Evidence of meeting #1 for Procedure and House Affairs in the 42nd 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.
11:05 a.m.
The Clerk of the Committee Ms. Joann Garbig
Honourable members of the committee, I see a quorum.
I must inform members that the clerk of the committee can only receive motions for the election of the chair. The clerk cannot receive other types of motions and cannot entertain points of order or participate in debate.
We can now proceed to the election of the chair. Pursuant to Standing Order 106(2), the chair must be a member of the government party. I'm ready to receive motions for the chair.
11:05 a.m.
Liberal
11:05 a.m.
The Clerk
Mr. Graham nominates Mr. Chan.
Are there other motions to nominate?
11:05 a.m.
The Clerk
Ms. Vandenbeld nominates Larry Bagnell as chair.
Are there further motions? None.
Since more than one candidate has been nominated, pursuant to Standing Order 106(3) I am required to preside over the election of the chair by secret ballot.
It has been moved by Mr. Graham that Mr. Chan be elected chair, and it has been moved by Ms. Vandenbeld that Mr. Bagnell be elected chair.
Before proceeding, I'll briefly explain the process. My colleague, also a procedural clerk at the House of Commons, will distribute a ballot to each member of the committee. You have to clearly indicate your choice by printing in block letters the name of your chosen candidate. You then deposit your ballot in the box when it circulates around the table. We will then count the votes and announce the name of the successful candidate. If no candidate receives a majority of the votes cast, another ballot will have to be conducted in the same manner.
Allow me to repeat the names of the nominated candidates: Arnold Chan and Larry Bagnell.
Go ahead, Mr. Reid.
11:05 a.m.
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON
Are we able to hear the two candidates indicate why they would like the chairmanship?
11:05 a.m.
The Clerk
The Standing Orders have no provision for this.
11:05 a.m.
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON
In that case, would it be permissible for us to have enough time to actually chat with them?
11:10 a.m.
The Clerk
Go ahead, Mr. Lamoureux.
December 8th, 2015 / 11:10 a.m.
Liberal
Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB
Maybe just to assist in facilitating, I've just canvassed both candidates. They're quite comfortable with proceeding as you've said, so we can just go right to the vote.
11:10 a.m.
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON
Madam Clerk, I appreciate that, but I'm not comfortable proceeding in that way. I have no idea what makes Mr. Chan better than Mr. Bagnell or Mr. Bagnell better than Mr. Chan. I can't vote in an informed manner if I have no idea how each intends to act.
It would be odd indeed if we'd had a process of not allowing the candidates for Speaker to indicate that, either formally or informally, and we gave time—30 minutes—for us to talk among ourselves and get further information.
Voting in an uninformed manner would be most inappropriate.
11:10 a.m.
Liberal
Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB
Madam Clerk, if I may, you indicated that you're not allowed to take points of order. You're just there to facilitate the election and you're following the rules.
I think it would be more appropriate, Scott, that we have this discussion and maybe look at changing the rule. There might be a better way so that we can improve it in the future, but when all is said and done, as of right now the rules say to just go ahead and have the vote. If one or both of the candidates had expressed an interest in addressing us, maybe we could consider it, but if they're both content, then why?
11:10 a.m.
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON
The rules are actually silent on how much time is taken for the voting. It would not be a breach of the rules for us to take half an hour and have an opportunity to chat with the two candidates so as to make an informed decision.
I quite literally cannot make an informed decision about two candidates, neither of whom, to my knowledge, was a candidate before the moment they were nominated, and neither of whose qualifications, one over the other, are known to me. It would make a sham of any voting procedure if we were simply to be told we have to tick off a name on a ballot without knowing why we're doing it.
11:10 a.m.
The Clerk
As I indicated at the outset, I can only receive motions for the election of the chair. I cannot receive other motions of any kind, entertain points of order, or take part in debate.
As a point of information, the Standing Orders of the House do provide for interventions by the candidates for Speaker of the House, but the rules have no provision for an equivalent proceeding in committee.
11:10 a.m.
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON
Let me ask this question: would I be correct in assuming that I will not be breaking the rules if I take the time, prior to casting my own ballot, to go over and chat with the two candidates who have been nominated by the government party and ask each of them why they think I would be best advised to vote for them as opposed to the other—that is to say, if I take my time in casting a ballot until such time as I can make an informed decision, as opposed to an uninformed decision? Conservative members and perhaps Mr. Christopherson might want to do so as well.
11:10 a.m.
The Clerk
Does Mr. Christopherson wish to intervene?
11:10 a.m.
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
Thanks. I don't need any time. I know the members. I'm ready to vote.
11:10 a.m.
The Clerk
As I outlined earlier, my colleague will distribute the ballots to each member of the committee. Once members have finished filling out the ballots, we will circulate around the table so that members may deposit their ballots. Then we will proceed to the count and be back shortly.
11:20 a.m.
The Clerk
Honourable members, I declare that Larry Bagnell has received the majority of the votes cast and is duly elected chair of the committee.
11:20 a.m.
Some hon. members
Hear, hear!
11:20 a.m.
The Clerk
I would invite Mr. Bagnell to take the chair.
11:20 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell
First of all, I thank everyone for their confidence.
To Mr. Christopherson, because I think everyone else heard, my philosophy is the same as the Prime Minister's. He said a couple of times that each of you has been elected by your constituents, and those constituents deserve a voice, so I think everyone should be heard fairly on the items we debate.
If the committee is in agreement, I invite the clerk to proceed with the election of the vice-chairs. Agreed?
11:20 a.m.
Some hon. members
Agreed.
11:25 a.m.
Liberal
11:25 a.m.
The Clerk
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Pursuant to Standing Order 106(2), the first vice-chair must be a member of the official opposition.
I am now ready to receive motions for the election of the first vice-chair.
Mr. Reid, you have the floor.
