Evidence of meeting #3 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 subcommittee.
A recording is available from Parliament.
NDP
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
It is moved by Mr. Donnelly and seconded by Mr. Sopuck that we constitute a subcommittee consisting of a chair, two vice-chairs, and two members of the governing party.
All in favour of that motion?
It turns out that during routine motions, we adopted that. Now we just have to institute it. We don't have to have a vote. It's already been accepted.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
I know we discussed it and I know there was a general kind of agreement as to whether or not to go through with that, but there was no vote or motion passed to defeat the idea of a subcommittee. We did have a vote to create a subcommittee during routine motions. It exists, and a vote really isn't necessary. It's just a matter of scheduling it.
NDP
Fin Donnelly NDP Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC
I'll withdraw the motion if it's already there. If my seconder is okay with that, we'll remove that and continue on. Ideally, the subcommittee could meet prior to the meeting you're talking about. That will be March 8. Will that be in camera or will that be open?
NDP
Fin Donnelly NDP Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC
That would be the difference. Ideally we have the subcommittee in camera, and then the discussion in public. We're talking transparency here. The public wants to know how we are setting priorities, and what the issues are.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
Just as a point of clarification, let me explain it again.
During routine motions, there are several measures we take, as does every other committee. We adopted a motion to have a subcommittee to help put out our committee business and eventually bring it back to the main committee of all of us. We did discuss the idea of not having a subcommittee because it has never really been the practice of the fisheries and oceans committee to have one in the past—not never but for the most part, let's say, in the last session.
We did not take a vote on that, however. So we can't vote it in to bring it back. Do you understand what I'm saying? So, right now, on the docket, we have a subcommittee created but just not used. Mr. Donnelly is proposing that we use this subcommittee in the future.
Liberal
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
I suppose that would go for a lot of things in life, but you get the idea. There you go. It's just a matter of using it.
I guess what you're proposing is to schedule a meeting for the subcommittee. It doesn't have to be within the parameters of Tuesday or Thursday from 3:30 to 5:30.
Fin Donnelly NDP Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC
That's correct. If I could add further clarification, Mr. Chair, the idea is that when we do get the priorities back into the realm of discussion, it's open, and Canadians have access to what we're talking about, as opposed to it being in camera.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
Are there more questions on that issue? Are there any points of clarification needed? We're good?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
Well, “not really” means no.
Would you have a question, Mr. Morrissey?
Liberal
Bobby Morrissey Liberal Egmont, PE
Take us through the process again. We are new to this, on this side. It started with a motion from Mr. Donnelly. Just walk us through the process that we are now agreeing to.
