Evidence of meeting #1 for Fisheries and Oceans in the 39th 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.
Conservative
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Fabian Manning
Does everybody understand what Mr. Kamp has put forward?
(Amendment negatived)
Conservative
Ken Epp Conservative Edmonton—Sherwood Park, AB
They must be expecting never to be on the government side again.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Fabian Manning
Back to the main motion moved by Mr. Stoffer. Has everybody heard the main motion? Is everybody clear on the main motion?
Mr. Kamp.
Conservative
Randy Kamp Conservative Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge—Mission, BC
Last year it was fifteen. Do we think ten is better?
Conservative
Conservative
Randy Kamp Conservative Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge—Mission, BC
Yes. It was always fifteen. It was in our motion. I think the practice was fifteen as well. Is ten enough, do you think, for a guy who comes all the way here from Timbuktu and we give him ten minutes? It seems—
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Fabian Manning
Back on May 9 it was moved by Mr. Byrne that the committee's order regarding time limits for witnesses' statements and questions be rescinded and that witnesses be given ten minutes for their opening statement, that during the questioning of witnesses ten minutes be allocated for the first questioner of the Liberal party, seven minutes to the Bloc, five to the NDP, and ten minutes for the first questioner of the Conservative Party, and if there were subsequent rounds the rotation would be the same, except that all questions would be for five minutes.
Mr. Simms.
Liberal
Scott Simms Liberal Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL
Do you want to repeat that, using the numbers again, the party numbers, just in case—
Conservative
November 14th, 2007 / 4:20 p.m.
Conservative
Conservative
Randy Kamp Conservative Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge—Mission, BC
I understand that clarification. I think it was amended later. But does this mean with two witnesses it's twenty minutes, a twenty-minute presentation?
Conservative
Randy Kamp Conservative Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge—Mission, BC
If two witnesses come from one organization, we'll now have a 20-minute presentation. Is that what this—
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Fabian Manning
No. My understanding—and I seek clarification on this from the committee—is that the witness, whether it's one, two, or five, has ten minutes to make their case. Then we open up the floor for questions. Then we flow back and forth. That's how I understand it.
Mr. Blais.
Bloc
Raynald Blais Bloc Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, QC
I, too, am happy with my colleague Peter's proposal, because it clearly indicates—and I have had the opportunity to take the chair on several occasions—that the procedure is nevertheless at the discretion of the chair.
There can be situations for one reason or another, in exceptional or specific cases, where 10 minutes is not enough. In general, it is. The other advantage is that it allows for a better exchange. The witness is not necessarily here to make a speech; the witness is here to converse with committee members.
The more time we have for an exchange with that person, the better it will be for him or her. In fact, if we allow 30 or 40 minutes for the presentation, the witness will not be better off, in my opinion. So I am very comfortable with the initial proposal.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Fabian Manning
Just as a follow-up to what Mr. Blais said, most witnesses I've had the opportunity to hear have also presented briefs prior to the committee or at the meeting. So there's not necessarily an opportunity to expand in under ten minutes. Also, we have the brief beforehand.
Mr. Kamp, you had a comment?
Conservative
Ken Epp Conservative Edmonton—Sherwood Park, AB
There was a question just moments ago about whether if there were two presenters from an organization they would then have twenty minutes. The motion clearly says it's ten minutes per organization. It's quite clear there. So I don't think we'll reword it.
Conservative
