Environment Committee on Nov. 2nd, 2006

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

I just mention a couple of things in getting started today. The first one is related to the timing of the meeting. We will go to the time posted in our agenda. For instance, today the meeting will end at eleven o'clock, except by unanimous consent that we carry on, or by a motion—that is, majority rule—that we in fact carry on beyond our posted time. Basically, that's how we'll operate from now on, so as not to have the confusion that we seem to have gotten into a couple of times.

[John Godfrey, Liberal, Don Valley West, ON]

Look how well it worked out for us.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

Yes, but I think it's good to make it clear off the top that this is what we'll do.

Yes.

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

I have no problem with the decision, Mr. Chair, but I would like to know if this is a ruling or if we are changing the rules?

I have no problem with the decision, Chair, but I am wondering if this is a ruling or if we're changing the rules with this. Are we voting on something?

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

No, I don't believe it's any change of the rules. After having gone through all of the books and all of the records, I think it's an interpretation that this is the way we should operate. It is therefore my suggestion that it is how we will operate from now on. I think it's the chair's prerogative to make it so, just so it's clear for everyone. Obviously majority rules at that eleven o'clock hour, or whatever time it is, and we'll carry on from there.

Yes.

[Mark Warawa, Conservative, Langley, BC]

Just for clarification, Mr. Chair, you've mentioned two options. You said there could be unanimous consent.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

Yes, to carry on past the hour posted.

[Mark Warawa, Conservative, Langley, BC]

Yes, and I think that would be the norm in terms of changing the agenda. But then you went on to say that if—

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

If there isn't unanimous consent, the only other way we could carry on beyond that would be through a majority vote. A motion moved—

[Mark Warawa, Conservative, Langley, BC]

So without unanimous consent, you would call for a vote?

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

I'd call for a vote, yes.

Yes.

[Maurice Vellacott, Conservative, Saskatoon—Wanuskewin, SK]

Just as a comment, there was great confusion the other day. There is one example that I'll tell you about, and I assume we're getting some more from the clerk at some point. It occurred about three weeks ago in a different context, in a 140-year-old Parliament. As you caught on, Bob, I was very distressed by that.

Others have been around this place, and obviously it's the call of the chair if a meeting completes at a particular time. I've served at a more recent time in this committee and other committees, and if we had a posted time, that was what we went by unless we were into clause-by-clause and that type of thing. But the chair has always had the prerogative to state it was an open-ended meeting, meaning that it started at nine o'clock, with no closing date. There was an assumption that, yes, it was maybe unending, but when we had posted times in other committees....

This is wisdom from other committees, and the clerk may cross-reference as well. But we do have other plans around this place and our whole lives are not taken up by this committee. As important as this august body is, it is a little bit unsettling to have to cancel other crucial appointments because somebody has a different issue or agenda that day.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

Going back to my history of fourteen years in this place, when we have needed to finish an item, we've always simply finished the item. If it took an extra ten minutes to hear a witness or to ask questions, that's what we did.

We don't have to operate that way, and I'm suggesting that we don't operate that way as of today. I'm saying that the way we operate will be that, at the appointed time, the meeting ends unless there's consensus to carry on. If there is no consensus, somebody puts a motion. If a majority says we carry on, then we carry on. That seems to settle that issue, and we move on.

I don't think we need to discuss that much further, do we?

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

Last time, during the debate, I called for a vote on what we were discussing. You said you couldn't interrupt the debate, so we went on. They wanted to interrupt at eleven but they couldn't, so you said we'd have to go on. What's going to happen next time if it has to end at eleven and there's a motion calling for a vote? Do we take the vote at eleven when it finishes, or—

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

We'll take the vote at eleven o'clock. If a majority says we carry on, we either stay in the room we're in or we find another room.

The clerk will provide documentation of some of this for Mr. Vellacott.

[Maurice Vellacott, Conservative, Saskatoon—Wanuskewin, SK]

I don't think we should be in a rush in the last few minutes to get 100% consensus on this. Pablo has possibly more things, and maybe others would. I don't think this should be necessarily the end of it, but if you want to use that as guidance for the present....

I don't think, Mr. Chair, that to be pressured into conceding, in a few minutes, something for the future and eternity is fair to any of us. I feel a little forced to be pressured into making decisions on the fly like this.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

I'm trying to clarify things so that we don't get into that confusion at the appointed hour. To me that is a pretty good solution.

I really think you will understand the flow of the meeting. You'll know the witnesses if in fact you want to hear more. I think it's pretty unfortunate if we have to live by that rigid, eleven o'clock, no matter what...even if everybody agrees that we want to hear a witness. I'm more worried about the witnesses than I am about anything else.

[An hon. member]

I'm more worried about my privileges.

[Maurice Vellacott, Conservative, Saskatoon—Wanuskewin, SK]

I concede that, Bob, on the fact that if we go a few minutes over.... That's been done at other committees, and I didn't want to mislead or give an impression otherwise, but the issue is if it's going an hour over, that's a little different from a witness being five minutes over.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

I agree.

[Mark Warawa, Conservative, Langley, BC]

I too don't want to spend a lot of time on this, but what you said as a guide, as a procedure that you're suggesting, is that if we've only got a minute or thirty seconds left at a meeting, you end everything and the meeting ends with a vote, which is what happened before--and a point of order was ignored.

So I think we need to discuss this a little bit more. Procedurally I think what is being suggested is not correct, and you do not have consensus to follow that procedure at this time.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

I'm just putting it forward as a suggestion.

[Mark Warawa, Conservative, Langley, BC]

If we could maybe discuss that a little further...but at this point, when we reach the time of eleven o'clock, if you want to have it continue that sounds reasonable, but to say that it will be a vote, and if we do not have a majority then you're going to force a vote, procedurally I don't believe that's correct.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

Can the clerk comment?

[The Clerk of the Committee, Mr. Eugene Morawski]

You are correct. It takes a majority of the members to keep the committee going, basically. It takes a majority of the members by a motion to keep going or to adjourn, and that would be non-debatable.