Environment Committee on April 1st, 2008

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

You can't interrupt with a point of order.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

You've heard my decision.

[An hon. member]

I'd like a recorded vote.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

Okay, we'll have a recorded vote.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Perhaps you could be clear, Clerk, about the vote.

[The Clerk of the Committee, Mr. Normand Radford]

It's a vote on whether the decision of the chair shall be sustained.

(Ruling of the chair overturned: nays 7; yeas 3)

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

So the decision has been overruled.

I'll now take a point of order from Mr. Warawa.

[Mark Warawa, Conservative, Langley, BC]

Chair, the record will now show that this is the second time the NDP, specifically Mr. Cullen, has moved a motion during a point of order, which is against the Standing Orders. Now, the clerk says, in a ruling the Speaker made.... It was released this week.

The Speaker said:

I'm now prepared to rule on a point of order raised by the hon. member for Mississauga South on March 3, 2008, concerning the proceedings in the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics at its meeting of February 28, 2008.

I would like to thank the hon. member for Mississauga South for having raised this matter, as well as the hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, the hon. member for Hull–Aylmer, and the honourable member for Scarborough–Rouge River for their contributions.

In raising his point of order, the member for Mississauga South expressed concerns about motions adopted by the Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics Committee at its meeting of February 28, 2008. Of particular concern was the motion ordering the committee, pursuant to Standing Order 108(1)(a), to investigate the fundraising practices of the Liberal Party of Canada. The member for Mississauga South indicated that, as chair of the committee, he had ruled his motion inadmissible as it did not include any reference to the Conflict of Interest Code for Members or any ethical standards that may have been violated but rather actually made direct reference to political violations of the Canada Elections Act. His ruling was appealed and overturned, and the motion was adopted.

What I'm reading here is relevant to what's happened here, because this committee was found to be in disorder.

I talked to the Clerk and the Speaker and let them know what was happening. The NDP had made a motion while we were having a point of order, which is totally against the rules. If members want to work hard enough to avoid the rules, they can lower this committee to a committee of disorder. What's been happening here is totally against democracy, even today, just now. That's why I asked for a recorded vote, because every member who voted in favour voted to break the rules.

The Speaker went on to say:

The member for Mississauga South contended that the access to information, privacy and ethics committee has now embarked on a study which is beyond its mandate as set out in the Standing Order 108. Questioning the committee's authority to disregard the Standing Orders in this way, he maintained that his committee was encroaching on the mandate of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs. The member for Hull–Aylmer and the member for Scarborough–Rouge River voiced their support for these arguments.

In his comments, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for Democratic Reform spoke of the well-recognized procedural principle that committees are masters of their own proceedings.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Mr. Chair.

[Mark Warawa, Conservative, Langley, BC]

In the absence of a report from the committee.... I have a point of order, and I have the floor, because I'm speaking to the subject.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

This is another point of order.

[Mark Warawa, Conservative, Langley, BC]

Do not raise another point of order. I have the floor. I'm speaking to a point of order.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

No, you're not.

Mr. Chair, may I? It's not a point of order.

[An hon. member]

Just rule him out of order.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

Mr. Warawa, can you summarize what you're trying to say? I mean, reading another document.... I just prefer people to say what they think. Make it clear, concise, and short. We don't need to read a whole document.

I'm trying to get Mr. Warawa to tell me what his point is, because we are about to debate a motion. I've been overruled, and we now are to debate that motion. So we should be getting on to debating the motion.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

I'm sorry, Mr. Chair. Could you ask Mr. Vellacott to say that on camera? I'd like him to repeat that on camera. Can he repeat that on camera, Mr. Chair?

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

Mr. Warawa, can I ask you to summarize your point of order. We would really appreciate it if you did.

[Mark Warawa, Conservative, Langley, BC]

Chair, it's unfortunate that I cannot read this very important report from the Speaker of the House of Commons. I will go to his summary. He said that:

Any observer of the 39th Parliament will realize that the problem in the Ethics Committee is only one of the recent manifestations of the need for crisis management in committees.

Almost a year ago, in a ruling given on March 29, 2007, l referred to the challenges encountered in this minority parliament, saying, in part: “...neither the political realities of the moment nor the sheer force of numbers should force us to set aside the values inherent in the parliamentary conventions and procedures by which we govern our deliberations.”

We saw that happen just now, and it shouldn't have happened.

He went on to say:

I went on to refer to situations in committee where, because decisions of the Chair are subject to appeal, decisions that were procedurally sound had been overturned by the majority.

Tyranny of the masses is what he is referring to, and you have to be very careful when members of this committee--

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

Mr. Warawa, you know, this is not really getting where we need to go. We need to debate this motion, and that's really where we need to go.

The last thing I want to do is rule you out of order, because then we'd have another vote about.... But my goodness, we do have the ruling of the Speaker--everybody is aware of that--regarding another committee.

[Mark Warawa, Conservative, Langley, BC]

And it is relevant to what we've seen here just now, Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

But I think you've made that point, and I really believe we should move on and debate the motion.

Again, just to summarize how I see it, I said the motion made by Mr. Cullen was out of order. It was out of order for two reasons: it was made on a point of order, and it was made when we were discussing a clause. That's how the rules are interpreted.

We then had a vote, because that decision I made to follow the rules was challenged. I lost. So now we debate that ruling, because the committee has control of its own fate. The committee just made a decision. We should debate the decision the committee made.

And now you'll have an opportunity, Mr. Vellacott, Mr. Warawa, and anyone else, to comment on that decision and on that vote. And that's when you should be discussing it. I don't really see much point in simply carrying on, quoting the Speaker in the House of Commons.

I've lost that one, so I would now ask for comments. Perhaps Mr. Cullen could make that clear.

Mr. Warawa, on a point of order.

[Mark Warawa, Conservative, Langley, BC]

My question to you, Chair, is what privileges I have in this committee right now, when we have seen the Standing Orders of Parliament broken.

So my question to you, sir, is what--

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, St. Paul's, ON]

Democracy is now over.

[Mark Warawa, Conservative, Langley, BC]

And it should not be, Madam Bennett. It should not be happening.

To you, Chair, what rights do I have? What rules are we going by if they're going to be made up on the fly by Mr. Cullen and people?

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

The opportunity to make that point is during debate of this motion that we have before us. That motion now stands because I was overruled. So now is your opportunity to make the point that in fact was made.

I'm asking Mr. Cullen to clarify the motion that he made, which I ruled out of order, which the committee decided was in order. We're now going to debate that whole issue.

Mr. Cullen, can you clarify the motion, please?