Evidence of meeting #56 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 clerk.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
Arnold Chan Liberal Scarborough—Agincourt, ON
It could be at the Wellington Building, whatever building is available for video conferencing, if we need it.
12:10 p.m.
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
There's one little technicality. I thought I heard you say, “Clerk or Speaker”. My understanding is that it was Clerk and Speaker, and actually I thought we were doing the PPS director.
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell
I said, “and/or”, but Mr. Chan was suggesting it was too early for the PPS director.
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
12:10 p.m.
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
We could have them as part of the background briefing in terms of structure, but I like the idea that we keep it fluid, rather than trying to go any further debating which one of these two things should be first. Leave the flexibility that for now the game plan is that we'll do an hour up front from the analyst to give us the historical context, and then the next two hours will be a fluid blend of—
12:10 p.m.
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
—individuals. I still think the Speaker should be there with the Clerk, but we don't have to nail down which one has to be in front of the other. If Lisa is not available until sometime in the third hour, surely we can jig that to accommodate everyone. At the end of the three hours, we should have achieved historical background, administrative framework, and begun the details of the incident at hand.
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
Anita Vandenbeld Liberal Ottawa West—Nepean, ON
Is there any reason we can't have PPS twice? We could have them in on the background, with the Speaker and the Clerk, and then bring them back when we need more specific details.
12:10 p.m.
NDP
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell
How does that sound to people? Good?
If one of those elements is not available, we'll cut the meeting back to two hours and do what we can, and we'll put the next onto the Thursday.
12:15 p.m.
NDP
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell
Would you rather start at 10 a.m. and finish at 1 p.m., or start at 11 a.m. and finish at 2 p.m.?
12:15 p.m.
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON
If you can give me a second to check my calendar, I'll provide you with a better answer than I can without having checked it.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
David Graham Liberal Laurentides—Labelle, QC
Are we going 10 a.m. to 1 p.m. instead of 11 a.m. to 2 p.m. on Tuesday?
12:15 p.m.
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
I was just saying that 10 a.m. to 1 p.m. works better for me.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell
Okay. We'll go 10 a.m. to 1 p.m., if we have three hours' worth of work. If we don't, we'll go regular hours, 11 a.m. to 1 p.m. We've already decided on the estimates.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
Arnold Chan Liberal Scarborough—Agincourt, ON
Can I also ask my colleagues if they are...? I'm fully seized of Mr. Nater's four or five witnesses, namely, the acting Clerk and Speaker, two members, and the head of the PPS or RCMP. The question is whether there are any other witnesses. I had suggested that tomorrow might be a bit fast for getting additional witnesses, and the evidence might suggest that we need to call other witnesses. We'll leave that to the committee to decide. I suggest that if we have additional ones we want to put on the table, we do so relatively expeditiously. I'd like to deal with this expeditiously and report back to the House.