Evidence of meeting #1 for Health in the 42nd Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was clerk.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bill Casey
The motion has been moved.
(Motion agreed to)
Perfect. We're doing great.
Concerning the reduced quorum, there's a motion:
That the Chair be authorized to hold meetings to receive and publish evidence when a quorum is not present, provided that at least four (4) members are present, including one (1) member of the opposition and one (1) member of the government; and That in the case of previously scheduled meetings taking place outside of the Parliamentary Precinct, the Committee members in attendance be required to wait for 15 minutes following the designated start of the meeting before they may proceed to hear witnesses and receive evidence, regardless of whether opposition or government members are present.
Sometimes members don't make it, and the witnesses are here. Rather than make them wait, this motion allows us to go ahead without quorum just to ask questions. There are no votes, no motions; it's just to hear witnesses.
Would anybody like to...? So moved.
(Motion agreed to)
Now on the distribution of documents:
That only the Clerk of the Committee be authorized to distribute documents, including motions, to the members of the Committee; That, except in cases where there is unanimous consent to proceed otherwise, all documents distributed amongst the Committee members by the Clerk be in both official languages; and That the Clerk advise all witnesses appearing before the Committee of this requirement.
Would anybody like to move that motion?
So moved by Mr. Davies.
Here's an important one, on working meals and snacks:
That the Clerk of the Committee, in consultation with the Chair, be authorized to make the necessary arrangements to provide for working meals and that the cost of these meals be charged to the Committee budget; and That, subject to availability, the working meals of the Committee be balanced and nutritious.
This is a repeat from last year.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bill Casey
So moved.
(Motion agreed to)
I didn't clarify. The clerk has asked me to clarify the vote on the one about distribution of documents. It was moved by Mr. Davies, and I didn't get approval from everybody.
Everybody approves; we're good.
(Motion agreed to)
The next one is witnesses' expenses:
That, if requested, reasonable travel, accommodation and living expenses be reimbursed to witnesses not exceeding two (2) representatives per organization, and that, in exceptional circumstances, payment for more representatives be made at the discretion of the Chair.
Conservative
Colin Carrie Conservative Oshawa, ON
Mr. Chair, I was wondering if we could add that in order to protect the taxpayers' dollars, every effort should be made to provide video conferencing.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bill Casey
Absolutely. Can we add that the alternative should be video conferencing if possible, in the interest of saving dollars?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bill Casey
I'm glad you did that. These are former motions from the last committee, and we can add whatever we want, or we can amend them any way we want.
Yes Mr. Davies.
NDP
Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC
I'm not opposed to the sentiment behind that motion, but I think we have to be somewhat careful about how it's worded. The way it was just proposed, that we do that if it's at all possible, could change the structure of this committee so that most of the testimony would be coming by video conference. It's been my experience that there is a difference between evidence by video conference and evidence here in Ottawa. There are also regional differences as well. What ends up happening is that people who live near Ottawa or who live near central Canada tend to come to the committee in person, and witnesses who come from British Columbia or outside this area tend to not be able to appear face to face with the committee.
I would propose language that doesn't make it seem as though the default is video, and that appearing before us can happen only if that can't happen. I don't have any language to propose, but maybe the clerk or the analysts could help.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bill Casey
I propose that we table this proposal and this motion. Perhaps the clerk can come up with some language that everybody is comfortable with. I agree with that. It would mean that people who live around Ottawa would be more likely to be present and have a different impact than would those from further away who would do it by video conference.
Do you agree with that?
Conservative
Colin Carrie Conservative Oshawa, ON
I'm open to different wording that the clerk could come up with.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bill Casey
That's fine, too.
Do you think you can come up with something for the next meeting?
February 3rd, 2016 / 3:50 p.m.
Liberal
John Oliver Liberal Oakville, ON
Perhaps it could be offered as an option, so the witnesses would have the option of doing that if they preferred, but otherwise they would be able to come.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bill Casey
Does that work?
We could have something along those lines about it being optional.
Are there any other ideas on this? Are there any suggestions? That's good.
NDP
Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC
Mr. Chairman, maybe we could just deal with this now by incorporating that, because that captured my thought. We could just add the words “however, each witness shall be offered the opportunity to testify by video conference”.
NDP
Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC
Mr. Chairman, if we say, “however, each witness shall be offered the opportunity to testify by video conference”, that would ensure that when they are spoken to, it will be offered to them. In some ways I think that will increase the amount of video conferencing.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bill Casey
That works.
Do we have video facilities here? Will this be our meeting room?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bill Casey
We'll have to make sure we have the facilities to do that.
Do you have the words that he has proposed now, “shall be offered the opportunity to attest by video”?
Are all agreed with the amendment?
