Evidence of meeting #1 for Fisheries and Oceans in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was vote.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:25 p.m.
NDP
Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC
Sure. I move that all requests to appear before the committee be distributed to committee members.
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
4:25 p.m.
NDP
Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC
I can speak to that.
What will happen is that there will be people in the Canadian public who will write to the committee chair asking to appear. That will go to the clerk, and in the absence of having a motion, committee members are not necessarily apprised of who's doing that. It's helpful for committee members to know who wants to appear before the committee. It's also helpful when we have to suggest witnesses for a particular study to know who wants to appear and not to double up. If you know that someone has written the committee, you won't necessarily waste a spot of your own.
It's just more efficient and a courtesy to all committee members.
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
Robert Sopuck Conservative Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB
That was most certainly not the practice in the past, and I question this motion now.
Basically, when a study was proposed and agreed to by the committee, each party would put forward a list of witnesses they would want to appear. Again, it was a fairly collegial process that ensured that every party had its witnesses appear before the committee in proportion to the party's representation on the committee.
I don't see what would be served by the motion on the floor right now, at all.
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
Is there any more discussion on this issue before we proceed to a vote?
Mr. Davies.
4:25 p.m.
NDP
Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC
I will briefly respond to that.
Again, so that we are clear, this does no violence to the normal situation wherever committees are working collegially and are requested to put in requests.
What this does is inform all committee members when a member of the public or an organization has written independently to the committee and has said that they want to appear, just to let the committee members know that the request is there. Otherwise, we wouldn't necessarily know.
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
Bobby Morrissey Liberal Egmont, PE
I'd be curious to hear what his motion would take away from the past practice.
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
Robert Sopuck Conservative Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB
Again, it has the capacity to create unnecessary conflict, because there are going to be members of the public who want to appear before the committee but won't be allowed to because the committee decided not to hear them. I think it would be a source of embarrassment for them.
My experience on this committee for the last four years was that there was a wide range of witnesses. No political party of any stripe on this committee was the least bit shy about putting forward an extensive witness list. As I said, it worked very well. We decided among ourselves which witnesses would come, and a wide spectrum of witnesses appeared before us on every single issue.
4:30 p.m.
Liberal
Bernadette Jordan Liberal South Shore—St. Margarets, NS
I have a question for clarification. You just requested that the names be put forward. You didn't ask to vote on whether or not they could appear. Is that correct?
That would then take away from your argument that it would embarrass people. Am I right in assuming that?
All he's asking for is that the names be submitted beforehand, not that we vote on whether or not they are able to present to committee.
4:30 p.m.
Conservative
Robert Sopuck Conservative Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the proceedings of this committee are public proceedings, so things will get out. Of course, if someone requests it and it is not possible for us to see them, obviously they will be disappointed and will make sure that their displeasure is known.
Look, I'm as much of a politician as anybody else. I like conflict as much as anybody else, but I'm thinking of the smooth workings of this committee and I'm drawing on my four years of experience on it. As I said, the past practice of each party putting forward a list of witnesses worked very well.
4:30 p.m.
Liberal
4:30 p.m.
Conservative
Robert Sopuck Conservative Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB
Of course, once a witness list is agreed upon, it becomes public for sure, which is as it should be.
But anyway, we're not in the majority, so if the majority wishes to do what Mr. Davies wants, that's the way it will be.
4:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
Is there any further discussion before we proceed to a vote on this particular issue, or even seek some clarification, if need be?
Are we okay with it?
Okay, I would like to ask for a vote.
(Motion agreed to)
Mr. Davies, I believe you have a second motion.
4:30 p.m.
NDP
Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC
I do. It's my final motion, Mr. Chair.
It's that whenever the minister appears before the committee, every effort be made to ensure that the meeting is televised.
4:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
Is there any discussion on this matter?
One second, Mr. Hardie, I'll go to you next.
Mr. Morrissey.
4:30 p.m.
Liberal
Bobby Morrissey Liberal Egmont, PE
What control do we as a committee have over that? Is it the chair?