Evidence of meeting #62 for Procedure and House Affairs in the 39th 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.
Liberal
Karen Redman Liberal Kitchener Centre, ON
This committee has worked very well for a very long time with regular members. I acknowledge that it may be somewhat new to those of you who are not regular attendees; however, I attempted to get clarification on Monday afternoon as to exactly what a study would look like, and I got shut down. I will go back in the blues and find my comments, because it was that we'll write to the commissioner of elections--and I was okay with that--and we would get his response, which we have, but it seems to me a quantum leap.
I would suggest, colleagues, that there's a little bit of intellectual dishonesty going on right now if we think this committee is going to make a report and get a plethora of witnesses here to change anything.
The Chief Electoral Officer has been pretty clear in the media, and he's been clear to us as a committee, that he's coming to talk to us about what his interpretation of the legislation was. In his view, there needs to be a change of the legislation. There cannot be one of us sitting around this table as seasoned parliamentarians who thinks for a minute that is going to happen before Tuesday--the goodwill of the Chief Electoral Officer to come and explain what his interpretation of the existing legislation is and this committee getting clarification. We sent a letter to him, through the chair, saying that we had trouble with his interpretation. I would suggest that he alone is a credible witness who should come and tell us his interpretation and how he reads the legislation, and then we can determine, as Monsieur Guimond has said, whether his persuasive argument says to us that this is something we need to look at in the next Parliament or whether we are okay with his interpretation.
Colleagues, there was goodwill at the beginning of this meeting when the chair asked if he could read this letter. Clearly you are filibustering; you're doing everything you can with motions to not get to the substantive issue. I would tell you that you're asking on the one hand for goodwill and cooperation, which this committee has always dealt with, and on the other you're using cover-up and obfuscation to not come to a vote.
I have a real problem with the fact that we're going to listen to the Chief Electoral Officer Thursday morning and then fritter away the rest of the day with a report. It will be like dropping a stone into a well, because there will not be a Parliament to submit the report to, unless Mr. Harper wasn't serious about proroguing the House and we are indeed back here next week; then we can report to the House, as would be the normal procedure for this committee.
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON
Obviously there are legitimate points being made about the time constraints we're dealing with. Mrs. Redman has a point. It's pretty hard for us to report back to the House, since the House is unlikely to sit.
Mr. Poilievre also has a point that it's logistically impossible to summon people, at a meeting on the 13th, to come within the time constraints we imposed on ourselves for the 14th.
So I'm not sure what else we're doing here, but I'm hoping we can get an agreement from the committee for one set of witnesses who I think we would all agree need to be able to speak. Essentially I'm now proposing that we all agree that whatever else we do, we summon as witnesses the spokesmen for Muslim women, who indicated that they have never been consulted by anybody. Clearly this is the one group that we would all agree has a legitimate say in who we can contact, who's apprised, who's already been speaking to the media, and who we could all benefit from.
I have no comment on any other group, but it would make sense to have this one group come and present for however long.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Goodyear
Thank you, Mr. Reid.
Mr. Poilievre, could we please keep this short?
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON
Mr. Chair, I suggest that the committee's course of action right now is very simple. What we have to do before we leave here today is nothing. We already passed a motion, and it was voted for by Ms. Redman, who now says that she doesn't want a study because she thinks it's a waste of time.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON
Mr. Chair, she said she doesn't believe that a report from this committee will go anywhere because prorogation would not allow it to appear before the House. If that's how she felt, she could have voted against the motion in the first place, but she didn't. She voted to produce a study, and the committee was told that it could submit witnesses for that study.
So why can we not go ahead with what was originally planned? We can proceed with the study that everyone voted for and get a report done on Thursday, so that it can be made public and delivered to the Chief Electoral Officer before the weekend.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Goodyear
Thank you, Mr. Poilievre.
May I make a suggestion that it's not uncommon for members of this committee to provide us with information, as did Mr. Reid, that we would like to speak to the head of something? Then it's up to the clerks and analysts to find out who that is. So I find his suggestion in order.
May I suggest that we have Mr. Mayrand here at 10 o'clock, and that we contact this one witness and have them here, maybe not at the same time but immediately following, so this matter can be dealt with before lunch on Thursday?
That's my suggestion, and then of course we would move on to this other matter immediately in the afternoon.
Order.
Mr. Proulx.
Liberal
Marcel Proulx Liberal Hull—Aylmer, QC
What will that give us in regards to the afternoon, Mr. Chair?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Goodyear
I suspect that the witness won't take too long. We can deal with Mr. Mayrand, bring in and deal with the witness, and probably get a draft report before lunch. We'll break for lunch, or if the committee chooses, we'll have lunch brought in.
Liberal
Marcel Proulx Liberal Hull—Aylmer, QC
Could we have a commitment, Mr. Chair, from Mr. Poilievre and his colleague that this would be the intent and we could continue in the afternoon, because you are of good faith?
You can propose and suggest these things, but if they don't work out, we're left out. In the afternoon, we want to be able to go back to today's business.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Goodyear
It is my suggestion that we go back to today's business in the afternoon. In fact, I've always promoted that.
However, we were thinking it would be 3:30 p.m. I'm suggesting now that if a few hours matter—and frankly I think they do—if we can get the witness, as long as I don't get a tonne of witnesses.... What I'm hearing now is that maybe there's an agreement that there would be one witness.
Liberal
Marcel Proulx Liberal Hull—Aylmer, QC
Could we hear the acceptance of your proposition from the Conservative members on this committee, Mr. Chair?
Conservative
Conservative
Joe Preston Conservative Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON
I need a point clarification beyond that, Marcel, if you don't mind. I have just one question.
Conservative
Conservative
Joe Preston Conservative Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON
The motion that was put forward suggested a study be completed by Friday, so we're suggesting hearing these witnesses, but we do need to get that report back to this committee too.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Goodyear
In all fairness, Mr. Preston, whether we meet at 11 o'clock, 12 o'clock, or 1:30 and hear witnesses, it's a heck of an undertaking for the clerk and the staff—
Conservative
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Goodyear
—who have nothing but my greatest respect. I think among the four of us we've had four hours' sleep.
We will get it done. We will do it. So let's get back to the point of whether we're going to have this witness immediately after Mr. Mayrand.
I saw a hand up over here, did I not? I'm going to recognize Mr. Reid. Mr. Reid, you are up next, and then Mr. Alghabra.
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON
I'm sorry, I didn't mean for us to go out and actually choose one Muslim woman. I meant for us to have a panel of witnesses and—
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON
No, hang on. Marcel, calm down.
I'm not suggesting that we then turn this into an all-day event either. My point is that it's reasonable to have a number of presenters. There's not one single Muslim organization in this country any more than there is a single, say, Christian organization in the country. The point is to have a number of panellists here.