Evidence of meeting #1 for Environment and Sustainable Development in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was chair.
A video is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
That's how we work in this committee. We go for the truth.
Does everyone agree with that motion?
(Motion agreed to)
What's next, Mr. Longfield?
Liberal
Lloyd Longfield Liberal Guelph, ON
On orders of reference from the House respecting bills, I move:
That in relation to orders of reference from the House respecting Bills, (a) The clerk of the committee shall, upon the committee receiving such an order of reference, write to each member who is not a member of a caucus represented on the committee to invite those members to file with the clerk of the committee, in both official languages, any amendments to the bill, which is the subject of the said Order, which they would suggest that the committee consider; (b) Suggested amendments filed, pursuant to paragraph (a), at least 48 hours prior to the start of clause-by-clause consideration of the bill to which the amendments relate shall be deemed to be proposed during the said consideration, provided that the committee may, by motion, vary this deadline in respect of a given bill; and (c) During the clause-by-clause consideration of a bill, the Chair shall allow a member who filed suggested amendments, pursuant to paragraph (a), an opportunity to make brief representations in support of them.
(Motion agreed to)
Liberal
Lloyd Longfield Liberal Guelph, ON
Yes, on technical tests for witnesses, I move:
That the clerk inform each witness who is to appear before the committee that the House administration support team must conduct technical tests to check the connectivity and the equipment used to ensure the best possible sound quality; and that the Chair advise the committee, at the start of each meeting, of any witnesses who did not perform the required technical tests.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
I have a question of clarification, because this has happened a number of times and we do want to protect our interpreters.
The motion says that we will do tests, that is “check the connectivity and the equipment used to ensure the best possible sound quality”.
Who deems the sound quality to be acceptable for witnesses to deliver their comments? Do we rely on the interpreters to tell us that the sound quality is acceptable or not? If it is unacceptable, can we then stop the witness from giving evidence?
Do you understand the question? “The best possible sound quality” is a bit subjective.
Ms. Pauzé, you have the floor.
Bloc
Monique Pauzé Bloc Repentigny, QC
Mr. Chair, there were times last spring when a witness did not have the right equipment and the interpreters were not able to hear him well. The interpreters were advising us through our headsets that they could not hear the witness well.
When that happens, we can reschedule the witness to another session.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
Okay.
In fact, I am asking for your permission to stop a witness if the interpreters say the sound quality is unacceptable.
Do you agree?
Liberal
Lloyd Longfield Liberal Guelph, ON
The way we functioned last time was to say that the equipment the witnesses were using had to be supplied by the House of Commons.
Liberal
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
There could be a piece of equipment that's just as good, but has not been supplied. It may even be superior.
What did you want to say, Mr. Longfield?
Liberal
Lloyd Longfield Liberal Guelph, ON
No, I'll leave it. I was just bringing that forward as to how we operated in the previous session.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
Indeed. As I read this, if the interpreters say this is not good enough, then I have permission to say to the witness, “Sorry, but you'll have to procure some proper equipment or we'll try to make alternative arrangements, but you cannot continue your statement.” Is that good?
(Motion agreed to)
Mr. Longfield, please move the last routine motion.
Liberal
Lloyd Longfield Liberal Guelph, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
On linguistic review, I move:
That all documents submitted for committee business that do not come from a federal department, members' offices, or that have not been translated by the Translation Bureau be sent for prior linguistic review by the Translation Bureau before being distributed to members.
Conservative
Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC
I just want to make a statement, though, that we've had, in some cases, government departments come in and table-drop documents. That is not helpful. I would just encourage you, Mr. Chair, to work with the clerk to always emphasize that, if a department is going to be coming in and they have prepared documents, those must be supplied to the committee as soon as possible so as to make sure they're available in both English and French.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
Was it not a given that if you brought documents they had to be in both official languages? That was agreed. That's always been the case.
It is, “That all documents submitted for committee business that do not come from a federal department” have been translated. Okay, we will always encourage witnesses to supply the documents ahead of time.
Conservative
Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC
We did have a government department.... The date and the department name escapes me at the moment because, quite honestly, this committee can be a blur. We did have a case where a government department did not submit in both official languages, and that caused a big issue.
Conservative
Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC
Again, if you could, always proactively remind them.
December 14th, 2021 / 11:45 a.m.
Conservative
Scot Davidson Conservative York—Simcoe, ON
Mr. Chair, because I'm new to the committee, on the topic of documents, I just wonder if we could have the clerk send us the Minister of Environment's mandate letter. This is so important in this committee, so that we know what direction we're headed over the holidays.
Liberal