Evidence of meeting #6 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 video is available from Parliament.
11:45 a.m.
Liberal
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
Madam Lattanzio has challenged my ruling in regard to the amendment from Madame Gaudreau being in order. She has the right to do that as a member of the committee, and so you'll be voting now to either sustain my decision or not. The question is, do you sustain the decision of the chair?
11:45 a.m.
The Clerk
On the question “Shall the chair's ruling be sustained?”, please vote “yea” if you're in favour and “nay” if you are against.
(Ruling of the chair sustained)
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
In the event of a tie, the chair does not need to vote. It's not just any tie; whenever there's a tie in regard to the sustaining of the decision of the chair, the chair does not need to vote, and the decision is sustained.
We'll move to a debate on Madame Gaudreau's amendment. Unless someone wants to be removed from the speaker's list, I will continue on with the one that I have.
By the way, I should let you know what I have, which is Mr. Barrett, Madam Lattanzio, Madam Shanahan, Mr. Angus and Mr. Dong.
11:45 a.m.
Liberal
Greg Fergus Liberal Hull—Aylmer, QC
Mr. Chair, is it possible you could sound out the members to see if we could just proceed to a vote?
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
Sure. I was just checking to see if there's a consensus to move to a vote.
11:45 a.m.
Liberal
Patricia Lattanzio Liberal Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC
Mr. Chair, would it be possible to receive Madame Gaudreau's amended motion? Can we all receive it? I know she read it out, but I would like to have it.
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
We can make sure that you have that sent to you. We'll suspend for several minutes to make that happen.
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
Francesco Sorbara Liberal Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON
Mr. Chair, we've received Madame Gaudreau's motion. The documents have arrived.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
Thank you very much. I just want to check with Madam Lattanzio if that is the case.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON
Thanks, Chair.
I appreciate the amendment and the discussion that followed. I want to make a few notes. I know we're going to encounter bells before 12:30.
Chair, what happens in this committee is not in a vacuum, nor is the work of other committees. We've seen play out at other committees the hasty decisions by chairs, and though I have strong opinions, of course, on how I would like each vote to go, I get one vote, but the chair makes his rulings and, while I haven't been in the room for the other meetings, I know, based on your comments, that you consult extensively with the clerk.
In the room, for this ruling, I don't have a stake in the decision by the chair. I wasn't voted as chair by colleagues on this committee. That responsibility was given to you for what I would say would have been a pretty easy decision. I think it could have been adjudicated quite quickly. The meeting was suspended, and you consulted with the clerk on the question before rendering your decision.
I'd like to contrast that for my colleagues on the committee against what we've seen at other meetings when we know chairs have, during this session of this Parliament, during heated discussions, adjourned meetings without a vote while members withheld consent to do so. We've seen a number of procedural irregularities at best, if not violations of the rules of this place.
We hear an awful lot about “with respect” and “with reservation on the vote”—
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
Francesco Sorbara Liberal Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, MP Barrett, for those comments.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
Francesco Sorbara Liberal Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON
Well, there's a point of relevance here. What you're speaking about has nothing to do with what's currently being looked at on the floor, in terms of the amendment that's been put forward by Madame Gaudreau.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
Thank you for the point of order, Mr. Sorbara.
I think all of my colleagues here from every party know that I give folks quite a bit of latitude in regard to the topic at hand. I've trusted for all of you that even though you broaden your scope, you generally come to the point, so I appreciate the point of order and will just encourage Mr. Barrett to move to the topic at hand as quickly as he can.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON
Thanks, Chair.
We've heard comments from the members, including that member, about respect, hesitation and reservation, but respect and reservation and thoughtfulness are what we've seen from the chair. I think it speaks to the motives and intentions of those who voted to overturn his ruling when we've seen the contrast. There's a fairness at play in this room. It doesn't always break the way I'd like it to, of course, but that's how an impartial chair works. We have not seen that at other committees dealing with this issue. While the chair's actions speak for themselves, so do the actions of those who voted to overturn that ruling.
Chair, on the amendment to the motion, we heard from Mr. Angus, and I look down the table to see a colleague who has logged nearly two decades in Parliament. He talks about the resources that have been expended and devoted at this committee to some of the issues that we're dealing with. I don't want to squander the resources and the efforts that have gone into bringing us to where we are today.
We know that the amendment has been ruled in order. We know that the consideration in Ms. Gaudreau's amendment reflects the will of the committee. Again, though I personally disagree with some of the points in the amendment, I know them to be the will of the committee in its current composition. Thus, while not striking the exact effect that I would look to achieve, the amendment does affect the outcome that the majority of the members on this committee have publicly stated they're seeking.
With respect to the main motion and the committee reviewing the safeguards to prevent a conflict of interest in the federal government, including the CSSG and the awarding of it to the WE organization, it's certainly germane. I think that having an individual from the organization speak to those documents and to have these documents in hand with the safeguards preferred by members of this committee would go a long way to being judicious in the future use of this committee's resources and time, because in a subcommittee or a full committee, in terms of deciding how to govern ourselves during the the development and progress of that study, we'll have resolved the question that is surely to be asked. It will be done with the main motion, the main motion that has now been shortened. It's been narrowed in scope and will affect what I have expressed previously in terms of getting some work done by substantially looking at issues that are in the public interest and looking at them in the limited time that we have.
We have a few days before the House will rise for Christmas, and it's unfortunate to be talking about Christmas now. The year is slipping away. We haven't even had Remembrance Day yet, and people are putting up their Christmas trees.
With that in mind, we need to get to the business that we've been sent here to do. These issues were of great public interest and of developing public interest over the course of the summer, through prorogation and into the new fall session. I appreciate that the main motion as amended is supportable, and I hope the committee can undertake to do that.
Chair, I will conclude, but if possible, with the resources of the House and in consultation with the parties, if the committee, which generally meets twice a week—and this committee was identified as a priority committee by the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs at the start of the session—can have a second meeting scheduled this week, I think that would be prudent in furthering the business of the committee, knowing the limited opportunity even for an extension today with votes after question period and votes before question period boxing us in, and then we are losing next week to a break week. Hopefully, we will get that work done this week and we won't have to come back during a constituency week.
With those thoughts, I will yield the floor.
12:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
Thank you for your comments, Mr. Barrett. I appreciate it. I will do what I can. I will confer with the clerk after the meeting to see what House resources we might possibly be able to shoehorn out of what we have left here right now.
I'm going to review the speakers' list.
It is Madam Lattanzio, Madam Shanahan, Mr. Dong, Mr. Angus, and I see Mr. Warkentin has removed his hand.
I apologize. I inverted. It was Madam Lattanzio, Madam Shanahan, Mr. Angus and Mr. Dong.
Go ahead, Madam Lattanzio.
