Foreign Affairs Committee on Dec. 13th, 2021

[The Clerk]

It means two members of any opposition party.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

So they could be two members from the same party.

With that clarification, is there any further discussion, colleagues?

Go ahead, Ms. McPherson.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

I just need a little bit of clarity as well on that one.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

Sure.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

I thought there was an agreement among the parties that members from two different recognized parties would be required. I thought that was the agreement that had been made by the whips previously, and because we are one of the first committees sitting, perhaps we are not seeing the changes that have been proposed and accepted by the House leaders.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

Thank you, Ms. McPherson.

Go ahead, Mr. Genuis.

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

I would just say that we're talking about two different things.

I think, Ms. McPherson, you're talking about Standing Order 106(4), which is when you have four members call a meeting. The agreement was that for the use of S. O. 106(4), there would be at least two parties.

This motion is for meetings without quorum. With meetings without quorum, there's not a lot of risk of surprises or magic happening at them because, if I understand this correctly, meetings without quorum would be only to receive evidence. You can't have motions moved. We can't compel someone to testify. It's just for the purpose of being able to have a meeting to receive evidence, so I don't think there's much risk of shenanigans if we just pass it as is. That's my thought.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Thank you. I think you're correct. That was my misunderstanding. I also very much appreciate your describing meetings as “magic”.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

We'll have plenty of opportunities to create magic.

Thank you, Ms. McPherson, if that clarifies it.

Mr. Bergeron, the floor is yours.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

I do not want to delay the adoption of this routine motion unduly. I just want to say that, when Mr. Genuis is on a committee, we always have to somewhat expect the unexpected.

However, I was thinking that, in the spirit of collaboration mentioned in the preceding routine motion, we could come to a friendly amendment between ourselves for it to be two members of two recognized opposition parties.

However, if this proposal of mine does not receive equally friendly support from my colleagues, I will not make it into a matter of principle.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

Thank you very much, Mr. Bergeron.

Mr. Oliphant, on the same point, please go ahead.

[Rob Oliphant, Liberal, Don Valley West, ON]

Yes, I thought it was important to get it on the record at the first meeting that I agree with Mr. Genuis. I thought that was quite critical, so I want to make sure that everybody.... I think his interpretation is correct, and I think that this routine motion stands as it is. On Standing Order 106(4), we understand that representatives of at least two parties would be appropriate.

I think the motion as it stands is the right one for now, so I would urge that we just pass that one and move through the motions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

Thank you, Mr. Oliphant.

I'll ask a quick question to our clerk with respect to Monsieur Bergeron's point.

Are opposition parties in this set of motions as we have them already defined as recognized opposition parties?

They are. Okay.

Is that okay with you, Mr. Bergeron?

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

As I said before, if proposing this friendly amendment does not receive an equally friendly welcome, I am not going to insist. Seeing that the unfriendly welcome curiously did not come from the ranks of the opposition, but from Mr. Oliphant, I will yield immediately.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

Thank you very much, Mr. Bergeron.

Is there any other discussion on this motion? I take it we take this motion as adopted as well with the discussion in mind.

(Motion agreed to)

Dr. Fry, please go ahead on routine motion number four.

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

Number four reads:

That witnesses be given 5 minutes or more for their opening statement; that whenever possible, witnesses provide the committee with their opening statement 72 hours in advance; that at the discretion of the Chair, during the questioning of witnesses, there be allocated six minutes for the first questioner of each party, as follows:

For the first round: Conservative Party, Liberal Party, Bloc Québécois, New Democratic Party.

For the second and subsequent rounds, the order and time for questioning be as follows:

Conservative Party, five minutes

Liberal Party, five minutes

Bloc Québécois, two and a half minutes

New Democratic Party, two and a half minutes

Conservative Party, five minutes

Liberal Party, five minutes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

Thank you very much, Dr. Fry.

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

(Motion agreed to)

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

Dr. Fry, we'll go back to you for number five.

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

The motion reads:

That only the clerk of the committee be authorized to distribute documents to members of the Committee provided the documents are in both official languages, and that the witnesses be advised accordingly.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

Thank you very much, Dr. Fry.

Is there discussion?

(Motion agreed to)

We've adopted routine motion number five.

Back to you, Dr. Fry.

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

It reads:

That the clerk of the committee, at the discretion of the Chair, be authorized to make the necessary arrangements to provide working meals for the committee and its subcommittees.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

Thank you very much, Dr. Fry.

There's resounding support for the motion, I believe.

(Motion agreed to)

Thank you very much, colleagues. We've adopted the routine motion on working meals.

Dr. Fry, please continue.

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

The next motion is:

That, if requested, reasonable travel, accommodation and living expenses be reimbursed to witnesses not exceeding two representatives per organization; and that in exceptional circumstances, payment for more representatives be made at the discretion of the Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

Thank you very much, Dr. Fry.

(Motion agreed to)

We've adopted motion number seven.

We'll go back to you, Dr. Fry, for number eight.