Evidence of meeting #142 for Finance in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was budget.
A video is available from Parliament.
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
Laila Goodridge Conservative Fort McMurray—Cold Lake, AB
I didn't question it on relevance. I'm questioning it on imputing false motives and talking about how Conservatives are pretending as if somehow we're not genuine, and I believe—
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Peter Fonseca
That's the member's prerogative, MP Goodridge.
MP Davies, the floor is yours.
5:10 p.m.
NDP
Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC
Not only is it not imputing false motive: I'm imputing the actual motive.
Ms. Goodridge didn't have the benefit of being here for the last several meetings. She's new to the committee, so I understand why she wouldn't know this, but I've sat at this committee and heard the Conservatives speak repeatedly about why they want to call Mark Carney. From Mr. Hallan to any other person on this side....
I shouldn't say that. There are some of my colleagues who have not said that, but I've heard Mr. Hallan repeatedly go on at length about Mr. Carney and how he's going to be the next Liberal leader and using that as a reason to want to call him here for committee. They've said it. It's on the record. Check the Hansard. That's not imputing false motive. I'm reciting back the motive that's been stated.
Even if he didn't, why would we be holding up the budget?
Let's assume the Conservatives didn't say what they said and that they want Mr. Carney here only because they're interested in his economic ideas. Why would they be holding up the budget? Why would they be filibustering the scheduling of the BIA because they want a particular citizen to come here and testify on the budget? There are thousands of people who can come to testify on the budget.
It's obvious. Let's not be disingenuous here: The Conservatives want Mr. Carney here because they want to politically attack him. That is not an appropriate use of a witness. In my opinion, it's not an appropriate reason to hold up a budget implementation act and it's not an appropriate reason to delay giving relief to Canadians who are suffering, whom the Conservatives claim to care about, but their actions belie it.
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
Marty Morantz Conservative Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB
I just want to circle back for a second to the use of the word “subterfuge”, because I just looked—
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Peter Fonseca
That's not a point of order, MP Morantz.
MP Davies, go ahead, please.
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
Marty Morantz Conservative Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB
No, it is a point of order.
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
Marty Morantz Conservative Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB
It's a point of order on whether it's parliamentary. If I might just finish my point, I'll tell you what the definition is.
The very first word of the definition is deceit: “deceit used in order to achieve one's goal”.
Mr. Chair, the NDP member, Mr. Davies, accused my colleagues, Conservative members, of subterfuge. He accused us of being deceitful. I ask you to rule if you think that word is parliamentary.
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Peter Fonseca
MP Morantz, I'll look into it.
MP Davis, you may continue. You have the floor—
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
Marty Morantz Conservative Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB
No, you can't just look into it, Mr. Chair.
Is that your ruling? I'll challenge it right now. I want to challenge that ruling, if that's your ruling.
You can't just look into it, Mr. Chair. You're the chair.
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
Marty Morantz Conservative Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB
You should say—
Maybe you should confer with the clerk.
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
5:15 p.m.
The Clerk of the Committee Mr. Alexandre Roger
The question is, shall the decision of the chair be sustained?
If you are in agreement with the chair's decision, you vote yes. If you are against, you vote no.
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
Jasraj Singh Hallan Conservative Calgary Forest Lawn, AB
On a point of clarification, we don't know the ruling that he gave to us. There is no ruling.
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
Marty Morantz Conservative Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB
Is “subterfuge” parliamentary? It means “deceit”.
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Peter Fonseca
What my ruling was is that I would look into what MP Morantz had to say—
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
5:15 p.m.
Conservative