Evidence of meeting #27 for Foreign Affairs and International Development in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was business.
A recording is available from Parliament.
3:40 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
I call this meeting to order.
Before we begin, I think Mr. Dewar has a motion in regard to committee business.
3:40 p.m.
NDP
Paul Dewar NDP Ottawa Centre, ON
Yes, Chair. I just wanted to acknowledge the fact that we have received correspondence from the Minister of Foreign Affairs regarding your request from the committee to provide Abousfian Abdelrazik with the necessary travel documents so he could be here at committee.
I essentially want to put forward a motion about the displeasure of this committee with the fact that he did not provide a travel document and that it took him more than a week to respond to the committee.
In essence--I'm reading here, Mr. Chair--the correspondence says: “Thank you for your letter of June 3, 2009”--this is the letter that you had sent to him as minister--“concerning the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development Motion (6-5)”, where we had asked Mr. Abdelrazik to come to committee. He says, “I would like to inform you that the Government is in the process of reviewing the Federal Court decision of June 4, 2009, on the case concerning Mr. Abousfian Abdelrazik.” It's signed, “Sincerely, Lawrence Cannon”.
Your request was different. Your request was for him to provide Mr. Abdelrazik with the necessary travel documents so he could come before committee. The letter is responding to something different, and that is the Federal Court case. It's not responding to your request to have Mr. Abdelrazik provided with the necessary travel documents.
I want to put forward to this committee a motion expressing displeasure at the fact that the minister took so long to respond and that he did not provide the necessary travel documents to Mr. Abdelrazik for him to appear before the committee.
3:40 p.m.
The Clerk of the Committee Ms. Angela Crandall
It hasn't been circulated yet. I just got the translation this morning. I received it Friday afternoon and sent it for translating.
3:40 p.m.
NDP
Paul Dewar NDP Ottawa Centre, ON
To be clear, I'm not criticizing the fact that we only got it here now; the fact is that we didn't get it until late on Friday, so staff didn't have time to turn it around. There's no concern here for me about getting it from staff now. My concern is about the fact that it took the minister that long and that he didn't answer the request, which was to provide Mr. Abdelrazik with the travel documents.
He's answering a query that has nothing to do with the query we put in front of him. He's talking about the Federal Court. We asked him to provide travel documents from his office, which we've established that he can. He didn't answer that query, so I want to put forward the motion that as a committee we express displeasure with the response of the Minister of Foreign Affairs to our request, which was a unanimous motion passed at this committee to have Mr. Abdelrazik present. It's a motion that we express displeasure with his response, both on the content and, of course, on the time it took.
3:40 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
All right, Mr. Dewar. Thank you for that.
I was just talking to the clerk here. Again, this is a motion, and I'm advised that we would have needed 48 hours on this motion. So unless we have unanimous--
3:40 p.m.
NDP
Paul Dewar NDP Ottawa Centre, ON
No. I challenge that, Chair, because we are speaking about the issue of Mr. Abdelrazik. You came out of our in camera meeting to speak about this issue, so it's actually in scope.
3:40 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
Well, we came into committee business, and we're also going to basically deal with the steering committee report, but--
3:40 p.m.
NDP
Paul Dewar NDP Ottawa Centre, ON
Well, you said for me to put forward a motion. I've put forward a motion, and now you're saying I can't. I'm confused.
3:40 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
Yes, I wasn't certain about what exactly you were going to be saying in a motion, but that's why we said that if we were going to do motions, you didn't want to be in camera for it. That's why we moved to a public meeting.
June 15th, 2009 / 3:40 p.m.
The Clerk
The motion of the committee says that all substantive motions require 48 hours' notice. The standard is that when we're under committee business and we're talking about committee business, motions can be moved.
3:40 p.m.
Conservative
3:40 p.m.
The Clerk
When it arises out of committee business, it doesn't require unanimous consent. It's a motion arising out of the business that's before the committee. Like the last time there was a motion put when we were discussing writing a letter to the minister, we were discussing the issue of Mr. Abdelrazik. So even though it was a motion without notice, it was arising out of the business before the committee and what was being discussed.
3:40 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
In your opinion, is this in order or not in order? That's what I'm asking you.
3:40 p.m.
The Clerk
Well, I would advise that since it's under committee business, it would be in order.
