Evidence of meeting #5 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 countries.
A recording is available from Parliament.
5:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Vice-Chair Liberal Geoff Regan
Yes, but a motion to deal with the agenda takes precedence, the same as a motion to adjourn takes precedence and is not debatable.
5:35 p.m.
Conservative
Mark Warawa Conservative Langley, BC
Mr. Chair, I'm not talking about the agenda. I'm talking about a motion that's already on the floor, not the agenda. An agenda would be what is coming up next. We already have a motion on—
5:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Vice-Chair Liberal Geoff Regan
Well, I'm sorry, but I would argue that in fact, when you have two motions, the order in which you deal with them is a matter of the agenda.
5:35 p.m.
Conservative
5:35 p.m.
Liberal
5:35 p.m.
Conservative
Mark Warawa Conservative Langley, BC
Through you, Mr. Chair, to the clerk, my procedural question is, do we have a motion on the floor now?
5:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Vice-Chair Liberal Geoff Regan
The motion is on the floor. So my ruling is that your motion is on the floor and that we have to proceed with that motion and debate that motion. If members want to challenge that decision, they can do so.
5:35 p.m.
Conservative
5:35 p.m.
Conservative
Luc Harvey Conservative Louis-Hébert, QC
This is also a point of order. The decision you took was not based on your own decision, but on what the clerk told you pursuant to the Standing Orders. Is that right?
5:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Vice-Chair Liberal Geoff Regan
I do not want to explain my decisions or comment on what was explained.
I am sorry, it is Mr. Vellacott's turn.
5:35 p.m.
Conservative
5:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Vice-Chair Liberal Geoff Regan
Yes, you're speaking to the motion, unless there's a point of order. Obviously a point of order takes precedence. You're speaking to the motion.
5:35 p.m.
Conservative
5:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Vice-Chair Liberal Geoff Regan
That's right. And if it's a point of order, obviously I have to interrupt for that.
5:35 p.m.
Conservative
5:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Vice-Chair Liberal Geoff Regan
I have been advised that because they've challenged my decision to proceed with your motion, that's non-debatable.
5:35 p.m.
Conservative
5:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Vice-Chair Liberal Geoff Regan
I'm sorry. I've been asked about that, and it has been challenged. Therefore—
5:35 p.m.
Conservative
Mark Warawa Conservative Langley, BC
Excuse me, Mr. Chair, is it a challenge to invert, or is it a challenge to move to—
5:40 p.m.
Liberal
Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS
It's a challenge on whether we proceed with your motion, or that's it. It's whether it should be your motion or not.
5:40 p.m.
Conservative
Mark Warawa Conservative Langley, BC
So the challenge is my motion, whether or not it is a legitimate motion, because I have a legitimate motion on the table. The clerk has acknowledged that, and so procedurally, according to Marleau and Montpetit, how can a motion that is legally on the table be removed without the permission of the mover? You first have to debate the motion and then vote on the motion procedurally.
5:40 p.m.
Bloc
Bernard Bigras Bloc Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC
I am asking for clarification, not a debate. Did I ask to invert the order before Mr. Warawa took the floor on his motion?
5:40 p.m.
Liberal
5:40 p.m.
Bloc
Bernard Bigras Bloc Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC
I had as well. Did I take the floor in order to request that we invert the order before Mr. Warawa took the floor to speak to his motion?
