Evidence of meeting #52 for Procedure and House Affairs in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was information.
A recording is available from Parliament.
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Joe Preston
Monsieur Godin, at this committee alone we've called the Speaker, as a matter of convention, each time he's sent a motion of privilege to us. Each time he's come and been our first witness, along with Monsieur Walsh sometimes....
But I don't want to get into the debate, as the chair.
Madame DeBellefeuille.
11:45 a.m.
Bloc
Claude DeBellefeuille Bloc Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC
Mr. Chair, you are right. However, when a study is conducted, the Speaker appears to explain the nature of his decision. He does not pass judgment on the testimony that he has heard or read. He does not say whether he is less confused than he was before. This is not the nature of his testimony. Mr. Lukiwski suggests that the Speaker appear to tell us whether he thinks the issue is less confusing than before. I think that this is irrelevant to the study we are conducting. He should have appeared earlier to explain why he was confused. However, he was not available. I don't think his testifying before our committee tomorrow would help us any.
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
Steven Blaney Conservative Lévis—Bellechasse, QC
Like any other witness, the Speaker is free to answer the questions put to him or not to answer them. He clearly has a key role to play in the analysis of this process. His opinion is very relevant and could help each member of this committee come to the appropriate conclusions and make the necessary recommendations. We will have to look into this. By doing so, we would show that the committee really wants to get to the bottom of things, be transparent and thoroughly understand the issues involved. This decision is not supposed to be made by the Speaker of the House, but by the committee. However, he could clarify certain things for the House. If he chooses not to comment on the matter, I think that no one here will blame him.
I think that this is an excellent idea. As Mr. Lukiwski said, it would allow us to meet the deadline set by the Speaker of the House. If there is anyone who could help us by testifying at this point, it is the Speaker.
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Joe Preston
All right.
I see no other speakers on the list.
Is it the will of the committee to have the Speaker at committee tomorrow?
11:50 a.m.
An hon. member
A recorded vote.
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Joe Preston
A recorded vote: we haven't had one of those yet today, so why don't we do that?
(Motion negatived: nays 6; yeas 5)
Okay.
With regard to the report you have in your hand, I'm going to caution you that although this has been in public, the report is still confidential until tabled in the House. I recognize that has a real bend to it today, with the way we've handled the proceedings, but that is the way the rules go. While it's still a draft report until it's presented in the House....
11:50 a.m.
An hon. member
[Inaudible--Editor]
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Joe Preston
Now, that's a good question. It's the will of the committee.
Do you want to hand your reports back in? You can certainly do so.
11:50 a.m.
Some hon. members
Agreed.
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Joe Preston
The final draft will come to me and be presented.
I will give mine back.
Is there anything else for the good of the committee today?
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Joe Preston
I think we'll then have.... If that's the case, we'll be giving guidance at tomorrow's meeting to the analysts as to starting down the road of writing that report, yes.
