motions here. Is it the motion in the email or is it the motion we received from the Bloc?

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

I have the motion from Canadian Heritage, which was sent on Tuesday, December 13.

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

It's the email.

[Chris Bittle, Liberal, St. Catharines, ON]

It's the email. Okay.

There's one day in January—

[An hon. member]

Come on.

[Chris Bittle, Liberal, St. Catharines, ON]

Come on...? There is one day in January. We come back on January 31.

Anyway, this is not going where I want to go. I thought there would be collaboration. I thought there would be a desire to hear from other organizations rather than what I think is unfortunately a few partisan jabs. Why don't we call the minister at the end of our study rather than at the beginning if this is going to be a new change in the direction of the study?

I don't know, guys. This is—

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

All right. I'm going to have to call the question on the subamendment.

[Chris Bittle, Liberal, St. Catharines, ON]

Madam Chair, I have the floor.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

I know you have, Mr. Bittle. I think you're making the same points over and over, but go ahead. Keep making them and we will come to no decision.

[Chris Bittle, Liberal, St. Catharines, ON]

There's no desire for there to be any movement on it. We heard from the members that maybe we will have an expanded study in the new year. However, there doesn't seem to be any desire to actually put that into writing, so I don't know what that means going forward.

I don't know why there's this weird divide. We've worked so well together on this study to this point. Again, I'll let it come to a vote. I won't talk out the clock. I don't know if that's appropriate.

I've expressed my concern and I've been begging for us—I'll focus on my public comments—for the last number of months to actually do the work that we need to do to protect kids. Calling the minister in advance of a report, when maybe she can attend or maybe she can't, is not protecting kids.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you.

Tim, we're speaking to the amendment.

[Tim Louis, Liberal, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Thank you. I just wanted to understand a little better.

In my experience, the ministers usually come at the end of studies. I think that's quite helpful, isn't it? To have witnesses come.... It seems to be reversing the order here.

I'm just a bit confused. I don't have as much experience as some members, but I thought we would have witnesses, we'd have studies and we'd extend that. When the minister comes at the end, there's a bit of a chance to—

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Point of order, Madam Chair.

We are not talking about the amendment at all.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

I'm sorry. This is what Mr. Bittle is suggesting.

However, Mr. Champoux's motion suggests a specific study.

Mr. Champoux.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

I was just saying, Madam Chair, that we are wasting time by giving explanations on something that was quite clear. It is not a question of deciding whether we receive the minister at the beginning or at the end. We have a clear request, namely that the minister present to us the outline of her policy on sport. We are not asking for a report. We are asking to receive the minister to get arguments and tools, and to be better informed for the work we are doing, and what recommendations we can make before the policy is put in place.

I think that was very clear and that we are wasting time, deliberately.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

I will call the question on the amendment.

(Amendment negatived: nays 6; yeas 5)

(Motion agreed to: yeas 7; nays 4)

We have five minutes. I think we could go in camera for those five minutes. No, it's too late.

Do we have any time after that? We have a hard stop at one o'clock, so I guess we will move forward.

Yes, Martin.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Madam Chair, as we have spent more time than expected discussing the motion, I would respectfully suggest to the committee that we schedule a meeting of the subcommittee prior to the start of the session in 2023 so that we can discuss the topics that we would like to address in the next few weeks—we could have done that today—and submit a report from the subcommittee to the committee at the first meeting after our return.

I therefore suggest that the Canadian Heritage subcommittee meet, sometime in the last week of January, to plan the schedule for our return.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

All right. It is the last week in January that you're suggesting, Martin.

Is anybody opposed to this suggestion that the subcommittee meet then?

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

I have a point of order, Chair. I just want to clarify the proposal in terms of it being the last week of January. Are we talking about the first week that Parliament is back in session?

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

It would be when Parliament is not in session. We're talking about sometime during the last week in January.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

I believe that might be difficult for some members due to caucus meetings that are taking place. I might suggest that in lieu of our first meeting in that week when Parliament resumes, perhaps the planning committee should meet instead. This is common practice in other committees.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

We have a motion on the floor. No one opposed it.

You opposed it, so shall we call a meeting?

I don't know when we can call that meeting. The clerk is going to have tell us when she has time and resources. We could be in touch with everybody, if that's okay.

Are you moving an amendment, Mrs. Thomas?

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Madam Chair, I wasn't aware that it was an official motion. I thought it was simply a friendly conversation.

If it's an official motion, then yes, I'm offering a amendment. It would be to say that we take the first meeting that would be scheduled when Parliament resumes, and instead of holding a full committee meeting, we hold a planning committee meeting.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

That's not really an amendment, that's an entirely new motion.

Mr. Champoux.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

The suggestion I submitted was to have an open discussion.

By the way, I appreciate Ms. Thomas' suggestion. I understand that each party has its own commitments before Parliament resumes.

I could clarify my suggestion by proposing the date of January 31 for the subcommittee to meet. That is a Monday. I think that might be a good day for us to meet. Then, at the first meeting of the committee, we would have a work program to propose.

So I propose January 31, if that is convenient for everyone, pending the availabilities that the clerk will offer us.