Government Operations Committee on Nov. 2nd, 2020

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

Mr. Chair, perhaps I can clarify my position here a little bit.

There is no intent whatsoever to supersede Mr. Green's motion. I support his motion fully. What I am suggesting is complementary. It builds upon it. I'm seeking my colleague's collaboration on this, again in the spirit of collaboration that we're trying to establish here and knowing that this is an important issue. I did not mean at all to supersede his motion or to supersede his production of documentation. I believe it complements it and I believe it builds on it.

I'm maybe looking to my colleague for some direction on this and to join me on this.

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

Thank you, Mr. Kusmierczyk.

The motion to challenge—

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

If I could, as a point of order, Mr. Chair, I'm unclear. The speakers list in and of itself was exhausted prior to the actual challenge hitting the floor. I'm just wondering if we would have some time to speak to this prior to it getting to that point.

[The Clerk]

Mr. Chair, perhaps I could just explain briefly the procedure.

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

Sure.

[The Clerk]

When any member moves to challenge the ruling of a chair, at that point the ruling of the chair has already been made. That motion is usually non-debatable and usually the question is put immediately, which is to say the committee gets to take a decision as to whether or not they agree with the ruling of the chair. Typically, the motion is not debatable and we proceed immediately to the vote.

That is what I wanted to explain, as Mr. Drouin has moved that the ruling of the chair be challenged. Thank you.

Do you wish me to go to the recorded division on the challenge of your ruling, Mr. Chair?

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

Yes, Mr. Clerk, I do.

[Dane Lloyd, Conservative, Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB]

If I may jump in here, Mr. Clerk, could you clearly state what is being voted on, and yes or no? Thank you.

[The Clerk]

Thank you, Mr. Lloyd, and to other members who have asked, I will do that.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

May I also have a point order, for my own clarity on procedure?

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

Yes, Mr. Green.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Just so I'm clear on what we're voting on.... If the challenge is not successful, could the motion then be put independently as a stand-alone motion that could still be put forward, or does it die in the ruling of the chair?

[The Clerk]

If I may, Mr. Chair?

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

Go ahead, Mr. Clerk.

[The Clerk]

The chair has ruled the amendment is inadmissible. What we are to be voting on now is the motion “Shall the ruling of the chair be sustained?” Those members who agree with the chair's ruling that the amendment is inadmissible will vote “yea”. Those who disagree with the ruling of the chair, who feel the amendment should be admissible, shall vote “nay”, essentially not to sustain the ruling of the chair.

With regard to Mr. Green's contention about the amendment, Mr. Kusmierczyk's amendment would serve as a motion in and of itself, and he could move it independently of Mr. Green's motion, at which point the committee would debate it as a normal motion. The concern is that, moved in the context of an amendment to Mr. Green's motion, you, Mr. Chair, have ruled that it is outside the scope of the motion.

What the committee would be voting on now is the motion “Shall the ruling of the chair be sustained?” Those who agree the amendment should be out of order would vote “yea”, which is the way you have ruled, Mr. Chair. Those who disagree and feel the amendment should be admissible and debatable would vote “nay”. Does this clear up all questions for members of the committee?

With your indulgence, Mr. Chair, I will call the roll on the question.

Shall the ruling of the chair be sustained?

It's five yeas and five nays. Mr. Chair, you will have to use your casting vote.

(Ruling of the chair sustained: yeas 6; nays 5)

The ruling of the chair is sustained and Mr. Kusmierczyk's amendment is deemed inadmissible by the chair.

Now you presumably would return to debate on Mr. Green's motion. Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

Thank you.

We will return to the debate on the motion.

Do we have any hands up? I don't know whether the ones I'm seeing here are old or new, Mr. Clerk.

[The Clerk]

I have Mr. Kusmierczyk, Mr. McCauley and Mr. Green.

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

That's what I have as well. Thank you.

Mr. Kusmierczyk.

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

That was just an old hand that I didn't remove.

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

Thank you.

Mr. McCauley.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Thanks.

I was just going to suggest to Mr. Kusmierczyk and Mr. Green that after we move forward, hopefully, on Mr. Green's motion, we can just talk separately and get a strong motion put forward at the next meeting, or the week after, to move Mr. Kusmierczyk and Mr. Green's co-study, for lack of better words, just so we can move on. We all seem to be in agreement that we'll do the study.

Thanks.

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

Thank you.

Mr. Green.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Mr. Chair, Mr. McCauley took my sentiment. I just want to be on the record and say that I fully support the spirit and intent. I didn't want to cause this committee to come to a place where you were challenged in that way, which is why I supported your ruling. I hope that Mr. Kusmierczyk and I, and others who are interested in this, can get together and bring back something that is really good and workable, because I support everything he said.

Quite frankly, I just wish I had thought of it myself.

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

Thank you, Mr. Green.

I see no further hands up for debate on Mr. Green's motion. Do we need a vote on division, or do we have hands up?

[The Clerk]

Mr. MacKinnon has asked for a recorded division.