Evidence of meeting #74 for Finance in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was amendment.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:30 p.m.
Conservative
Shelly Glover Conservative Saint Boniface, MB
I'm sorry, Mr. Chair, but unless I'm out to lunch today, what I just heard was that the previous motion says we would not undertake any substantive motions.
I'm happy to go with the motion that was just put before, but now the chair says to Mr. Brison that the motion we put forward says we can put motions forward between 3:30 and 5:30 on our regular days and that it's the same as the last one, but they are completely different.
I'm lost in translation somewhere as to the difference between the two, because I see them as completely different, and the chair is indicating they are exactly the same. I'm sorry, but I would ask for your enlightenment, because to me they are completely different.
4:30 p.m.
Conservative
Shelly Glover Conservative Saint Boniface, MB
In the one it says we're not entertaining any substantive motions at all.
4:35 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Rajotte
Correct me if I'm wrong, Mr. Brison: I thought you were asking if there was precedent for what we're doing with respect to the motion today.
With respect to the motion today, this will allow motions between regular scheduled time for pre-budget consultations, which in the past it has not, so in that sense there is a difference between this motion and that motion.
With respect to the concern from some of the members of the opposition, it's that if they have a motion to bring forward and we have a number of pre-budget consultation meetings that have been allocated, it may be a number of days before they could raise a motion before the committee. That's why I thought that the three parties had agreed to this motion.
They are not exactly the same. Am I fair in my understanding, Mr. Brison, that you wanted to know that this motion didn't come out of thin air and that there was a precedent for doing a motion like this?
4:35 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Rajotte
Members of the committee can do the full motion not to do any hearings during the Ottawa hearings as well, but we're not travelling this year. The primary reason for doing that in the past was that we travelled all over the country.
Is there any further discussion? Okay.
All those in favour? Thank you.
(Motion agreed to)
The second small housekeeping item, ladies and gentlemen, deals with the schedule on Thursday, November 8. We have a meeting scheduled then for 3:30 to 5:30. It's a second meeting on Bill C-377.
The House schedule has been amended such that we are not sitting on Friday, November 9, and Thursday, November 8, will be a shortened day. It will be a Friday day. Therefore, I think there is agreement to move that meeting to November 7. Is that correct?
We will move the November 8 meeting, which is the second meeting on Bill C-377, to become a meeting from 3:30 to 5:30 on Wednesday, November 7. That November 7 meeting had previously been a meeting for potential government bills; that meeting will move to the meeting after the break week. It's just to accommodate members' schedules. Is that okay with everyone?
Okay, thank you. That's all I have for today.
The meeting is adjourned.
