Evidence of meeting #46 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 witnesses.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
Sir, I've advised you that points of order are not matters of debate; they're matters—
Conservative
David Tilson Conservative Dufferin—Caledon, ON
Please give me the point, sir. Please tell me your authority for that.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
Yes, I will give it to you. I'm at the behest of the committee.
Marleau and Montpetit, page 539, says:
Under the Standing Orders, a brief debate on the point of order is possible at the Speaker's discretion.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
Okay, that's enough.
It's at my discretion. That's page 539, and it goes on, but this is a straightforward one. It's not a matter that we want to delay the—
August 11th, 2008 / 11:30 a.m.
Conservative
David Tilson Conservative Dufferin—Caledon, ON
No, it's not a straightforward one; it is not straightforward.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
We don't want to delay the hearing of these witnesses any further.
Mr. Del Mastro.
Conservative
Pierre Lemieux Conservative Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON
Chair, I have a separate point of order. You've stopped questioning; I have a separate point of order.
Conservative
Pierre Lemieux Conservative Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON
Chair, I have a separate point of order before we resume questioning.
Conservative
Conservative
Pierre Lemieux Conservative Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON
Thank you, Chair.
The point of order has to do with your recognizing points of order. It's related to procedure.
When Mr. Proulx was asking questions to the witness and Mr. Del Mastro had a point of order related to his questioning, you would not take the point of order. In fact, you deferred it to the end of questioning and then forgot to come back to Mr. Del Mastro. We moved well into the next witness.
When Mr. Del Mastro was in the middle of his question, Mr. Proulx raised his hand on a point of order and everything ground to a halt.
Conservative
Pierre Lemieux Conservative Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON
This is the second huge inconsistency regarding the procedures. The first had to do with no statements from witnesses going to be given, yet we could add a huge statement to the end of question period and go beyond the time limit. And the second one, Chair, was that you're recognizing points of order for certain parties and not for other parties. That is not unbiased.
I'm asking for application of the rules in a consistent manner among all parties. If you're not going to recognize Mr. Del Mastro when Mr. Proulx is asking a question, it's highly ironic that you recognize Mr. Proulx when Mr. Del Mastro is asking a question.
That's my point of order. You are not being consistent in the application of procedure, and it's extremely important in this particular committee meeting.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
Thank you, Mr. Lemieux.
Mr. Lemieux, you will not find in Marleau and Montpetit or in the Standing Orders anything that says a chair must hear a point of order immediately. It is at the discretion of the chair. I certainly have to make a decision. It is not black and white, but it was obvious that a point Mr. Del Mastro had raised was going to cause a problem. Mr. Proulx reacted immediately to the word “sponsorship”; I knew what it was.
With regard to the others, Mr. Lemieux--and let me explain, because I don't want this to go on too much farther--if a witness is in the middle of an answer.... The chair did not recognize one of the those points or order you referred to because you were interrupting a witness in the middle of an important statement.
I will hear it. I have to hear it eventually. But I have to hear it in a way that does not disrupt the ability of either members or witnesses to hear what's being said. This is a serious, important matter. I take it very seriously, and I'm following the rules. But, sir, I cannot—I cannot—as you have asked me, stop the proceedings every time somebody yells “point of order”, because nine out of ten times they are not points of order.
I'm going to do my best. Now, Mr. Del Mastro has two minutes left, and right now I want to complete Mr. Del Mastro's questioning of the witnesses.
Mr. Del Mastro, you have the floor, sir.
Conservative
Conservative
Pierre Lemieux Conservative Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON
You twist the facts. Mr. Del Mastro's question was interjected while Mr. Proulx was asking the question.
Conservative
Conservative
Gary Goodyear Conservative Cambridge, ON
It's a courteous one, and I think all members will appreciate it.