Evidence of meeting #30 for Government Operations and Estimates in the 40th Parliament, 3rd session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was security.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
NDP
Pat Martin NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
I wanted to very briefly remind Chris that if he reads to the end of the motion, it does say “as well as any other witnesses the Committee deems relevant”. And we have taken care of the one irritant of a staff member to a senator and he is no longer on the list. I think he should be, but because the Conservative Party refuses to send witnesses that we call, if they're staff people, I think in the interest of moving this along that person should be removed.
I don't think we should tie this up any longer either, Mr. Chairman. I agree with you; we should hear the witnesses that we have, and I think we should put this matter to a vote.
Conservative
Chris Warkentin Conservative Peace River, AB
Mr. Chair, that doesn't address the concern. I mean, he says we can add witnesses. I still haven't got any kind of an explanation as to who these other people are. Madam Bourgeois has given no explanation. I'm not certain that she knows. I'm not sure what kinds of games are—
Conservative
Chris Warkentin Conservative Peace River, AB
Well, she's sitting there and she's not giving any explanation.
Out of respect for other committee members, out of respect for this committee, I think it's important that she give some explanation as to why she's calling the members that she's calling.
Madam Bourgeois, I'm wondering if you would comment on that.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
I'm going to call the vote because we've now run through 25% of Mr. Head's time--the Correctional Services' time--and it's getting close to an abuse of witness....
Okay, I'm going to recognize two more and then I'm going to call for a vote.
Mr. Calandra was first, Mr. Holder second.
Conservative
Paul Calandra Conservative Oak Ridges—Markham, ON
I know Mr. Warkentin had mentioned there were some issues with respect to how it was worded. I know Ms. Coady amended Mr. Pichet. I'm wondering if we can also make the amendment that we remove the wording “the Conservative Party of Canada organizer”. Or are we going around the province of Quebec looking for a person who works for the Conservative Party of Canada by this particular name? If we find no such person who's actually employed by the party under this name, is that person then not coming?
I wonder if this doesn't also relate back to an earlier discussion that was had at this committee with respect to the lobbying of a member where it was ruled that the procedure and House affairs committee should be looking at this and not necessarily this committee.
So I'm wondering if we can have a friendly amendment to accept the removal of “the Conservative Party of Canada organizer”, because I doubt we'll find such a person, and if this is not something—and you can judge this--rightfully dealt with at the procedure and House affairs committee and not here.... And that was a ruling that was made. It was something that the member from Mississauga South championed at this committee with respect to the activities of the member for Scarborough—Rouge River. We've already made a ruling on that type of issue coming before this committee, and now a couple of months later we've decided that ruling is no good and we should go right back at it and take it away from the procedure and House affairs committee.
So there's the friendly amendment and the ruling on whether this is appropriate use of this committee's time.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
I take it you wish to have that.
Madam Bourgeois, do you regard the deletion of “Conservative Party of Canada organizer” as a friendly amendment?
The answer is no? Okay.
Bloc
Diane Bourgeois Bloc Terrebonne—Blainville, QC
His title is not important anyway. The important thing is that his name stays.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
Okay, so that's out.
The procedure and House affairs committee is another issue altogether.
Mr. Holder, last comment.
Conservative
Ed Holder Conservative London West, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'm mindful of your comment that we are severely cutting into our guests' time today, and I think it's terribly unfortunate. I think there are a number of things still to be discussed to do this right. I'd like to amend this motion, that we move this to subcommittee and ask for a vote.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
Well, it will effectively be at subcommittee regardless because the subcommittee will have to organize the committee's affairs next Thursday. So it's going to be dealt with there regardless.
Conservative
Ed Holder Conservative London West, ON
Then it's a curious thing to me, Chair, that we've absorbed as much time as we have on this.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
Okay.
Will we treat them as one motion?
Those in favour? Those opposed?
Conservative
Conservative
Chris Warkentin Conservative Peace River, AB
No, no, he's saying to defer it. He made a motion to do that. I'm wondering if that's what we're voting on or if we're voting on the main motion.