Evidence of meeting #2 for Declaration of Emergency in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was chair.
A video is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Larry Brock Conservative Brantford—Brant, ON
That was the original amendment. I am prepared, in light of the commentary I have heard, to make a further suggestion—that all four ministers appear for six hours. That could be broken down into increments of two three-hour periods.
Conservative
Larry Brock Conservative Brantford—Brant, ON
Yes. I understand and appreciate Mr. Virani's very thoughtful suggestions that from time to time, as we often see in the House in question period, when a question is posed to a particular minister and that minister may be present, there may be an element of the question that's better addressed by another minister. I understand that and I get that. However, in the conduct of this particular hearing, while I appreciate that this is by no means a trial, a civil trial or a criminal trial, we ought to strive for some level of independence.
This is not going to be the proverbial cakewalk for ministers. They're going to be required to delve into some serious issues. I don't want this to be a situation where a minister may not like a particular question being put to him or her and simply defer it to another minister to provide an answer. I think there has to be some degree of independence.
I have no problem with them being in the vicinity, but with regard to being able to defer to another minister, I would prefer to have the minister who's being questioned provide some response. He or she can simply say, “I'm not aware” or “That's not part of my jurisdiction; you'd better ask Minister Such-and-such.” That's okay.
Bloc
The Joint Co-Chair Bloc Rhéal Fortin
Mr. Brock, if I understand your comment correctly, you would be prepared to withdraw your proposed amendment, and we would debate Mr. Virani's amendment. Mr. Virani's amendment proposed that rather than having a two-hour period for each witness, we would have a total period of six hours.
Would you agree to that, Mr. Brock?
Conservative
Bloc
The Joint Co-Chair Bloc Rhéal Fortin
There would be a total period of six hours.
Senator Carignan, your hand is up. Do you wish to speak?
Bloc
The Joint Co-Chair Bloc Rhéal Fortin
Before I hear your comment, I just want to make sure that Mr. Brock is in agreement.
At the moment we are discussing Mr. Brock's amendment.
Mr. Brock, do you agree to withdraw your amendment so that we can move on to Mr. Virani's amendment?
Liberal
Rachel Bendayan Liberal Outremont, QC
Mr. Chair, I think it's still Mr. Brock's amendment. It is Mr. Brock who wants to add to what Mr. Virani proposed earlier.
Bloc
The Joint Co-Chair Bloc Rhéal Fortin
The amendment that we are considering is that each witness would be heard for two hours. What I understand from our discussions is that we would like the question period to be six hours in total.
Am I mistaken?
Liberal
Bloc
The Joint Co-Chair Bloc Rhéal Fortin
Mr. Motz wanted to propose an amendment to Mr. Brock's motion, which might resolve the dilemma, but Mr. Carignan had already begun speaking.
If your comments are still relevant, Senator Carignan, we will listen.
Then I will give the floor to Mr. Motz.
Senator, Québec (Mille Isles), C
I would like to get some information from the clerk.
I'm looking for the information in last week's notes, and I can't find it. I know we had discussed the speaking time for each of the committee members, and the second round.
If I remember correctly, at the end of the second round, the Senators will speak. If everyone uses their allotted time, will an hour and a half be enough time for the ministers to make their opening statements and for each of the members of the committee to have two turns?
Bloc
The Joint Co-Chair Bloc Rhéal Fortin
Thank you, Senator Carignan.
The clerk of the Senate would like to give us some information on this matter.
The Joint Clerk Mr. Mark Palmer
According to the calculations, there will be enough time, but it obviously depends on the length of the ministers' statements.
Bloc
The Joint Co-Chair Bloc Rhéal Fortin
The clerk tells me that the limit for the opening statement is five minutes and then we'll go to question period. We will have time in an hour and a half to do the full rounds.
Does that answer your question, Senator Carignan?
Senator, Québec (Mille Isles), C
Yes, that's perfect. That's what I was worried about.
Conservative
Glen Motz Conservative Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB
Thank you very much, Chair.
In reference to the amendment from Mr. Brock, I wish to propose a friendly amendment that changes the wording here on this, and I believe it will find support from across the way. It is that we change it to “dates chosen” and then “invoked on February 14th under the Emergencies Act for a period of 1.5 hours each”. That would mean each minister would have 1.5 hours, for a total of six hours between the four ministers. Now for those of you who are lawyers, 1.5 times four is six hours.
Bloc
The Joint Co-Chair Bloc Rhéal Fortin
Are you sure?
Does anyone wish to speak on Mr Motz's proposal?
Mr. Green, you have the floor.
NDP
The Joint Chair NDP Matthew Green
Just to speak to the conversation around their introductory remarks, I have found it immensely helpful in some other committees when ministers provide their remarks to us in advance. That will give us time to contemplate it and have them before us. It will obviously give the translators the opportunity there as well. If we could put that small administrative request in, that would be helpful. If we require them 48 hours in advance.... I've also been on committees where those remarks have been distributed 10 minutes before the meeting, and that's not quite as helpful.
