Declaration of Emergency Committee on March 24th, 2022

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

Thank you, Mr. Carignan.

Mr. Brock, you have the floor.

[Larry Brock, Conservative, Brantford—Brant, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Ultimately, I think what I will be proposing is that we adjourn this debate. I think that perhaps this is premature, based on what I'm hearing from committee members.

I just want to add this commentary. For the lawyers on this committee, there is such a thing as bias, and there's the reasonable apprehension of bias. No one on the Conservative team is impugning the integrity and the professionalism of the federal civil service, but ultimately, depending on how we frame this study and the scope of the study, we may be getting into areas that directly relate to the advice that legal counsel gave to the government.

In that instance, it would be highly, highly inappropriate, because it would be an actual perception of bias to consider the independence of that type of evidence for the purposes of this committee. I think that in those circumstances it would be a wise, prudent move to consider outside counsel.

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

Mr. Brock, are you moving that we adjourn the study of this motion?

[Larry Brock, Conservative, Brantford—Brant, ON]

No, the motion, not the study.

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

Obviously.

[Voices]

Oh, oh! (laughter)

[Larry Brock, Conservative, Brantford—Brant, ON]

That would run contrary to my commentary last week.

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

Of course.

I want to know whether you're moving a motion to adjourn the study of Mr. Motz's motion.

[Larry Brock, Conservative, Brantford—Brant, ON]

Yes.

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

Okay.

Ms. Bendayan and Mr. Virani still want to speak, but I'm told that the motion to adjourn must be voted on first.

Do we have the unanimous consent of the committee members?

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

It's adjourning debate on the motion.

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

Yes, this concerns the adjournment of the debate on your motion, Mr. Motz.

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

To adjourn the debate....

[Rachel Bendayan, Liberal, Outremont, QC]

Yes, to adjourn the debate.

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

This isn't the adjournment of the committee meeting.

Is there a consensus?

(Motion agreed to)

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

I rule that we adjourn the debate on Mr. Motz's motion.

Mr. Motz, I think that you wanted to move another motion.

[Rachel Bendayan, Liberal, Outremont, QC]

Mr. Chair, with your permission, I would like to address a comment made by my colleague Senator Carignan.

He said earlier that our committee's work was quite similar to the work of a commission of inquiry. I want to point out that subsection 63(1) of the Emergencies Act, entitled “Inquiry”, provides for a commission of inquiry. Our work is separate, pursuant to section 62 of the act.

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

Thank you, Ms. Bendayan.

Mr. Motz, you can now move your next motion.

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

Thank you so very much, Chair.

I'm proposing the following motion. I'll just wait for its distribution.

I think everyone has it. May I proceed, Chair?

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

I think that everyone has the text of the motion.

Mr. Clerk, did the committee members attending the meeting virtually receive it as well?

Mr. Carignan, did you receive it?

[Claude Carignan]

Yes.

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

Thank you.

Mr. Motz, you have the floor.

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

Thank you so much, Chair.

The motion, then, would read, “That the joint committee frame its primary study and its final report under the following themes: one, the events leading to invocation of the Emergencies Act; two, the rationale for invoking the Emergencies Act and the alternative courses of action available; three, the legality of invoking the Emergencies Act; four, the choice and necessity of the regulations and orders adopted under the Emergencies Act; five, the constitutionality of those regulations and orders; and six, the use made of those regulations and orders.”

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

I'll now turn the floor over to Mr. Green. I've noted that Mr. Harder wants to speak next.

[The Joint Chair, NDP, Matthew Green]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I think this is a really solid start and a really clear pathway for a work plan.

I would, however, like to move an amendment to include, “that the joint committee frame its primary study in its final report, including but not limited to the following themes”.

That would give us the flexibility of perhaps pursuing topics that are unbeknownst to us in this moment. It would use this frame as the basis for the work plan, but not keep it limited to that should other courses of interest or study present themselves given new information that's presented on the points that are brought forward.