Thank you.
First, as a matter of procedure, it seems to me that people are just jumping in and whoever puts their hand up and starts talking is being recognized. I saw Ms. Sidhu have her hand up before Mr. Fisher jumped in, yet you recognized Mr. Fisher. That's not to pick on Mr. Fisher; it's just an example.
The first thing I want to get straight here is what the speaking order is and how that is determined. It can't just be whoever grabs the microphone and starts talking. You're not respecting either the raised hands list or the order of visual calling on the screen. It just seems to be that the speakers are determining who gets recognized. Therefore, I'd like to register, for the sake of all of us, that we need to come to an agreement on a respectful, appropriate speaking order.
Second, to the point of order at hand, I also think we need to decide, as a committee, how we're going to proceed on this. Ms. Rempel Garner is absolutely correct: There is no requirement that any motion that is moved at a business meeting, relating to business, has to be in writing. If the committee wants to make such a requirement, we certainly can, but there is no such requirement.
Again, to Ms. Sidhu's comment, it doesn't have to be bilingual, because it doesn't even have to be in writing. Mr. Thériault could raise a motion from the floor, if he wished, and he could raise it in French.
What I would suggest is that it's very helpful for all of us on any type of motion, particularly one that has any length or complexity, for it to be produced in writing. What we typically do in these meetings is that once someone has moved the motion from the floor orally, we then take a moment to make sure that the clerk reads it out and we all write it down ourselves so that we have it in front of us. That is the way this committee has operated.
If you want to have a rule that motions have to be submitted in writing, prior to the meeting or not, we can make that decision, but that is not in the standing orders of this committee presently and I think that needs to be emphasized.
Also, I don't think there is anything wrong with my colleague Mr. Powlowski's request. If a motion does come and it's in writing, and we get it in writing and it has complexity to it, absolutely we can take a moment to talk about it, but I would like to have those discussions on the record. If a party needs to caucus for a period of time, I totally respect that. I myself have an easy caucus. If the Liberals, the Conservatives or anybody else needs to do that, I'm fine with that.
To sum up what I'm saying, it would be good for all of us if we come to an agreement on how we recognize speakers and how motions will be presented to each other, because it is true that we all deserve to have the motion clearly in front of us and clearly understood in both official languages prior to having a sensible debate on it.