Evidence of meeting #1 for Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was chair.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Bloc
Marie-Hélène Gaudreau Bloc Laurentides—Labelle, QC
I believe that we should simply stick to the decision made by the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs.
Liberal
Brenda Shanahan Liberal Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I understand the situation, especially when it comes to video conference meetings. During these meetings, as a result of interruptions, we may run out of time. I think that it's very important to give everyone the opportunity to ask questions.
I'm moving a friendly amendment to reduce the time for witnesses to give their presentations to, say, seven minutes. I know that these presentations are important. However, we obtain the information that we need by asking our questions.
Conservative
Liberal
Greg Fergus Liberal Hull—Aylmer, QC
The suggestions made by Ms. Shanahan, Mr. Angus and Ms. Gaudreau align with the decision of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs.
According to my recollection of the discussion in that committee, witness presentations were five to seven minutes. This would give us all the opportunity to participate in each round and to ask questions. It's also enough time for the witnesses to express their views, as Ms. Shanahan just said.
Liberal
Francesco Sorbara Liberal Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
The suggestion to follow PROC is something that I'm in favour with in terms of the precedent there. In terms of cutting the witness time down, my experience in the last six years in sitting on a couple of committees, and quite onerous committees, is that five to seven minutes is plenty of time. I think in today's virtual world, in terms of the time lag, sometimes we need to cut down a little bit in terms of the witnesses so we can allow all the questioners the time to put their thoughts and ideas forward.
In terms of the second round, we all have plenty of time to ask questions as we move along in this committee. I have no issues with that. I look at this as sort of rearranging the chairs, but the chairs will still all be utilized and everybody will be able to ask their questions to the witnesses and get their thoughts out.
I think we can move forward on that. If we can cut it down to five minutes on the witnesses, that would be perfect.
Conservative
Le président Conservative David Sweet
As long as we're not moving the chairs on a cruise ship, I'm fine.
Mr. Barrett—
Conservative
Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON
The wording presented by Mr. Angus, based on listening, is consistent with what PROC had said and is the traditional speaking order.
Through you, Mr. Chair, am I correct, Mr. Angus? Was it just the length of time that was amended, or was there also an adjustment to the order in which questions would be asked?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
Madame Gaudreau is on the list next. With her indulgence, I'll have Mr. Angus respond to that.
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
We're dealing with two things now. In terms of the order, the Bloc Québécois and the New Democratic Party do not get any extra time. It just shifts the order of when we speak.
Madam Shanahan's motion for five to seven minutes is different from the PROC motion, which said five minutes. I certainly support a five-minute to seven-minute variable for our committee, because sometimes we have extraordinarily important people speak and at other times we have a number of people speaking. I prefer Ms. Shanahan's five to seven minutes.
Then in the second round, it is the Conservative Party, five minutes; Liberal Party, five minutes; the Bloc Québécois, two and a half minutes; the New Democratic Party, two and a half minutes; the Conservative Party, five minutes; and the Liberal Party, five minutes. Then, of course, the rounds would repeat if we go into the third and fourth rounds.
I figure that this would be pretty much straightforward. If we cut the time down for the speakers, it does give everybody an opportunity.
Conservative
Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON
I concur, Mr. Chair.
Bloc
Marie-Hélène Gaudreau Bloc Laurentides—Labelle, QC
I want to make a few clarifications.
Because we were meeting using Zoom, there were unfortunately several occasions where, in the interest of fairness, the second round did not take place, despite the very good work done by the chairs.
I think that this motion for the second round will ensure a proper level of fairness. I propose that we refrain from repeating the process carried out by the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs and that we trust this committee. I think that we'll find that not only will we be more effective, but we won't split as much time. We must sometimes stop while witnesses respond. This has happened a number of times.
In the interest of fairness and effectiveness, I support the proposal made by the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs.
Conservative
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
I sense that there is agreement to go ahead with the reordering of the speaking according to the motion of PROC. Is that agreed?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
I'll have the clerk make that amendment. We'll accept that routine motion as amended.
(Motion as amended agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Liberal
Greg Fergus Liberal Hull—Aylmer, QC
Thank you.
The fifth motion concerns document distribution. The motion reads as follows:
That the clerk of the committee be authorized to distribute documents to members of the committee only when the documents are available in both official languages and that witnesses be advised accordingly.
Conservative
Liberal
Greg Fergus Liberal Hull—Aylmer, QC
The sixth motion concerns the working meals—I like this—and reads as follows:
That the clerk of the committee be authorized to make the necessary arrangements to provide working meals for the committee and its subcommittees.