Evidence of meeting #27 for Health in the 43rd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was chair.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Matt Jeneroux Conservative Edmonton Riverbend, AB
Mr. Chair, I think the confusion was that when Mr. Paul-Hus asked you if he should move both motions or one motion, you said two motions.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ron McKinnon
Correction: I said move one motion. We can only deal with one motion at a time.
Conservative
Matt Jeneroux Conservative Edmonton Riverbend, AB
I'll argue with you, Mr. Chair. We can go back to the blues. I think you're wrong.
However, that isn't my intervention. My intervention is based on Mr. Thériault's amendment.
I'm not sure if he is simply looking for less work to do or what, but requesting the removal of “emails”.... I think it's pertinent to essentially what we're trying to get at. There is certainly a lot of back and forth over email. If you remember, this is the same member who brought up the removing of “text messages” as well—both times.
This is certainly something that I would argue is important for us at the committee level to understand. We're looking at the overall response of this thing.
If Mr. Thériault doesn't want to read a whole bunch of emails, then he simply doesn't have to read those emails. We'll do that work for him. I certainly don't support his amendment, and I will be voting against it.
Bloc
Luc Thériault Bloc Montcalm, QC
Mr. Chair, the Conservatives have already tried to tarnish my reputation once. I won't accept, in front of witnesses who are waiting to appear, the insinuation that I'm making an amendment because I don't want to work.
I'm asking Mr. Jeneroux to retract his comments immediately. His comments are disgraceful. It's pointless to make these types of comments, which show a lack of respect for his colleagues. I said earlier why I wanted to delete the words. Since Mr. Fisher said that he agreed with me, does this mean that he doesn't want to work either?
I explained that this was strictly related to the series of motions moved and that we had to be able to finish our work and process the information. I speak from experience. I've made access to information requests in the past. Following these requests, I've drowned in a sea of completely irrelevant documents. I don't see the relevance of the text messages related to the first proposal, which was blocked several months ago. We can determine this during the debate based on the arguments.
I'm asking Mr. Jeneroux to show respect for his colleagues. I work and I'm known for being hard-working. I'd like him to retract his comments and insinuations, which once again seek to tarnish my reputation. The Conservatives were disgraceful last time, and they didn't even apologize. Yet three weeks later, they proposed the same thing.
Can we have a calm and substantive debate instead of ascribing motives to the individuals moving amendments?
Mr. Chair, I urge you to handle this properly, because this time it won't fly.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ron McKinnon
Are there any comments or responses to Monsieur Thériault's point of order?
Mr. Webber.
Conservative
Len Webber Conservative Calgary Confederation, AB
Yes, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Thériault is referring to Conservatives talking poorly about him. I have not once made any comment on Mr. Thériault in a disrespectful manner, so I would ask that Mr. Thériault please retract those statements referring to Conservatives. I am a Conservative, and a proud one, and I have not once said anything poorly against Mr. Thériault.
Thank you.
Liberal
Bloc
Luc Thériault Bloc Montcalm, QC
Mr. Chair, I encourage Mr. Webber to read Mr. Bellavance in La Presse, along with the comments made by his colleagues, Mr. Paul-Hus and Mr. Rayes. He'll understand that I'm stating facts. That said, can we please stick to rational arguments?
Conservative
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ron McKinnon
I am actually in error in allowing this to go to debate. This is a point of order. It's not a point that we want to debate.
If Mr. Jeneroux wishes to apologize, that will be up to him, but we will not carry on with our....
Conservative
Matt Jeneroux Conservative Edmonton Riverbend, AB
Sure, Mr. Chair. I'll just address Mr. Thériault's.... I'm not sure what he's—
Liberal
Marcus Powlowski Liberal Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON
Point of order. We're getting French translation over the English. I am, anyhow. I don't know if you are. We can't understand two languages at the same time.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ron McKinnon
Mr. Jeneroux, please make sure that your language is on English, if you're speaking English.
We'll try again. Go ahead, Mr. Jeneroux.
Do you want to respond quickly to Mr. Thériault? And please, let's not get into debate.
Conservative
Matt Jeneroux Conservative Edmonton Riverbend, AB
Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
To address Mr. Thériault's point, I'm unaware of what article he is referring to. I'd ask him to table that at either this meeting or a future meeting, and I would be happy to look in more detail at what that means.
I am certainly happy to address any issues he has with me.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ron McKinnon
Okay. We'll leave this to be resolved between the members.
I would urge everyone to remember proper decorum and to be respectful of each other.
We will resume debate on the amendment proposed by Mr. Thériault.
I have on my list now, Dr. Jaczek.
Dr. Jaczek, please go ahead.
Liberal
Helena Jaczek Liberal Markham—Stouffville, ON
Thank you, Chair.
Certainly I echo your comments in terms of respecting each other. Through the very many meetings of the health committee that I've attended, I think we have had a very respectful dialogue among us. I hope that continues.
In speaking to the amendment proposed by Monsieur Thériault, I would certainly agree that removing the reference to “emails” is a good one. With the kind of quantity that could be generated by including emails—it would be a huge amount, of course—I really don't see how that would add to what we all want to see, which are the briefing notes, the background documents and memos that relate to the closing of the United States-Canada border.
As it would read with the amendment—though I'm wondering, again, about the timing of this—certainly we would have enough information. I will be supporting Monsieur Thériault's amendment.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ron McKinnon
Thank you, Dr. Jaczek.
On my list now, I have Mr. Kelloway.
Mr. Kelloway, go ahead.
Liberal
Mike Kelloway Liberal Cape Breton—Canso, NS
Thanks, Mr. Chair.
To the witnesses, my personal apologies for the delay here, but this is democracy at work and sometimes it gets a little messy.
I would support the amendment that Mr. Thériault has put forward. It's logical, as Dr. Jaczek said. It is one that is based on common sense, at least from my perspective.
My understanding as well.... Mr. Fisher mentioned, and I think this is accurate once again, that we're voting on this amendment. I have a couple of other items with respect to an additional amendment, and that will be forthcoming.
Liberal
Sonia Sidhu Liberal Brampton South, ON
Mr. Chair, I want to echo, with my colleagues, that I support Mr. Thériault's amendment and we should be respectful with each other.
