Health Committee on Nov. 6th, 2020

[Darren Fisher, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

Is this still on Mr. Barlow's...?

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

It is. Thank you, Mr. Fisher.

Chair, to the points that have been made before, these types of interruptions are.... I get it. I'm a woman, and people usually interrupt me, but enough.

The days of that type of relationship with this committee are over. There is a responsibility to public health and there's also a responsibility to democracy, and every member on this committee has the right to scrutinize the government's decisions.

I believe that's the spirit in which this motion is being made, but, Chair, again, these are perhaps my feelings toward the government. They need to understand that we are going to be asking for information and we are going to be scrutinizing their decisions. It is also their responsibility to be accountable to this committee.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Thank you, Ms. Rempel Garner.

We go now to Mr. Thériault.

Mr. Thériault, please go ahead.

[Luc Thériault, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

I don't want to appear to be lecturing anyone, except that, as parliamentarians, regardless of our political stripe, we owe it to the voters, at the very least, to show good faith and consideration to one another.

I agreed with Mr. Barlow's motion until he revealed his intention. Inviting the Minister to submit her speaking notes before we meet, as other witnesses do, was fine with me. Going over the line and saying that, as a result, we don't need to hear from her, that's not okay with me. I consider it disrespectful, not to the executive and its authority, but to the person we are inviting to come and meet with us. If she is kind enough to submit her notes, I will certainly read them. However, supplementary estimates are already available and we are in the process of doing the necessary work in that regard.

As parliamentarians, surely we are not going to deny a witness the opportunity to speak. If the minister wants to tell us something and that takes 10 minutes, I think we should hear her out. That is having a modicum of respect. I will not cross that line. I am sorry, I will never cross it. I am a legislator. I don't like the executive branch sticking its nose into the legislative branch, but I am able to treat the people who have that power with respect. If the minister wants to speak to us, she can speak to us; gagging a minister is really no better than gagging a member of Parliament.

In that regard, I will be voting against the motion because I think the intent of the motion is malicious. Furthermore, if we start the work of the committee in this way, looking at what we have done from the beginning, I think we will never get anywhere.

I may be lecturing, but I have a moral compass. I will never do to others what I wouldn't want others to do to me. There is a pendulum between the blue power and the red power; our parliamentary system allows that pendulum to swing. That is healthy in a democracy. I put myself in the shoes of Minister Barlow, who would be outraged if he was treated like that. As a legislator, I will not do that. That's it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Thank you, Mr. Thériault.

Is there any further discussion on Mr. Barlow's motion?

Seeing none, I will ask the clerk to conduct the vote.

(Motion negatived: nays 7; yeas 4)

Thank you, Mr. Clerk. Mr. Barlow's motion does not carry.

That brings us to the end of our business for today. I thank you all for attending and for your attention and all your diligent efforts.

With that, we shall now adjourn.