Foreign Affairs Committee on May 16th, 2022

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Ms. Bendayan.

[Rachel Bendayan, Liberal, Outremont, QC]

On that point of clarification, could the clerk clarify until what time we have this room? I'm certainly prepared to listen to this until midnight. I just want to be able to schedule things accordingly.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

I did consult with the clerk, and at this particular point, it is unverified. We have no response on that specific issue.

Mr. Genuis.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

We're deleting old practices and creating new ones at the same time.

We're having points of information, which is a previously unknown practice. I don't want to be too much of a stickler, but if members want information—

[Sameer Zuberi, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

Point of order, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Mr. Zuberi.

[Sameer Zuberi, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

Thank you for recognizing me.

I'm wondering if people's interventions on this amendment to the motion have to remain fixed and focused on the amendment to the motion in question. If that's the case, I'd ask that anybody who is intervening be succinct so that we can grasp the essence of what they're trying to say.

Thank you for recognizing me again, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Mr. Zuberi, you are correct. All members are required to keep their remarks focused on the substance of the amendment to the motion.

[Sameer Zuberi, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

Again, may I, Mr. Chair?

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Yes, Mr. Zuberi.

[Sameer Zuberi, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

I myself am paying attention, but I'm not grasping the essence of what's being said. I'm not sure if other members of the committee are feeling similarly.

I would just put this forward. Would you be willing to intervene to make sure that these comments are succinct so we can move on with our business and anybody who's intervening can be effective and not waste words?

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Mr. Zuberi, I will do so by emphasizing and underscoring how important it is that all members keep their remarks relevant to the issue at hand. Thank you.

Go ahead, Mr. Genuis.

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

Mr. Chair, I have a great deal of respect for Mr. Zuberi. We work together quite a bit, and I think one of the.... He's being very friendly, but I don't know that the public can see.

I think the challenge may be that I am so frequently being interrupted with points of order, points of information, points of practice, points of debate and points of general grumpiness that it is difficult to proceed with any line of reasoning.

Sometimes in the House the Speaker calls upon ministers to begin from the beginning again, and I won't do that fully, but perhaps I can try to directly answer Mr. Zuberi's question. To Ms. Bendayan's comment, I don't plan to talk until midnight. I plan to be wrapping up my intervention on this topic well before then.

To try to respond to Monsieur Zuberi's request for us to grasp the essence of the topic before us, the amendment that we're discussing is an amendment to remove.... The point isn't really five meetings; it is to amend out the prescriptive reference to a minimum number of meetings from the motion. It is based on the belief that the work of this committee should be shaped by the subcommittee on agenda and procedure meeting together with a mandate to work in a collaborative way.

What I would like to see in an ideal world is for this committee not to adopt motions programming the agenda of the committee going forward without first receiving a report and a series of recommendations from the subcommittee on agenda and procedure. That would be my preference.

In fact, early on in this conversation, we moved a motion to refer this matter to the subcommittee on agenda and procedure, which wasn't about tricks or anything. It was a very straightforward way of trying to move the conversation along by saying that we have this idea, and I can't speak to motions that are on notice, of course, because they're not public, but, prospectively, we might have motions on notice. Prospectively, we might have many motions that have been put on notice by other members as well. This one was moved, but there might prospectively be other motions that have been put on notice on various other topics that we could study.

Let's refer all of that to the subcommittee on agenda and procedure to allow those matters—

[Randeep Sarai, Liberal, Surrey Centre, BC]

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.

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

Mr. Zuberi's not going to be happy with you, Mr. Sarai, because you've now interrupted this explanation of the essence of the topic.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Go ahead, Mr. Sarai.

[Randeep Sarai, Liberal, Surrey Centre, BC]

Mr. Chair, I've been trying to listen. The amendment is a very simple one. It's to have five meetings. I've heard nothing about why we should have five meetings. I've heard how many times the word “abortion” is in the original motion. I've heard why it wasn't referred or was referred or an amendment was made to refer it to subcommittee.

I have yet to hear one word on why it should be five meetings. Therefore, there is absolutely zero relevance to one word the member has said in the last hour and a half that he's been speaking to the amendment.

I implore you to please rule on this; otherwise, this will continue. This makes no sense. If he wants to speak to the actual motion itself after the amendment is passed or defeated, he has all liberty to do so, but every single word that has been said by the member on his own amendment has had absolutely nothing to do with the amendment itself—zero, nothing.

I ask you to make a—

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

This seems like debate, Mr. Chair.

[Randeep Sarai, Liberal, Surrey Centre, BC]

—directive, and please rule this out of order.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Thank you, Mr. Sarai.

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

Can I respond to the point of order or not?

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Yes, Mr. Genuis.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I appreciate that.

Mr. Chair, I think the member characterizes the unfolding of events thus far in this committee very inaccurately. What has allegedly been going on for an hour and a half.... This committee didn't even start until closer to four o'clock than 3:30 and it began with the election of chair. It proceeded with discussion about matters of procedure and I am now discussing the amendment. The arguments I am making are fundamental to that amendment, which is around the question of the agenda of the committee and how the agenda of the committee is being set.

The reason for my amendment is the fact that I don't think this committee should be prescriptive on the subcommittee on agenda and procedure about the number of meetings that are involved. As I said, it's not fundamentally about the numbers—

[Randeep Sarai, Liberal, Surrey Centre, BC]

That should be your amendment.

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

Do you have the floor, Mr. Sarai, or do I? Okay.

These are highly relevant and well within the traditions of this committee to make substantive arguments about these matters. They are entirely consistent with what has always been permitted in the rules of the committee—