Evidence of meeting #55 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 opposition.
A video is available from Parliament.
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
Blake Richards Conservative Banff—Airdrie, AB
On that point, Mr. Chair, I'm flabbergasted. That's appreciated. Because it's being asked by a government member, maybe the government members will change their tune here. If that's the case, that would be wonderful.
12:55 p.m.
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
I would hope, and if they want to divide, that's helpful too.
12:55 p.m.
Some hon. members
Oh, oh!
12:55 p.m.
Liberal
12:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell
On this motion, we have a point of order by Mr. Kmiec, and then Mr. Chan.
March 23rd, 2017 / 12:55 p.m.
Conservative
Tom Kmiec Conservative Calgary Shepard, AB
I have no problems with the way it's proposed as long as the unanimous consent is sought at the time that it's wanted, that it doesn't form part of the motion that whenever it's requested on the government caucus side to cede some speaking time.... Two, on televising or not televising, I hope that thus far the reasons we're not televising is that my face is not good enough for television. It's only good for print—
12:55 p.m.
Some hon. members
Oh, oh!
12:55 p.m.
Liberal
Scott Simms Liberal Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL
It's precisely the opposite.
Yes, like I said, that's the only thing we would ask for in return: that we be able to get the...and again, I say this in complete sincerity that we will not hog the time or rag the puck, as the expression goes, when doing so, as we've done in the past.
12:55 p.m.
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
If I may say so, Chair, I think that's the key thing. It's in the past. A lot of these kinds of things are based on goodwill and respect. We do know what we're talking about, and it would be very obvious to everyone if we didn't allow that kind of continuing co-operation. You'd be right to call us on it and make us look bad, because we are giving you the assurance that the same process that we entertain, the fairness....
I agree with my friend. It is important, because every time we did it in the past, Mr. Simms, it was precluded with you respectfully asking unanimous consent that we invoke that little mechanism—whatever we're calling it—we have to further our discussions. You have certainly my personal assurance that exactly that same respect and latitude would be afforded whether we're in public, private, down the hall, or whatever.
12:55 p.m.
Liberal
12:55 p.m.
Liberal
David Graham Liberal Laurentides—Labelle, QC
Thank you, Chair.
I would hope that we see the irony of the conversation we're having in terms of refusing to have the unanimous consent in this motion. I just wanted to put that out there.
12:55 p.m.
An hon. member
Pardon?
12:55 p.m.
Liberal
David Graham Liberal Laurentides—Labelle, QC
Well, he said that he doesn't want the motion to be amended to say to require this, because we want to go on the basis of the agreement.
That's the whole discussion we've been having here for the last three days. I think we can pass the basic motion, without your amendment, on the same basis. That's all I want to say on that.
12:55 p.m.
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
It must be how long I've been sitting here. You've confused me.
12:55 p.m.
Some hon. members
Oh, oh!
12:55 p.m.
Liberal
David Graham Liberal Laurentides—Labelle, QC
Well, I just heard Mr. Kmiec.... My point is that you just said a moment ago that you would not want this motion to be amended to require unanimous consent for us to take the floor at any time.
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
Tom Kmiec Conservative Calgary Shepard, AB
It should be automatic. I'm not proposing an amendment to the motion. I'm just saying that we should not say or mean to say that whenever it's automatically done, such as.... Mr. Simms could at any time seek the floor and he already has unanimous consent, because if the speaker is making a point, I think the speaker should be allowed to finish making that point, to complete it, so as not to lose the spot in their speaking notes, if they have any, and then be forced to restart from the beginning. I don't think anybody would enjoy that.
12:55 p.m.
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
If it required unanimous consent, you as the speaker could immediately say you don't give it because you want to finish that thought.
We always maintain—and we'll use you as an example—that when you have the floor, no matter how far afield we get with our little side deals, discussions, set-asides, and everything else, at the end of the day you always have the right to say to the chair, “I have have the floor and I want it back right now.”
12:55 p.m.
Liberal
David Graham Liberal Laurentides—Labelle, QC
The irony is that you're asking for us not to do exactly what you're trying to do with the amendment to the main motion.
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
Blake Richards Conservative Banff—Airdrie, AB
Mr. Graham still has me confused. I certainly hope that what he is saying—
