Finance Committee on May 17th, 2006

[Judy Wasylycia-Leis, NDP, Winnipeg North, MB]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Brian Pallister]

I'm sorry, Monsieur Loubier has a point of order, I believe.

[Yvan Loubier, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

This motion was tabled more than 48 hours ago. Ms. Wasylycia-Leis has the right to present it when she pleases after 48 hours.

[The Chair, Conservative, Brian Pallister]

Thank you.

Mr. McCallum, do you have a point of order?

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Unionville, ON]

On this same issue, I think maybe the point is not to stop Judy from presenting, but to request that in future meetings it be on the printed agenda. Is that the point?

[Yvan Loubier, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

We don't need it, John. We don't need it for a private motion.

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Unionville, ON]

It would just be clearer for information purposes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Brian Pallister]

Thank you for that point. However, we will, and we currently have other notices of motion. It will not be my practice to list every possible motion that could be brought at every meeting, because it will be up to the member to decide when they present it to the committee. Otherwise your agendas are going to be foldout sections comprising several pages, I expect, as we get more and more notices of motion from all members of the committee who wish to bring motions forward.

So it's up to the members when they wish to bring the motions forward. Madame Wasylycia-Leis had indicated to me earlier she wished to. I'm not directing her to do that, but I don't propose to include in every one of my agendas the possibility of motions being brought forward when they may in fact not be brought forward at those meetings.

Mr. Pacetti, you have a point on the same point of order?

[Massimo Pacetti, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

Absolutely.

It's part of your job to put them on the agenda. In this case we were lucky that we finished with Mr. Le Pan. What are we going to do? Are we going to invite a witness and then suddenly decide to address some motions? If we have too many motions, we'll have a separate meeting to address those motions. That's what the motions are for. If they've been given 48 hours and they're in proper form, we should address them with a set order of the day. It is up to you to decide when we're going to do them, and they should be put on the order paper. If we have 20, we're going to put 20 on the order paper.

But we can't expect to have witnesses appear and then all of a sudden turn this committee into a zoo because we decide that we're going to present 20 motions that are outstanding. If somebody is serious about putting forward a motion, they have to get to it, and if they're not, they'll pull it. That's it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Brian Pallister]

Mr. Savage, you wanted to speak to the same point.

[Michael Savage, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

Yes, thank you, Chair.

I would like to see all motions be on the agenda, for the purposes of preparing for our meetings and knowing what we're going to be discussing as we get ready for the meetings. I have no problem with Ms. Wasylycia-Leis presenting hers today, and frankly I have no problem with the chair making exceptions when he thinks it's appropriate. I don't have a problem with that. But I do hope that notices of motions that are going to be discussed at a meeting would be put on the agenda.

[The Chair, Conservative, Brian Pallister]

I don't know if we require a motion to that effect. It's not been a practice in any committee I've been part of. I'm sure there are other members who may have found it a practice in committees in the past to put notices of motion on every agenda, but it's up to members when they want to present them.

I've heard your advice. If anyone wants to speak further to this, please so indicate.

Yes, Mr. Dykstra.

[Rick Dykstra, Conservative, St. Catharines, ON]

The only point I would make is for a little clarification here. Notices of motions are not required to be put on the agenda, but motions are required to be put on the agenda. The notice of motion can be put forward at any time, at any place. As for the motion itself, from my understanding, once we've had the 48-hour notice, we would have received it and we would see it come up.

[The Chair, Conservative, Brian Pallister]

Just for clarification, no, once the notice of motion has been given and the requirements for time have elapsed, there is no requirement to put that motion on your agenda each time.

[Rick Dykstra, Conservative, St. Catharines, ON]

Is that then up to you or to the mover?

[The Chair, Conservative, Brian Pallister]

Just to clarify, for example, Mr. Loubier has given ample notice of motion on an issue pertaining to Barbados. If the committee so instructs me, I can have every agenda carry that and each other subsequent motion that is made--if that is the wish of the committee. I just see it as a waste of paper, frankly, but it's up to the members of the committee. I will act on your instructions.

