Declaration of Emergency Committee on March 24th, 2022

[Rachel Bendayan, Liberal, Outremont, QC]

It was a two-hour period when we were contemplating two-hour meetings. Now that it is possible to do two panels within one three-hour meeting, in 1.5 hours we would not have time for more witnesses.

However, colleague, I take your point.

I would also like to clarify that there is nothing in this motion that states we would need to come to any conclusion following this panel. We can absolutely speak to outside legal counsel should the majority of this committee wish to do so. There's nothing limiting that possibility in this motion.

[The Joint Co-Chair, Bloc, Rhéal Fortin]

I yield the floor to you on this point of order, Mr. Motz.

[Glen Motz, Conservative, Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB]

Thank you, Chair.

Quite honestly, I have no issue with the motion in dividing them up, but I have to agree with Mr. Green.

We're talking about bringing witnesses in who are going to help us frame a scope. In helping us frame a scope, we then need counsel. I think the counsel will help us frame a scope. I agree that these people need to be here. An hour and a half each is fine. However, if we're doing this for next Tuesday, we still haven't settled the legal counsel issue and I think we need to have legal counsel here to have this conversation, because counsel might be able to provide some sort of balance to what we're hearing from the law clerk and from the drafter of this original legislation.

[The Joint Co-Chair, Bloc, Rhéal Fortin]

Thank you, Mr. Motz.

I remind you that we are still discussing Mr. Green's point of order. We still have Mr. Green, Mr. White, Mr. Virani and Ms. Bendayan who wish to speak on this. I would point out that it is almost 8:10 p.m. and that we have the room until 9 p.m. I just want to remind you of that, because I want to do my job properly.

So we'll continue.

We will now hear from Mr. Green.

[The Joint Co-Chair, NDP, Matthew Green]

No, that's fine. Thank you.

[The Joint Co-Chair, Bloc, Rhéal Fortin]

So we'll move on to Mr. White.

[Vernon White]

I'll be brief.

My expectation is not that they would frame anything for us. They would give us evidence, and I would like to hear their evidence. I don't believe it's the time to call on external legal counsel. I just want to hear their evidence about what their thinking was, and then we will make a determination about our scope.

[The Joint Co-Chair, Bloc, Rhéal Fortin]

Mr. Virani, you have the floor.

[Arif Virani, Liberal, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

I wholeheartedly agree with the interpretation that was just provided by Senator White, but I also question some of the vernacular that's being thrown around. We've heard talks about “independent counsel” or “the law clerk”.

I'm going to reiterate that I do believe that the law clerk, who serves 338 members of Parliament in an impartial way, is independent. He or she gives impartial advice to all members of Parliament.

I would cite what's in appendix 10 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice, second edition, 2009. It says that the “Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel is responsible for providing legal advice to Members of Parliament, the House of Commons standing committees....” That's their job. I want to make sure we're all on the same page in that regard.

I would reiterate Senator White's interpretation that this isn't the point final. We're just starting out on this journey.

It would be useful to hear from the law clerk of both the House of Commons and the Senate, and also from former minister Beatty. They could provide us with some evidence in respect of their views on section 62 and section 63 and what was contemplated at the time of drafting.

Then it is up to the 11 of us, or however many there are, to make a determination about what the scope shall be. That's our decision.

[The Joint Co-Chair, Bloc, Rhéal Fortin]

Thank you, Mr. Virani.

Ms. Bendayan, you have the floor.

[Rachel Bendayan, Liberal, Outremont, QC]

Mr. Chair, I see that we are indeed debating this motion.

[The Joint Co-Chair, Bloc, Rhéal Fortin]

That's what I think too. It bothers me, because I was under the impression that we were discussing Mr. Green's point of order.

[Rachel Bendayan, Liberal, Outremont, QC]

I think we've moved on, and that's fine.

[The Joint Co-Chair, Bloc, Rhéal Fortin]

I do not have any objection to returning to the debate on this motion.

[Rachel Bendayan, Liberal, Outremont, QC]

I have no objection either. In fact, what I would suggest to you, Mr. Chair, is that we go straight to the vote.

[The Joint Co-Chair, Bloc, Rhéal Fortin]

All right, thank you.

Is everyone ready for the vote?

The vote is on Ms. Bendayan's motion, which we received a few minutes ago.

I'll let the clerk proceed with the vote.

(Motion agreed to: yeas, 11; nays, 0. [See Minutes of Proceedings])

[The Joint Co-Chair, Bloc, Rhéal Fortin]

Ms. Bendayan's motion carries unanimously.

Mr. Clerk, since we adjourned the debate on the previous motion and we have just passed Ms. Bendayan's motion, shall we adjourn and call the proposed witnesses, or shall we continue the meeting?

[The Joint Clerk, Mr. Paul Cardegna]

What I would suggest to you is that if anyone else wants to make a motion [Inaudible—Editor].

[The Joint Co-Chair, Bloc, Rhéal Fortin]

All right. So we could invite them to the next meeting.

[Yasir Naqvi, Liberal, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Mr. Chair.

[The Joint Co-Chair, Bloc, Rhéal Fortin]

I heard “Mr. Chair”, but I don't know who said it.

[Yasir Naqvi, Liberal, Ottawa Centre, ON]

I did.

[The Joint Co-Chair, Bloc, Rhéal Fortin]

I'm not used to being called “Mr. Chair”.

[Yasir Naqvi, Liberal, Ottawa Centre, ON]

You're doing a really good job, Mr. Chair. Get used to it.

[The Joint Co-Chair, Bloc, Rhéal Fortin]

Thank you, Mr. Naqvi.

You have the floor.