Evidence of meeting #30 for Procedure and House Affairs in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was flyer.
A recording is available from Parliament.
11:05 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Joe Preston
I call the meeting to order. We're meeting today in public pursuant to the order of reference of Monday, November 30, 2009, a question of privilege relating to mailings sent into the riding of Mount Royal.
Before I introduce our witness, I have a couple of quick things.
We've had discussions, and I'd ask for the consent of the committee to designate Guy Lauzon the acting chair for this meeting.
Mr. Guimond, perhaps you could help us out.
11:05 a.m.
Bloc
Michel Guimond Bloc Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, QC
Yes.
Mr. Chair, perhaps my Liberal colleagues were not told by their whip, but at the whip meeting, I asked about whether a chair who leaves the committee chair is replaced by another Conservative member. To reflect the government's minority status, however, the Conservative member who takes the chair will not be replaced. That has happened in other committees, namely, the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food.
In this case, Mr. Chair, I think you are making the right decision, because your name, apparently—and that is why I deliberately use the word “apparently”, the investigation will prove it—you are being extremely wise by taking your retirement.
As far as I am concerned, I have no problem supporting Mr. Lauzon as chair, but we need to make sure we comply with the agreement reached with the Conservative Party whip, which states that Mr. Lauzon will not be replaced.
In terms of the numbers, you realize this means that if my colleague, Marcel Proulx, first vice-chair, or myself, second vice-chair, take the chair, the Conservatives would have the majority in the committee, which would not reflect the reality in the House.
11:05 a.m.
Liberal
Marcel Proulx Liberal Hull—Aylmer, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
At a previous meeting, Mr. Lukiwski made some comments in camera, but was the intention not to do things differently than what is being proposed now? Through you, Mr. Chair, I put the question to Mr. Lukiwski.
11:05 a.m.
Conservative
11:05 a.m.
Liberal
Marcel Proulx Liberal Hull—Aylmer, QC
I was saying that in a previous meeting when this was discussed indirectly, I appreciate that it was in camera, but was it not your interpretation, Mr. Lukiwski, that there was another way of handling this situation?
11:05 a.m.
Conservative
Tom Lukiwski Conservative Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, SK
I want to choose my words carefully so that we don't break an in camera confidence. The main objective I was trying to convey, or I want to make sure that I convey and the whip has conveyed, is that we would not try to gain a majority on the committee. So if there was a replacement at the chair level for whatever reason, we would still maintain the integrity of the opposition having more voting members than the government.
We did talk about types of replacements of the chair, if that were to take place, but at the latest whips' meeting, as Mr. Guimond has just indicated, the whips had agreed that if there was to be a change of chair, Mr. Lauzon would take the chair.
11:05 a.m.
Liberal
Marcel Proulx Liberal Hull—Aylmer, QC
In other words—if I may, Mr. Chair—the intent was that the Conservative Party would not gain a majority by the recusal of the existing chair being replaced.
11:05 a.m.
Conservative
11:10 a.m.
Bloc
Michel Guimond Bloc Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, QC
Mr. Chair, do you intend to remain a committee member, or will you step down from the committee?
11:10 a.m.
Conservative
11:10 a.m.
Liberal
Marlene Jennings Liberal Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC
Just as a clarification, once you recuse yourself, should you recuse yourself from your seat and say you'll sit and watch, do you have any intentions at any point during the proceedings of this committee to take part in a vote, should there be an issue that has to be voted on? Or does your recusal include being one of the voting members for any issue directly dealing with the breach of privilege, the reference that has been made to this committee?
11:10 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Joe Preston
My intention is to recuse myself as the chair, but I would certainly vote on any issue we had.
11:10 a.m.
Conservative
11:10 a.m.
Liberal
Marlene Jennings Liberal Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC
I would just make the point that, given that the mailing—at least one of the mailings—into the riding of Mount Royal was authorized by you, you could possibly be in a conflict of interest, not just as chair but as a voting member of the committee that is seized with the issue.
11:10 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Joe Preston
Madam Jennings, I might as well then share with you that at no time in 2009 have I ever sent a mailing into Mount Royal.
11:10 a.m.
Liberal
Marlene Jennings Liberal Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC
Are you prepared to testify as a witness to that?
11:10 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Joe Preston
I'm not certain I'll have to, but if that were the case, I've certainly done all the research I can do from a post office and mailing point of view. The document provided to the Speaker certainly did have my name on it, but I'm certain it must have been a document that was sent into Eglinton—Lawrence. That is the only riding I can find that I have sent any mailings into during this period of time.