[Yvan Loubier, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Mr. Chairman, in order to assist the proper working of the committee, we could table a motion with the clerk's office.

I should have tabled my motion today. However, I can say to the members of the committee that I would like my motion to be dealt with at the next meeting of the Standing Committee on Finance, when we come back from the break week. Perhaps by giving several days' notice, we might be successful in managing these motions, especially since everyone will receive a copy of the motion. We must also look at our emails. The clerk's office sends all of the motions to members.

It is therefore up to us to prepare accordingly. However, it would make things easier if we were to announce that we hope that the following week, or two weeks later, there would be a vote on a motion that was tabled concerning this subject or another. I think that might be a good way to proceed.

As far as Judy's motion is concerned, we are in the hands of the chair, but we can very well deal with it today.

[Judy Wasylycia-Leis, NDP, Winnipeg North, MB]

I'll just jump in on this point of order.

I'm not sure what the big deal is. The practice that's being followed is no different from what we had in the past when you were chair, Mr. Pacetti. In fact, one would follow the rules to give proper notice, and then to try to get it addressed at the committee was often a difficulty.

The fact of the matter is that we follow the rules of giving 48 hours' notice. It's been circulated twice to every member, so it's not as if you didn't have a chance to read it. We've had lots of time to consider it. Obviously you would assume that if you got something 48 hours beforehand, the member is likely going to raise that at the next appropriate meeting. It's as simple as that. That's how all committees operate. That's how you operated. If you want to change the rules now, then let's do it at the steering committee and not waste time.

[The Chair, Conservative, Brian Pallister]

I'll suspend discussion at this point and I will ask if there is a desire to put a motion forward that we include in the agenda each notice of motion that has received 48 hours' notice. I would entertain that motion now.

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Unionville, ON]

I so move.

[The Chair, Conservative, Brian Pallister]

Mr. McCallum so moves. I don't believe we need a seconder for that.

I will invite speakers to speak to that motion.

Mr. Loubier.

[Yvan Loubier, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Things cannot work in that way. I tabled a motion over 48 hours ago. I did not ask if it could be dealt with today, because I knew that Mr. Le Pan was appearing and that we were going to deal with Judy's motion.

I can tell you today that I would like it to be dealt with at the first meeting after we come back from the adjournment week. If you put all of the motions on the agenda, would the movers of those motions want them to be dealt with specifically at that meeting? No. I would prefer that notice be given once a motion is tabled and after 48 hours, I would indicate that I would like the motion to be dealt with the following day or the day after that. If you are putting all of them on the agenda...

Mr. Chairman, I would just like to say one thing. Mr. Pacetti was a good chair. However, he had one major shortcoming: he was always trying to lecture the others, and after 48 hours or even after 94 hours, we sometimes had to fight with him in order to deal with a motion. We can do without the lessons.

[The Chair, Conservative, Brian Pallister]

I can't comment pro or con on your observations.

Mr. Savage, it's your opportunity to speak to this motion.

I would encourage comments to be brief so we can move forward.

[Michael Savage, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

For me, it's simply a matter of planning our work and knowing what we're going to discuss. I have no problem with somebody showing up with a motion that was filed and isn't on the agenda and asking for it to be discussed. That's okay with me.

I just think it's helpful, especially when we get into multiple motions, to have an idea on our agenda of what we are going to be discussing so we can better prepare for it.

As I said, I have no problem with Madam Wasylycia-Leis making her proposal today.

[The Chair, Conservative, Brian Pallister]

If I could just observe, though, the clerk's office has copies of such motions at any point in time. If you wish to review what motions may be brought forward by members, you're certainly able to do that in that way.

That isn't to say that I'm speaking in favour of or against the motion.

Mr. Dykstra.