Evidence of meeting #2 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 committees.
A recording is available from Parliament.
11:20 a.m.
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
We're going to define the work of the parliamentary secretaries?
11:20 a.m.
Liberal
Arnold Chan Liberal Scarborough—Agincourt, ON
We're going to determine the rules that will ultimately govern that function—
11:20 a.m.
Liberal
Arnold Chan Liberal Scarborough—Agincourt, ON
We'll set the necessary agenda and have that conversation at the appropriate time.
11:20 a.m.
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
Did you say that this committee is going to define the role of parliamentary secretaries? Because I second that.
11:20 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell
Order, please. Please speak through the chair, when you're recognized.
I think people's opinions are well known on that. I'd like to get on with routine business and do the motions we have before us. If people would like to come back to this later, we could.
The first motion, which I'll read out and then ask someone to propose, is on the analysts' service. This is routine. It allows someone from the Library of Parliament to help us out:
That the Committee retain, as needed and at the discretion of the Chair, the services of one or more analysts from the Library of Parliament to assist in its work.
That has been moved by Mr. Hoback.
Is there any debate or any objection to this motion?
(Motion agreed to)
I'd like to introduce Andre Barnes.
Welcome. It's great to have you back. We couldn't do this without you. We really appreciate all the staff. He has experience, as you know.
I'll read out the second motion as it is, but then I'll ask for an amendment, since, as you know, we're making a change here:
That the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure be established and be composed of the Chair, the two Vice-Chairs, one Government member and the Parliamentary Secretary.
Mr. Chan.
11:25 a.m.
Liberal
Arnold Chan Liberal Scarborough—Agincourt, ON
I'd like to propose an amendment to delete what it says after “the two vice-chairs” where it says “one government member and the parliamentary secretary” and to substitute the following wording: “two government members”.
11:25 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell
The motion now reads:
That the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure be established and be composed of the Chair, the two Vice-Chairs, and two government members.
Is there any discussion?
Mr. Hoback.
11:25 a.m.
Conservative
Randy Hoback Conservative Prince Albert, SK
Could we have a clarification? When you say “two government members”, that means two government members who are actually members of this committee. Is that correct?
11:25 a.m.
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
I thank Mr. Chan. I support part of his motion, of course, the part that strikes the parliamentary secretary. That won't come as a shock. My difficulty is with putting two government members on.
Chair, I would seek your guidance on some of this. Most of the steering committees I've sat on have been one of two configurations. One is where the chair was actually the government representative and then there were two other members from the other two parties, which was very problematic. If you hearken back to some of the concerns I raised about your chairing a little earlier, there is the issue of the chair trying to represent a party at a steering committee, even though it's very informal, while at the same time being the one who referees the discussion, which is very difficult.
I moved a motion at public accounts committee, a number of parliaments ago, whereby we actually changed that and put on a formal government member and one from each of the recognized parties, and then the chair did its thing.
My understanding is that most steering committees don't bring non-unanimous decisions; at least that's been my experience. The steering committee tries to reach consensus. If there is consensus, which there is most of the time, in my experience, then things are brought forward to the full committee to vote on.
If the steering committee can't agree, then we don't have a power play on the steering committee such that the majority, meaning the government, gets to carry the day and bring the recommendation back. It can exercise its majority right at the committee, but the steering committee process is not a decision-making body per se. Everything we do has to come back to the main committee to be supported.
As we all know, the whole idea of steering committees or executives is to facilitate the business of the committee. There are a lot of details, just routine stuff. It puts together the schedule. Nobody's playing any games. It's just straight up front, boom, boom, boom, here's what we're trying to achieve and how can we best do this as a committee. As I said, 95% of the time there's agreement, because it's only about how we do our business, not about what the decisions are.
With that in mind, I would just ask the government to please consider the idea of a chair, a government representative, and then one representative from each of the recognized parties. In this case it would be the Conservatives and the NDP. Again, if there's no consensus, then it doesn't come back here by majority vote, because it's not a decision-making body. If it's a consultative body, and if all their decisions have to come back here, and the government has 100% guarantee that their will, because they have a majority, will always prevail, then it would seem to me we could facilitate things if we stayed with a chair and one from each of the recognized parties.
Thanks, Chair.
11:25 a.m.
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON
I just want a bit of clarification. Is that effectively a proposal to amend Mr. Chan's amendment, and if so, are we debating it?
11:25 a.m.
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON
Could you word that as a subamendment, then? Then we could debate it.
11:25 a.m.
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
I would move to amend the amendment, so I guess it's a subamendment to Mr. Chan's amendment, to strike everything after the words “government member”, and leave out the two government representatives and the parliamentary secretary.
Joann, I seek your assistance in trying to make some sense of that.
11:25 a.m.
Conservative
11:25 a.m.
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
The two vice-chairs.... No. You need a government member if you're going to do the one, two, three, so we would stop after “government member”. We would just stop it there.
Madam Clerk, I don't know if that constitutes a subamendment. I would seek your guidance.
11:25 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell
If I got that correctly, the motion would read that the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure be established and be composed of the chair, the two vice-chairs, and one government member.