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.
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
Patricia Lattanzio Liberal Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC
Correct, but from reading paragraph (d), I'm just suggeesting that maybe that question could possibly be included. I understand there's now a question of unanimous consent or majority consent, but I wanted to bring it forward.
11:50 a.m.
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
Well, I'm going to make things even more complicated, because what Mr. Fergus read was not what was adopted when we last passed routine motions.
The routine motion that we adopted the last time read:
That any motion to go in camera should be debatable and amendable, and that the committee may only meet in camera for the following purposes: (a) to discuss administrative matters of the committee and witness selection (b) examine draft reports (c) briefings concerning national security and (d) to discuss matters involving an individual's private information; and furthermore, minutes of in camera meetings should reflect on the results of all votes taken by the committee with the exception of votes regarding the consideration of a draft report; including how each member voted when a recorded vote is requested.
That was the language from our last committee meeting dealing with routine motions.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
All right, colleagues, we have a couple of versions here. I don't have either one in writing at this point.
I'll go to Madam Shanahan.
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
Brenda Shanahan Liberal Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC
I thank my colleague for that clarification. I was looking for that earlier wording as well.
I'd like some clarification as to whether what Mr. Fergus read out encompasses what we did in the last session, as Mr. Angus just read out.
I'll suggest that we maybe have a five-minute pause so that the clerk can take a look at this. I understand there are various versions and emails. We don't always open the right email I guess. I don't know. I'm seeing different versions as well.
Thank you.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
I apologize. I actually do have that one. It's the second-to-last...where it has “other routine motions”. I do have the version the Mr. Angus mentioned. I don't have the other version with me.
If we want to take a look at both of them, I think we'll have to suspend and wait for the clerk to give us a copy of the one that Mr. Fergus read. Then we can compare and debate them.
Mr. Angus.
11:55 a.m.
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
Chair, I think the fundamental change we agreed to the last time was that the motion to go in camera should be debatable and amendable, so that we don't have committees interrupted by someone saying that they vote to go in camera, and then we would have to suspend. It has upended discussions before because we then had to vote. What we agreed the last time moved it out from being a dilatory motion to something where the committee agrees to go in camera. That was the fundamental change between what we adopted the last time and what Mr. Fergus has in his motion.
Thank you.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
Colleagues, we'll suspend for a minute or two. We'll make sure that we have both copies, and then I'll come back and confer with you to see where we want to go with this particular motion.
We are now suspended.
12:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
Okay, colleagues, I'm sorry. With video and getting used to all of this stuff, I have to officially un-suspend the meeting.
Wait for a minute, and then, Mr. Sorbara, you can make your point again that you made when were suspended. Give it maybe 10 or 15 seconds and then you can go ahead again.
We are unsuspended.
12:05 p.m.
Liberal
Francesco Sorbara Liberal Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON
If the committee is now unsuspended, I will now speak again.
Thank you, Chair, for travelling with us. I guess you're not the driver but the person who's taking us to where we need to go, the navigator, if I can use that term.
As I said a few seconds ago, the drafting of this routine motion was on the recommendation of the head clerk. This is not a partisan thing in any way. In my understanding, it's to clarify and possibly avoid any unintended consequences in the future when we go in camera.
I think the four points from (a) to (d) incorporate what Mr. Angus was referencing in terms of possible scenarios in which we would have to go in camera and deal with scenarios that may present themselves in this committee. I think this routine motion is quite innocuous, or the point of the routine motions is quite innocuous and pretty self-explanatory.
I think we should adopt it as recommended by the head clerk.
Thank you.
12:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
To be clear, Mr. Sorbara, and then I'll move on to the next person on the speakers list, the version that you're approving is the one that Mr. Fergus read or the one that was in the routine motions that we received?
12:05 p.m.
Liberal
Francesco Sorbara Liberal Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON
It's the version that was just received via the clerk, our clerk, and that was exactly the same as the one that Mr. Fergus read.
12:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
Thank you, Mr. Sorbara, for that clarification.
Now we have Mr. Barrett.
12:05 p.m.
Conservative
Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON
I'm good. I'll yield my time, thanks.
12:05 p.m.
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
Thank you.
Having both of them in writing, I do notice that one does say at the bottom that it is debatable. That was something that wasn't in the previous Standing Orders, so I think what Mr. Fergus has offered is fair. It's just to give the committee the ability to decide if whether or not we go in camera should be a debatable issue, and then when we go in camera, the rest of the matter is totally applicable. I'm fine with it.
12:05 p.m.
Liberal
Brenda Shanahan Liberal Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC
Thank you, Chair.
I'm very happy that we've had clarification, because I fully appreciate the importance of going in camera when necessary. I support the motion as just read by Mr. Fergus, which we just received from the clerk. I'm happy to hear that Mr. Angus agrees with the part about it being debatable and that we leave that option for this committee to make that decision at future times.
I think the motion as drafted by the head clerk covers all the bases. I'm in support of it.
12:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
Thank you very much, Madam Shanahan.
I have nobody else on the speakers list, and I sense that there's consensus around the version that Mr. Fergus read and the most recent version, of course, which is the same one the clerk sent to you. Is that correct, everyone?
(Motion agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Okay, thank you. The clerk will make the amendments and that motion has passed.
Mr. Fergus, does the next motion you're going to read say “Orders of Reference”?
12:05 p.m.
Conservative
12:05 p.m.
Liberal
Greg Fergus Liberal Hull—Aylmer, QC
I always like causing trouble wherever I go, David, as you know. I'm sorry about the confusion for all my colleagues here but I'm glad that we came out on the right side and you know that I wasn't trying to pull a fast one on anyone here.
Other-Orders of Reference from the House Respecting Bills 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...
I'm sorry, I do not have the next page, but I will read it in French, or do you want me to do a quick translation?
(b) suggested amendments filed, pursuant to paragraph (a) at least 48 hours...
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
12:10 p.m.
Conservative