Foreign Affairs Committee on Feb. 4th, 2016

[Michael Levitt, Liberal, York Centre, ON]

I'd like to propose that we do six minutes in rounds one, two, three, and four, so it would be Conservative, Liberal, NDP, and then Liberal. Then in round two it would be six, six, six, five, and three, for Liberal, Conservative, Liberal, Conservative, and NDP, for a total of 50 minutes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Nault]

Are you following that, Madame?

[Hélène Laverdière, NDP, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

I would need to make some calculations.

I would like to comment on Mr. Kent's last question. It seems to me that, if any time is left, we should repeat the order from the first round. That is how I understood his question.

After round one and round two, when there's still time left, then we should go back to round one, it seems to me, but I would have to calculate this. I have no comment on this one yet.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Nault]

Dean.

[Dean Allison, Conservative, Niagara West, ON]

I don't think we have a problem with it in terms of that thought process. It should be fair and representative of what's in the House. I think that our biggest concern, when we start talking about other parties, is to make sure that everyone on the committee who was present would get a chance to speak first, before anyone else would.

I don't know if it would be that much of a problem. We could talk about that later. I think that's what you're getting at.

At the very least, all of the members or their equivalents, their fill-ins, should have a chance to speak before we open it up.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Nault]

That's very much in line with my thinking. Obviously, regular committee members will get the first opportunity, before anybody else who's not on the committee does.

Hélène.

[Hélène Laverdière, NDP, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

This is on Mr. Levitt's proposal.

That gives us a total of 50 minutes instead of 51 minutes. That is one less minute for the NDP. That is not really acceptable for us.

Thank you.

[Raj Saini, Liberal, Kitchener Centre, ON]

I didn't understand that. The total time is 50 minutes.

[Hélène Laverdière, NDP, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Yes, and in the current proposal the total time is 51 minutes. In Mr. Levitt's proposal the total time is 50 minutes. However, in the current proposal, in what we have in front of us, the NDP is entitled to 10 minutes. As you'll see, I talk a lot. I'm rather talkative. With Mr. Levitt's proposal, I lose a minute. It may be a gain for your own mental health, but it's a loss for me, so I can't agree to that.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Nault]

Thank you very much for your comment.

To make this formal, Mr. Levitt is putting a motion forward. If he would read it one more time, we'll move to put the question.

[Michael Levitt, Liberal, York Centre, ON]

The rotation by time would be the following: in rounds one, two, three, and four, in the order Conservative, Liberal, NDP, Liberal, it would be six, six, six, six. In round two, in the order Liberal, Conservative, Liberal, Conservative, NDP, it would be six, six, six, five, three. This would total 50 minutes, which I believe is representative of the proportion in the House as well.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Nault]

You've heard the motion. I'll put the question.

[Hélène Laverdière, NDP, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

There's an amendment to the motion.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Nault]

Well, it's a little late for that. I've already put the question.

(Motion agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

Keep in mind that we'll be very flexible on these kinds of things, as we should be.

Thank you for that, Michael. I appreciate it.

The next procedural motion is on document distribution. The motion reads:

That the Clerk of the Committee be authorized to distribute documents to members of the Committee only when the documents are available in both official languages and that witnesses be advised accordingly.

I would like to make an amendment to this document. I'd like to include the parliamentary secretaries for the sake of the distribution of documents. As you may imagine, they'll be here the whole time, and it would be useful for the clerk to distribute the documents to the parliamentary secretaries for their information. I'm sure you'll also distribute it to everybody that you want to anyway, but I think it just makes good common sense.

If people are in favour of that, I would make that small amendment.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Mr. Chair, I don't object to that in principle, but I would suggest that if this provision is made for parliamentary secretaries, then we allow members who wish to come to this committee on a regular basis to request that they receive documents distributed to them directly as well, regardless of the party. That seems like a fair way to operate.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Nault]

The clerk has brought it to my attention that when we are in the process of doing reports that are considered to be not for public consumption before they are completed, there would not be a distribution of documents to people who are not on the committee. That is, of course, the standard procedure of how we have operated in committees for many years.

I think I may have to forgo what I was trying to accomplish—allowing documents to go to the parliamentary secretaries because they will be here—because it has to be members of the committee.

If you'll allow me, we'll go back to the standard motion:

That the Clerk of the Committee be authorized to distribute documents to members of the Committee only when the documents are available in both official languages and that witnesses be advised accordingly.

Mr. Kent.

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Just for clarification, given that we've already begun the transition to paperless committee work, should there be some reference here to the fact that it would be electronically distributed to members' iPads, for instance? Somehow we need to recognize, I think, the fact that much of the document distribution is intended to be digital in the future.

[The Clerk]

The distribution of documents involves either hard copies or electronic copies. Sometimes only paper copies may be available, if they're something that the witnesses provide.

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Sure.

[The Clerk]

Distribution can mean electronic format as well. It's included.

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Understood.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Nault]

Is there any further discussion?

(Motion agreed to)

[Hélène Laverdière, NDP, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Mr. Chair, before we move to the next item, I'd like to move a motion that, following the proposal from Mr. Levitt, an extra minute be added to the NDP talking time in the second round, bringing it from three to four.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Nault]

Okay, you've heard the motion, so we're going to have a discussion to make an amendment, which is a little unusual since we've moved beyond that, but for the sake of being fair, let's have that discussion.

Garnett, do you want to touch that?

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

I want to say I support that. I think it's reasonable based on the original time to the new proposal. I think the new proposal flows a bit better in terms of having equal time throughout, but I wouldn't want to shortchange the NDP from something they had in a previous version.