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.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
What we agreed to in the very first meeting is what we do. It's called routine motions, right? The food that's provided, how we operate in generalities—
February 23rd, 2016 / 5:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
Okay. If you have them there, go down to the one on subcommittee creation.
Liberal
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
That's correct. We voted to create that. Now, the discussion that followed was about not needing that. We can do it within the full committee, as was done prior. In the past, we have done that. We're a fairly collegial committee, as was said by Mr. Sopuck, and therefore maybe it's not needed. We didn't schedule one at that time.
In the beginning, what was asked by Mr. Donnelly was to create a subcommittee to do this, but in fact one was already created, which the clerk pointed out, so we didn't need to do that vote. It was just a matter of asking shall we schedule a meeting of the subcommittee?
Ms. Jordan.
Liberal
Bernadette Jordan Liberal South Shore—St. Margarets, NS
I'm sorry. I hate to be difficult, but I'm very good at it.
What you're saying is that when we did the routine motions, we decided that we weren't going to have a subcommittee because we were all going to make that decision. We didn't vote on it, but we said at the time that it was going to be all of us because we were a collegial committee and we didn't need the subcommittee.
Now what you're saying is that Mr. Donnelly wanted to make a motion, and no, we don't have to, because we already have it. But we didn't already have it. We decided against having it. That's my confusion. Sorry.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
The clerk has pointed out to me that the record shows we voted on it and passed it as a routine motion to create the subcommittee.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
Correct? Right. That's why we don't need to do it, because one was already created by routine motions. You can check the blues if you wish.
Mr. Hardie.
Liberal
Ken Hardie Liberal Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC
If it's possible, if it's the will of the majority, could we amend the motion we passed in the first meeting to basically designate the subcommittee to be a committee of the whole? In other words, the subcommittee is everybody. Is that possible?
Liberal
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
Okay. Right, because a double negative makes.... No, a double positive makes a negative. I don't know. Whatever. You know what I'm saying.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
If you would like to make a motion, I cannot stop you from doing that. This is committee business, so you have the right to do that, but the record shows that we did have a vote and we created a subcommittee.
Liberal
Ken Hardie Liberal Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC
I was just seeing if there was a way open, and if it was the general consensus that we wanted all of this to happen in the committee of the whole, if there was a mechanism to get there. I'm really agnostic on the whole thing.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
I guess, Mr. Hardie, for what you're suggesting, that one of the options you could do if you don't want the subcommittee that's set up would be this: you leave it to committee business, which is what we're doing right now, and not bother with the subcommittee or going to meetings of the subcommittee. Is that what you're suggesting?
Liberal
Ken Hardie Liberal Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC
No. My colleague down here was of the opinion that we had generally agreed that everything would happen as a committee of the whole. I was just looking for a way that we might make it happen that way.
Liberal
Ken Hardie Liberal Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC
Okay. As I say, I'm comme ci comme ça on this one. If one of my colleagues wishes to make that motion and bring that about, they can go for it.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
As I say, any motion is possible. Right now we're dealing with the fact that Mr. Donnelly wants to have scheduled meetings of the subcommittee that was created at our first meeting.
Mr. Donnelly, go ahead.
NDP
Fin Donnelly NDP Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC
Mr. Chair, I'm not sure if the motion has been made yet, but if a motion does come forward, I'll support it if you're happy to keep it public. That's the issue, so I'm suggesting that the subcommittee is the part that will go in camera and bring it back to the committee of the whole, to which Canadians will then have access. They don't know what we're talking about right now. When we come back to the committee of the whole and we have this discussion then if we're in public and we've had our opportunity to have this debate in camera, we'll be able to let Canadians know what we're talking about. Right now, they have no idea.
NDP
Fin Donnelly NDP Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC
I thought we had gone in camera. So if we're in public, this is great. Then Canadians have an opportunity to understand what we're debating, procedurally of course, but when we go in camera, they don't, and if we're making decisions about priorities, they're not going to know what we're talking about.
