Evidence of meeting #33 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.
5:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ron McKinnon
Yes.
Dr. Jaczek, your motion was moved and it is in order. This is a substantial change to that. We can attempt to do this by unanimous consent. Would you be agreeable to doing so?
5:30 p.m.
Liberal
Helena Jaczek Liberal Markham—Stouffville, ON
I think I need some further clarification, as Mr. Van Bynen has suggested.
Is Ms. Kwan saying that the mask information, just to put it simply, would be required by August 31 and then the entirety of the NESS information, the stockpile information, for 2003 to 2020, the piece I was suggesting, be by September 30? But you're saying to divide the mask piece with the original dates that we had suggested—that passed in fact—and then have the stockpile piece in its entirety, from 2003 to 2020, be available September 30. Is that what you're proposing?
5:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ron McKinnon
Just for clarity, the date was not 2003; it was 2005, but other than that, I think that's exactly what Ms. Kwan is suggesting.
5:30 p.m.
Conservative
Tamara Jansen Conservative Cloverdale—Langley City, BC
Mr. Chair, on point of order, I'm really concerned about the translators. I know that we've talked many times about their health when they have to translate, so I just want all of us to keep in mind that this is an issue. I don't know if we have another team behind them that can switch off with them, but it's a concern.
5:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ron McKinnon
Thank you, Ms. Jansen, I appreciate your concern.
My information is that the translation team basically gives us a hard cap at the top of the hour coming up. I'm not sure if there's another team on deck, but we should probably consider that it's a hard cap for this meeting and should probably plan on having another meeting, perhaps next Monday, to carry on and finish what we've started here. I think we will, in any case, postpone the in camera portion for another week.
Getting back to Dr. Jaczek's motion, it may be that it's too complicated to do this by unanimous consent, but let's give it a shot.
5:35 p.m.
NDP
Jenny Kwan NDP Vancouver East, BC
Sorry, Mr. Chair, if I can just interject to answer the question that was asked, that is correct; that is what I'm asking. This is for the committee members who were asking that question.
5:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ron McKinnon
The proposal here is that we deem Dr. Jaczek's motion to amend to be as Ms. Kwan has proposed, which is that the delivery time for the entire subset of documents relating to the national emergency strategic stockpile, because of the change in scope in relation to those documents, be moved to the dates Dr. Jaczek proposed.
Is that your suggestion, Ms. Kwan?
5:35 p.m.
NDP
Jenny Kwan NDP Vancouver East, BC
No, sorry.
My suggestion was to separate out the two requests with the two separate timelines that were proposed. So the timeline of the mask request would be in keeping with the August 31 timeline that was previously established, but because the scope of the stockpile has been extended by that timeline, that information then would abide by the suggestion that it be made available in September.
5:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ron McKinnon
Understood. I thought that's what was said, but it's good to have it clarified.
Dr. Jaczek, are you comfortable with that?
5:35 p.m.
Liberal
5:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ron McKinnon
I see Mr. Kelloway has his hand up.
Let us just see, before we go on any further, whether we have unanimous consent to deem Ms. Jaczek's motion to be—
5:35 p.m.
Conservative
Tamara Jansen Conservative Cloverdale—Langley City, BC
On a point of order, I think Matt got kicked out.
5:35 p.m.
Conservative
5:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ron McKinnon
All right. I guess we can wait a couple of minutes to ask him and give him time to reconnect.
5:35 p.m.
Conservative
Matt Jeneroux Conservative Edmonton Riverbend, AB
Thank you, Mr. Chair. It was a good attempt, but I'm back.
5:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ron McKinnon
I'm trying to ascertain whether we have unanimous consent to deem Ms. Jaczek's motion to be as Ms. Kwan has proposed.
Is there any dissent to that approach?
Mr. Fisher, please go ahead.
5:35 p.m.
Liberal
Darren Fisher Liberal Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS
I don't know if it's dissent or not, but none of us really knows exactly what's involved in pulling all of this stuff together and how easy that is to do. I think it simplifies things to keep it as September 30. If Dr. Jaczek says that she's okay with her motion being amended, I'm happy to support her, but I do have some concern about that time frame and then complicating things by splitting it up.
5:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ron McKinnon
Well, that sounds to me like it's not consent.
We are faced with dealing with Ms. Jaczek's motion to be subsequently modified by Ms. Kwan, and dealing with that in the normal course of events where we short-circuit the process and do it by unanimous consent.
So, Mr. Fisher, would you be amenable to doing this by unanimous consent or shall we go forward with the full process?
5:35 p.m.
Liberal
Darren Fisher Liberal Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS
Well, again, my feeling is that September 30 is a better time frame for this.
Again, I will go with Ms. Jaczek's motion. If she says that she's okay with MP Kwan's subamendment, then, I guess, who am I to disagree?
5:40 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ron McKinnon
Okay.
Ms. Kwan did not actually move a subamendment. We were trying to do this by unanimous consent.
Ms. Kwan, would you like to move that as a subamendment?
5:40 p.m.
NDP
Jenny Kwan NDP Vancouver East, BC
Sure, I'll move it as a subamendment.
I think we all heard MP Jaczek say that she accepted that as a friendly amendment. I think we heard MP Fisher say “who am I to oppose?”. I think if we really go with that language spoken by both members, then we actually do have unanimous consent. If that's not the case, I'm happy to move my subamendment.
5:40 p.m.
Liberal