Procedure and House Affairs Committee on June 16th, 2016

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

Sure.

I'd like to apologize, Ruby, if I have not done my job in this last hour and a bit of convincing you. I hope to take the next—

[Ruby Sahota, Liberal, Brampton North, ON]

It's an hour and 50 minutes.

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

—few minutes to convince you.

Before I do, I'd like to quickly move an amendment to Mr. Richards' motion, Chair, through you.

I'd like to move that the motion be amended in its final line by deleting all words after “Committee”.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

This is the first of Mr. Richards' five motions. It's the one on the list and the one we've been debating for two meetings. He would remove all the words right at the end of the motion, after the word “Committee”. The words being eliminated are “no later than June 21st, 2016”.

Is there any discussion on the amendment?

Sorry, the debate's now on the amendment. We can start the debate all over again on the amendment.

Now that we're starting a new debate, who would like to speak to the amendment?

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

I can quickly speak if you want.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Jamie, do you want to be on the list? Okay.

Go ahead.

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

I'll just give some background on why we need to make this amendment. It's because the committee, as you know, Chair, is likely not going to be meeting between now and June 21. That makes the date in the original motion by Mr. Richards out of order. I think we need to make this change because, clearly, as I mentioned, the reasons are quite obvious.

I put that before our friends here.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

I have a point of order.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

On a point of order, go ahead Mr. Christopherson.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

I seek your guidance, Chair.

If this amendment fails or does not carry before June 21, what then is the status of the original motion?

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

I'll ask the clerk that.

If this isn't adopted, another amendment could be moved, the clerk suggests.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

In other words, it in no way becomes untimely or out of order because we surpass that date before we reach a conclusion, correct?

We're clarifying his legal position here. I'm just trying to help.

[David Graham, Liberal, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Mr. Reid, are you convinced yet?

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON]

Actually, I think I am convinced and I'm not easy to convince, I should tell you. I'm a tough customer but that was very persuasive.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

You could just see it starting to happen partway through the meeting. It was quite clear. I could tell by the body language; he was nodding.

[David Graham, Liberal, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

I could see the transition taking place.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Mr. Christopherson made a very good point that all the motions, actually, in theory, could lapse before the next time we're meeting on this, which is June 23. Because they're all out of date, we have to propose new motions.

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON]

The motion itself, I believe, is in order as long as this amendment is in debate. The amendment, of course, allows us to continue on past the 21st. In fact may I suggest—

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Now we're going way deep into the rabbit hole.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Sorry?

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

It was nothing but a smart-ass remark that's not helpful.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

I'm just trying to clarify your ruling, Mr. Chair. The reason I'm trying to clarify it is that obviously there are other motions as well.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Yes.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

I do understand that they have the same date; however, I would argue that the substance of the motions would still be important to consider. Obviously, there is an opportunity for those to be amended as well.

I would think that it would be possible for us to still carry them and just seek an amendment to them, because the substance is still important and very germane to the subject matter that we're studying on this important matter of privilege.

I would hope that they could still be moved. Obviously, there would be an amendment required.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Mr. Reid.