Evidence of meeting #40 for Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics in the 39th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was point.
A recording is available from Parliament.
11:05 p.m.
Conservative
Russ Hiebert Conservative South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC
No, no, I'm not trying to challenge the chair. I want to understand why my motion...because I put a lot of thought and effort into this.
11:05 p.m.
Liberal
11:05 p.m.
Conservative
11:05 p.m.
Conservative
Russ Hiebert Conservative South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC
--that we would not want to make recommendations to Elections Canada until the legal case has been resolved--
11:05 p.m.
Conservative
Russ Hiebert Conservative South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC
--because that would provide guidance to this committee.
11:05 p.m.
Conservative
Russ Hiebert Conservative South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC
I'm seeking understanding, Mr. Chair.
11:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
Order.
Order, Mr. Hiebert; that's seven times.
I'm sorry, but if you really respect the committee and the committee's time, you'll respect the decisions of the chair. You have opportunity to challenge the chair if you disagree with him, but as you well know--
11:05 p.m.
Conservative
11:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
Order.
The chair--all colleagues should know this--does not have to explain every decision to the members and take questions and enter into a debate. The chair must take into account all of the facts, consult with the clerks, and make a decision--in accordance with our policies and practices, our Standing Orders, and our best judgment--on what is in order.
I've made a decision. You may not agree with it, but it's the decision of the chair. I don't want to have a debate every time I make a decision.
Now, I--
11:05 p.m.
An hon. member
Do I have the floor?
11:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
Order.
This will be the fourth time I've had to admonish you about coming to order when I say the word “order”. And I say that to get us back under control, but you continue and you persist.
I'm sorry, Mr. Hiebert, but this can't continue. If I call for order, let's just have order and move on with it. This badgering of the chair, this disrespect for the chair, is not helpful. All it does is show contempt--
11:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
We're in the middle of something. Just hold on; I'll get to your point of order.
11:05 p.m.
Conservative
11:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
No, no...well, we're in one right now.
So I want to ask you, sir, please, respect our practices and our convention that when the chair calls for order, members should stop talking and stop trying to have a debate with the chair. The chair calls order to bring order back to the committee.
Now I have a point of order from Mr. Poilievre.
Go ahead, sir.
11:05 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON
You indicated that Mr. Hiebert's subamendment didn't make sense and therefore was out of order. I'm not sure what standing order indicates that the chair must be able to understand the motion for it to be in order.
However, I would just suggest--it's just a suggestion, and I think you will agree it--
11:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
Order.
We made a ruling, on the first attempt by Mr. Hiebert, that you couldn't make the subamendment on the amendment because that didn't apply to the main motion. It's not that it just didn't make sense; it was the same situation where it didn't work its way up. It was in the wrong order.
Mr. Hiebert asked if he could move it later. Well, it depends on whether or not the amendment passes.
So I've made a ruling on that. You, on a point of order, have decided that you want to debate with me a ruling that I've already made. It is not a point of order, sir. It is debate. So I'm going to move on.
Mr. Hiebert has the floor.
