Government Operations Committee on June 16th, 2021

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

Mr. Chair, I would ask you to rule on the appropriateness of proposing this motion, which deviates from the subject at hand. I don't think that Mr. Paul-Hus's motion has anything to do with the subject we are discussing today.

Can you tell us whether the motion is admissible?

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

Mr. MacKinnon, the order would be that the motion can be brought back if there is agreement among the members to bring it back up. That's why I'm asking if there agreement from the committee members to do so.

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

No.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

On a point of order, I believe due notice was provided on the motion, was it not? If so, why would we need to have unanimous consent?

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

We don't need unanimous consent. We just need agreement to retable it. We suspended the motion at the last meeting. It sat in that situation, and it's open to being brought up at any time by anybody and brought back to the table. Mr. Paul-Hus has brought it back up, and now it's before the committee to determine—

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Just to be clear, it's a debatable and votable motion.

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

At this point in time, it's to see if there's agreement. If there's a majority, then it is. If not, if it's on division, then we would go to a vote.

Mr. Drouin, I see your hand is up.

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Mr. Chair, I would defer to the clerk or the analyst, but when we left off, I believe we were debating an amendment, and Mr. MacKinnon had the floor at the time. If it is brought back, I just want to make sure that Mr. MacKinnon gets the floor back, because we were debating that particular amendment to the motion.

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

Thank you, Mr. Drouin. I think you are correct on that, but I'm just going to check for a second with the clerk.

Go ahead, Mr. Paul-Hus, and then I'll go to Mr. MacKinnon.

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

Mr. MacKinnon, you also have your hand up. I quickly want to hear from you before I rule.

[Pierre Paul-Hus, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

Mr. Chair, could the clerk inform us about what procedure to follow? I don't think we need to have a debate on this matter. We can go directly to a vote.

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

Mr. Chair, please rule, but I do agree with Mr. Drouin that I had the floor.

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

Thank you.

I'm going to ask the clerk to comment briefly on whether that is a motion.

[The Clerk]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My understanding is that Mr. Paul-Hus is moving a motion that the committee retake up the debate on his motion that had been moved on June 7, but the debate had been adjourned on that day on the motion, which means that the motion basically stays where it is until the committee takes a majority decision to take up the debate again.

The mechanism for doing so is what we call a dilatory motion, which is what Mr. Paul-Hus has moved. He has moved that we proceed to consideration of the motion he moved on June 7. A dilatory motion is traditionally non-debatable. Actually, the question is put immediately and decided by a majority decision.

If you want, pursuant to the order adopted on January 25, any decision that is not unanimous or decided on division has to be decided by a recorded division.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Let's go to a vote.

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

That said, I do not see agreement, so I will call for a vote.

Go ahead, Mr. Clerk.

[The Clerk]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

The question is on the dilatory motion, in the name of Monsieur Paul-Hus, that the committee resume consideration of his motion moved on June 7, 2021.

I'm not hearing any vote from Ms. Harder.

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

She's absent, Mr. Clerk. You must move on.

(Motion negatived: nays 5; yeas 4 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

Thank you, Mr. Clerk. The motion is defeated.

We will not resume the debate, so we will continue with the round of questioning.

We'll go to Mr. Kusmierczyk for five minutes.

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

On a point of order, Mr. Chair, who's calling the Conservative whip?

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

It's silly season, not bad humour season.

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

Mr. Kusmierczyk, your time is running.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

On a point of order, Mr. Chair, I think we should agree to allow Mr. Kusmierczyk to have his full time and not take Mr. MacKinnon's intervention away from his time.

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

Mr. Kusmierczyk, you have the floor.

[Irek Kusmierczyk, Liberal, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

Thank you very much, Chair, and I appreciate it.

I have a question for our witnesses. The Public Health Agency of Canada is requesting about $1.1 billion under vote 1a, operating expenditures; vote 5a, capital expenditures; and vote 10a, grants and contributions for border and travel measures and isolation sites related to COVID-19.

The funding would be used to implement enhanced border and travel measures relating to COVID-19 travel restrictions for individuals entering by land or at the four designated Canadian airports, and for federally designated quarantine sites across Canada. It would strengthen national border and travel health programs, including enhanced compliance and enforcement, such as home checks; safe voluntary isolation spaces in municipalities; and enhanced surveillance initiatives to reduce COVID-19 importation and transmission at points of entry.

This funding request is interesting. In Windsor—Essex, we received through the safe voluntary isolation sites program about $18 million from PHAC for an isolation and recovery centre, and it was used for temporary foreign workers who were working on farms.

Windsor—Essex receives about 10,000 temporary foreign workers per year, so this was a critical piece of our COVID-19 response. We had large outbreaks on our farms during the year, so this isolation recovery centre provided us with a bit of breathing space. It took a lot of pressure off our ICUs, our hospitals and our health care system. It allowed us to safely quarantine and isolate temporary foreign workers who were COVID positive or who had been in contact with folks who were COVID positive.

First and foremost, how many isolation sites were federally funded in Canada?

It's an open question. I'm not sure who it's directed to.