Foreign Affairs Committee on Feb. 25th, 2021

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

Okay. Let's hear it, briefly, Mr. Genuis.

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

Thank you.

What I would propose, if there's unanimous consent for this, is that Ms. McPherson be allowed to deliver some brief remarks on this issue. Then we will adjourn debate on this issue. Adjourning debate doesn't mean going to a vote on the issue; it means it can be brought back at a future point. Then we would adjourn debate on this issue and that would still leave us, hopefully, with 20 or so minutes to address the Uighur report so that we could at least get something done.

That's my proposal for unanimous consent.

[Ruby Sahota, Liberal, Brampton North, ON]

Point of order.

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

Point of order, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

Let's stay in sequence here.

There's a point of order.

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

Point of order.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

There's a point of order on Mr. Genuis's point of order, raised by Dr. Fry.

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

Mr. Chair, there are procedures in place—they're written in a book that we were all given when we first became MPs—on how committees and standing committees must proceed with the work that they have to do. We cannot suddenly decide that we don't want to follow those procedures and create our own new procedures. Doing that is out of order, as far as I'm concerned, Mr. Chair.

The order, at the moment, is that a member has duly, according to her privilege, introduced an amendment to a motion on the floor. We will debate it because that is what the rules say. She will debate her own points of order, and those of us who support her or do not support her, have an opportunity to speak to or against her amendment. The order on the floor right now is the debating of an amendment to a motion introduced by Ms. McPherson.

Until the debate on that amendment is finished, there should be nothing else moving that procedure off, because anything else would be against the order of the committee's rules at the moment.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

Dr. Fry, thank you.

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

The committee can, by unanimous consent, do anything it wants to.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

Mr. Genuis, wait one second please. Let's stay in sequence here.

I take it, Dr. Fry, that through your point of order, you've expressed a view that there is no unanimous consent on Mr. Genuis's proposal.

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

Fair enough.

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

That's it exactly, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

We will pass the floor back to Ms. Sahota.

[Ruby Sahota, Liberal, Brampton North, ON]

I kind of had a point of order there, too. I want some clarification on the points of order that just took place. I know you can't move a motion on a point of order, but what was tricky there was that Mr. Genuis was not just trying to get consensus on moving to the draft report and tabling this issue for now and maybe coming back to it later, but he was also trying to take my position on the floor away from me and give it to Ms. McPherson. I don't think I'm willing to cede the floor right now.

Could I get clarification on that as well? That's where I was confused.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

Procedurally, we may need some advice here.

Ms. Sahota, I think what you're raising implicitly is a point of privilege. Maybe we can pass it to the clerk to help us sift through that and see how to best answer it. In any event, I believe we do not, at this point, have unanimous consent, which means the floor would revert to you.

Madam Clerk, could you advise?

[The Clerk]

Mr. Chair, I would suggest that when you gave the floor to Mr. Genuis after he indicated that he was seeking unanimous consent, he did at that point legitimately have the floor. However, he does not have unanimous consent to move that motion or for it to be agreed to.

At this point, I would consider any debate on this collapsed. The floor would be returned to Ms. Sahota.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

Thank you very much, Madam Clerk.

Just for future reference, is it permissible, then, to raise a point of unanimous consent, if that's the right term, on a point of order—or raise a question of unanimous consent on a point of order rather than a motion? Can a member solicit the unanimous consent of the committee at any time through a point of order?

[The Clerk]

No, Mr. Chair. Points of order are really reserved for when a member thinks the rules of the committee are being breached. They would have to indicate which rule is being breached to make it a proper point of order.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

That's helpful to all members, I believe, Madam Clerk.

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

Mr. Chair, just for clarification, my understanding of the committee rules is that a committee can do anything it wants by unanimous consent. It's a moot point anyway, because there's no unanimous consent.

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

No.

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

This happens all the time in the House. We constantly have members of the House rising on points of order to seek unanimous consent on points of procedure or substantive matters. Is it the point that this can happen in the House but it can't happen in committee?

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

That's not what you're seeking. That's not what you're seeking.

[The Clerk]

Mr. Chair, if I may—