Evidence of meeting #1 for Environment and Sustainable Development in the 39th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was chair.
A recording is available from Parliament.
5 p.m.
Conservative
5 p.m.
Bloc
5 p.m.
Conservative
Luc Harvey Conservative Louis-Hébert, QC
I apologize, Bernard.
The NDP, the Bloc Québécois and the Liberals have to be protected, but we, the government members, are being asked to step aside because we might stonewall and prevent committees from sitting. If the members of the NDP or the Bloc Québécois did not show up, that could also be filibustering. As well, opposition parties have been given some protection, but they have refused to give it to the party forming the government. I ask that all parliamentarians be treated fairly.
We are all parliamentarians, and a minimum protection should apply to us all. I demand that the Conservatives benefit from the same protection as do the NDP, the Bloc Québécois and the Liberal Party. I don't think I am asking for that much. Up until now, we have always attended meetings. We are talking about a theoretical situation, not something that has occurred often. I don't see why the opposition should be protected, but not the government.
Once again, the opposition is using its majority to engage in virtual obstruction. I cannot understand how the opposition parties can rationally explain that the government does not need to be present for there to be a quorum in committee.
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Bob Mills
Any other comments?
The question on a reduced quorum then:
That the Chair be authorized to hold meetings to receive evidence and to have that evidence printed when a quorum is not present, provided that at least three (3) members are present, including one member of the opposition.
(Motion agreed to)
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Bob Mills
“Notice of Motions”:
That ___ hours' notice be required for any substantive motion to be considered by the Committee, unless the substantive motion relates directly to business then under consideration; and that the notice of motion be filed with the Clerk of the Committee and distributed to members in both official languages.
The previous document, as you will notice, said 24 hours, and we did have some discussion about that on a number of occasions. Let's open that for discussion as to what that number should be.
Mr. Warawa.
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
Mark Warawa Conservative Langley, BC
Chair, I recommend 48 hours. That was one of the problems with the environment committee in the last session, which was abused terribly. In the House it's 48 hours. That would give adequate notice to all of us as to what is happening. Previously it was 24 hours, and the 24 hours was, in practice, by five o'clock the night before. What I am proposing is 48 hours, as it is in the House, and 48 hours would be 48 working hours, which I believe it is in the House. What I'm proposing is 48 working hours.
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Bob Mills
I would remind members that probably our time slot will be nine o'clock in the new year. So, conceivably, a motion coming in at five o'clock or six o'clock could be a very short 24 hours, if in fact we meet at nine o'clock in the morning. Right now we're meeting at 3:30, so it's probably less of a problem. This is just so you understand that I understand we will move as the rotation goes, so that our next time slot will be nine o'clock. Anyway, keep that in mind when you're thinking of numbers here.
Yes, Mr. Godfrey.
5:05 p.m.
Liberal
John Godfrey Liberal Don Valley West, ON
Perhaps I have a faulty recall on this, but I think the 24-hour notice worked reasonably well for us. As you say, right now we're in a situation where we're meeting in the afternoons. I think the motion, with the insertion of the word “24”, works just fine. I move it.
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Bob Mills
There is a question regarding when we as members receive it and when the clerk receives it. We should be sure to clarify as to whether it's when we as members receive it, which could be different. If it's filed at six o'clock at night, there are many members who may not receive it until the next morning.
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
5:05 p.m.
Liberal
Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS
Whatever the number of hours is, Mr. Chairman, the problem is that members need to know that when they're filing it with the clerk, they've done it on time. Having it be when the clerk distributes it isn't in our control, and therefore you can't know if you've done it on time or not. So it seems to me that the motion as proposed is the one to go with.
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Bob Mills
May I ask you this, then. If a motion is received by the clerk at five minutes to six the day before, if that's the deadline, and our meeting is at 3:30, that is not 24 hours and therefore that cannot appear until the following meeting.
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Bob Mills
What we're saying, then, is a true 24 hours from the time of filing.
5:05 p.m.
The Clerk
A calendar 24 hours.
5:05 p.m.
The Clerk
As opposed to a House 24 hours. A House 24 hours is one night, one sleep. That's the issue.
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Bob Mills
The issue is this. Is 24 hours one night or is 24 hours 24 real hours?
5:05 p.m.
Liberal
David McGuinty Liberal Ottawa South, ON
Can I ask the clerk what the practice is in most committees?
5:05 p.m.
The Clerk
Each committee varies on this issue. One way is to ensure that the notices of motions are in, say, by four at the latest and distributed by six at the latest. Anything later than six would not meet the 24 hours.
Sometimes the motions are not translated and sometimes they're not correct, so they require a bit of fiddling. They may not be sent to the members, though, till seven or eight o'clock at night. If you have a nine o'clock meeting the next day, in theory that meets 24 hours because it's one night, but a lot of members' offices are not open at eight o'clock at night. So it means your staff would come in at 8:30 and have a motion facing him or her.
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Bob Mills
That is difficult, and that has happened and it has been difficult for all of us to be prepared for what that motion is. I think all of us can remember that happening.
Mr. Cullen, then Mr. Warawa, and then Mr. Harvey.
5:10 p.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
I understand. We do remember when motions were done so quickly that people hadn't had a chance to see them.
The discretion is how you treat the 24 hours. The problem with the 48 hours in this case is if you treat it by the script, then for our Tuesday meetings you'd need to have everything in by Friday, which makes it a four-day notice, which is not, I know, the intention.
I think it's the prescription to the 24 hours. If it's submitted to the clerk, if we're having our meetings now at 3:30 on a Tuesday afternoon, and if it's not done before 3:30 on a Monday, it feels to me that there's enough time for the clerk to get it out, into our offices, and we have the entire day with it. I don't know how much more time people really need. We always want more, but I think putting it back to Friday is the problem.
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Bob Mills
Mr. Cullen, I think your argument is—and I certainly argued that when I was sitting in Mr. Godfrey's and Mr. McGuinty's place—that 24 hours should be 24 hours. In fact, it hasn't been that way. We can very easily clarify with the clerk what the 24 hours are and what the deadlines are.
So reasonable deadlines, 24 hours being 24 hours, is something we haven't done. We didn't do it before.
Mr. Harvey.
He's insistent, Mr. Warawa.
