Procedure and House Affairs Committee on March 18th, 2011

[John McKay, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood, ON]

Well, it may well have been that you took it on yourself to have a conversation. The issue is sharing the conversation in public, because that may well prejudice any finding the committee might wish to make.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Mr. McKay, I did make the statement earlier in the week also.

[John McKay, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood, ON]

I understand.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

I was just reiterating it. I heard no objection at that time.

[John McKay, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood, ON]

You can take it from me that this is an objection, and I don't think it's actually appropriate that a chair share a private conversation with the Speaker or with anyone else, even absent the person being able to come before the committee to put their version of the conversation. I just think it's inappropriate.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Well, thank you. I take that advice, Mr. McKay.

Okay, I have a couple of other speakers on this.

Go ahead, Mr. Martin.

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Mr. Chairman, on the same point, for the supposedly independent chair to try to set the tone of the hearings of this committee even before we hear from the first witness sabotages and undermines the work of this committee.

I can't believe, frankly, that you would misuse and abuse your position and your office as a supposedly independent chair to try to set the tone and comment on what may or may not be the outcome of our deliberations here today.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Mr. Martin--

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

It's one of the most blatant abuses of your office that I've seen any chairman avail themself of.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Thank you, Mr. Martin. I'll take that as good advice and thank you for it and will suggest that it is the chair's responsibility for the flow of this committee and--

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

I'd like to make a motion that we strike your comments from the permanent record of this committee.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

I have a motion on the floor.

I know we wanted to hear from the minister today, but speaking to the motion...?

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON]

Well, look, I don't think we should be dealing with the motion. I think it's a ridiculous motion. I think we should be hearing from the minister.

But since Mr. McKay has seen fit to challenge the propriety of your discussing a conversation you had with the Speaker of the House of Commons, and since Mr. Martin has seen fit to do something that just seems very peculiar, striking it from the record.... I mean, we're televised, so I'm not sure what purpose that serves.

I'm also not sure that it's very wise to start going along and saying we're going to selectively edit out things that have been said. Talk about a dangerous road to go down, that is it. We're debating this, so I think it's reasonable for me to proceed in this fashion.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

We're debating the motion. I just want to get there.

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON]

The argument that you've engaged in some kind of action that goes beyond the bounds of any propriety that Mr. Martin has seen...that's just ridiculous. He doesn't believe what he is saying there, obviously.

But I just want to point out that if we're on the theme of outrageous things that have been done in this committee, that are unprecedented, we have the example of the motion that was given yesterday, that was done at an in camera meeting, then in public, to secretly shut down this committee, to secretly pre-write the report, to presuppose--in a manner that I must say in ten years I really have never seen, and none of us have--that here is what the report is to say.... Here is what it is to say: it is to condemn the government, it is to condemn the government in a whole variety of ways...the draft report must contain the following conclusions, right...? And it goes on and lists those off--

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Mr. Chair, a point of order on relevance.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Mr. Martin.

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

I'd like to question the relevance of my colleague Mr. Reid's debate, as he is supposed to be debating my motion, which is to strike your opening comments from the permanent record of this committee, in that they were biased and unbecoming of the chair. If he wants to debate the draft report of a previous hearing, it should be under some other heading.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

If the chair were to apologize and fall on the will of the committee for us to move forward, would that be a...?

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON]

Mr. Chair--

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Mr. Reid, I know you were still debating, and I'm not supposed to--

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON]

I'm still in debate here, Mr. Chair--

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Agreed.

[An hon. member]

Agreed.

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON]

Well, Mr. Chair, I just want to finish my comments.

Mr. Chair, yesterday there was a draft report to be no more than two pages long, making it impossible to produce a dissenting report. There was no summary of evidence because the evidence contradicts what--