Evidence of meeting #31 for Foreign Affairs and International Development in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was million.
A video is available from Parliament.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sven Spengemann
Use the “raise hand” feature, please, to come in and speak to it.
Ms. Saks.
Liberal
Ya'ara Saks Liberal York Centre, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I would have to agree with my colleague Mr. Fonseca. There was ample time in the previous hour to explore Canada's response in addressing the UNRWA situation. As the minister well knows, I have been deeply involved in the review of materials, being both a fluent Hebrew speaker and having background in Arabic, and am well familiar with curricula in Israel and within the Palestinian Authority.
That said, there is ongoing oversight of this matter and the minister answered these questions. I'm really anxious, as are many of my committee members, to focus our time for this hour on COVAX as it was appropriately outlined, and not waste the time of either the minister or our officials who are here to answer those questions.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sven Spengemann
Ms. Saks, thank you very much.
I have Mr. Genuis, and then Mr. Chong.
Conservative
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
Mr. Chair, there are a few things. I'm concerned that some of the comments on this point of order are clearly venturing into debate on the point. I'll also just observe that everybody has their own time slots. Members are generally welcome to, within a pretty broad latitude, ask the questions they wish.
I will also say that, within the limited time we have for the minister, there is a significant relationship between these different elements. Of course, UNRWA is involved in responding to the circumstances of COVID-19, and the particular circumstances of these materials did arise from the context of COVID-19.
The issue here is that UNRWA was producing at-home study materials as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. They were UNRWA-produced study materials, which were for that particular context. They were not Palestinian Authority textbooks. They were UNRWA-produced materials for the context of the pandemic.
That is the point I wish to clarify: how the pandemic context impacts the hateful materials that were produced. However, I would suggest we don't allow the debate to go on too long on this point, because it seems to negate the point of the point.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sven Spengemann
Mr. Genuis, thanks very much; I appreciate that.
There has been, however, a question of relevance raised by one of our colleagues, a member of the committee, and we should have a survey of the committee's view on this. in case the committee wishes to change its orientation away from COVAX. I don't think that's the case, but let's hear from Dr. Fry and Mr. Fonseca briefly, and Ms. Sahota.
Conservative
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sven Spengemann
My apologies, Mr. Chong. Yes, you are, absolutely.
Go ahead, please.
Conservative
Michael Chong Conservative Wellington—Halton Hills, ON
Mr. Chair, I think members should be afforded a great amount of latitude as to how they use their time in committee and in the House. I've chaired a number of parliamentary committees. From time to time members would interrupt on a point of order, raising the issue of relevance and repetition. I always deferred to the member in question who had the floor prior to the point of order and gave them the latitude to use their time as they saw fit.
I think it's clear that this has been the trend in recent decades in the House of Commons. We just have to watch the 45 minutes of question period to realize the latitude given to people and ministers of the crown with respect to relevance and repetition in their answers to members of the House.
That is particularly important during this pandemic, when Parliament has essentially been stunted and is sitting in a very abbreviated form. I encourage you on this point of order to give the member in question the greatest amount of latitude possible to use his time as he sees fit.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sven Spengemann
Thank you, Mr. Chong, for that point.
I have three colleagues who have their hands raised. I'd like to canvass their views very quickly, just to make sure that we don't delay the discussion to any greater extent than necessary.
Dr. Fry is next, followed by Mr. Fonseca and Ms. Sahota, please.
Liberal
Hedy Fry Liberal Vancouver Centre, BC
Mr. Chair, with regard to the issue of a point of order, I think Mr. Genuis has explained why he sees this particular question as pertinent to COVAX. I don't agree that it's pertinent to COVAX, but I think it is pertinent to COVID. He says kids are locked down, and now we have the production of educational materials for them at home.
However, I would like to point out that we should be very respectful of our witnesses, and when a member has asked the same question so many times and been given the best response the witness is able to give, I would like to suggest that we not continue to do what I think is disrespectful, which is to badger the witness and beat the point into the ground.
While I acknowledge Mr. Genuis's saying that this is pertinent, it's not pertinent to COVAX; it's pertinent to COVID. I am prepared to let him have leeway, but I am not prepared to have the very same question asked over and over in the hopes that we will get a different response, when the witnesses have already responded, or tried to respond, three times.
What we see is the questioner trying to get the answer the questioner desires in the words that he asked the questioner once, and not to really ask a question and get an answer to the best of their ability. That is what worries me.
Conservative
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sven Spengemann
Dr. Fry, thank you very much.
Let's keep order. I'd like to get through the—
Conservative
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
This is a delay tactic by the Liberal members who don't want us to have a chance to question the minister—one way or the other.
Liberal
Conservative
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
That was [Technical difficulty--Editor] point of order. Let's just move on.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sven Spengemann
There was a point of order raised. I can invite debate on it to canvass the committee. I'd like to do so expeditiously without wasting time.
Quickly, in order, I have Mr. Fonseca, Mr. Sidhu and Monsieur Brunelle-Duceppe. Then we can return to the discussion with the guidance of the committee.
There was a very specific agreement to focus the second hour on COVAX, and I'd like to just hear briefly the views of the colleagues who have raised their hands and return to the discussion.
Please, Mr. Fonseca, go ahead, followed by Mr. Sidhu, then Monsieur Brunelle-Duceppe.
Liberal
Peter Fonseca Liberal Mississauga East—Cooksville, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I couldn't say it better than Dr. Fry has. The member has posed the question in many different ways and forms, and out of respect for the minister and the officials who are here—and especially, for this second hour, to talk about COVAX.... The minister has answered the question eloquently, has given detailed answers, has provided all the information that the member may want.
The member commenced his questioning by saying it was non-partisan. Well, the member is being totally partisan on this and continues to badger these witnesses—
Conservative
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
Let's move on, Mr. Chair. It's a total farce. Let's move on.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sven Spengemann
Mr. Fonseca, let us confine the discussion to the point of order itself.
Conservative
Liberal
Peter Fonseca Liberal Mississauga East—Cooksville, ON
Mr. Chair, the member continues to interject in a very disrespectful way again. Again, Mr. Chair, this member—
Conservative
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
Mr. Chair, take control and end this farce. We have limited time to talk to the—