Procedure and House Affairs Committee on Feb. 4th, 2016

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

I said I would take only a few minutes to make my point. I will do that and let it go.

Madam Sahota was trying to move it along, saying, “We're listening, but now we want to vote.” Well, that's just using their majority, waiting until everybody is finished talking so they can use their majority to shut everything down.

I'll end with this. I think the motion has legitimate value. I think it's quite legitimate. I was very pleased to hear Mr. Graham; it sounded as though they were interested in having the minister in, and we just had to agree on the time frame. It can't quite be the way they're suggesting, but I think it would just take a minor tweak to get a unanimous vote.

I remain optimistic that it will happen, but whether it does or not, I think it has great merit. I'm pleased to support that motion.

C'est tout.

[Arnold Chan, Liberal, Scarborough—Agincourt, ON]

The only point I—

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Hold it. You can't speak yet. We have to extend the time. We're out of time again.

Is there agreement to extend the time another five minutes?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Okay. We're extending another five minutes.

Could you keep the time, Clerk?

Mr. Chan.

[Arnold Chan, Liberal, Scarborough—Agincourt, ON]

We're prepared to put it to a vote, but the issue for us, on our side, is that we simply need to consult to see when the minister is available.

In terms of the time frame you're talking about, Mr. Richards, we don't know. We're on break next week. It's constituency week, right? We just want the opportunity to go back and actually ask the minister when she is available. We have no issue with the minister appearing. That's why I said I'm prepared to bring this to a vote. We're prepared to bring the minister before this committee, but we have to be able to consult and have her check.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Let's come back for a day next week and hold a hearing.

[Arnold Chan, Liberal, Scarborough—Agincourt, ON]

I don't know if she's available.

[An hon. member]

I drive right through her riding. I'll pick her up.

[Arnold Chan, Liberal, Scarborough—Agincourt, ON]

I yield the floor. The amendment is put.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Is there any more discussion on the amendment, which is subject to the availability of the minister?

Mr. Reid.

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

It's always subject to the availability of the minister. I've never yet seen, except in the most extraordinary circumstances where there was an attempt to bring down the government over allegations of a contempt of Parliament, a situation in which we were saying we were effectively issuing a writ for the minister to be forced to testify here. In fact, the only time anything like that has ever been done was when we brought in Schreiber. Remember that?

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Yes.

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

That's it. It's always subject to availability. We expect her, morally, and she must know this, because I assume this is on CPAC, so she can watch it if she wants to. Someone is monitoring it in her office. She knows that we, on this side, want her here before February 15 and that we'll make ourselves available. I'm confident the government can find enough members to be available, even if the specific individuals here can't be here.

I will be voting against the amendment, but not because I don't think we should try to accommodate her. I do think, however, she should try to accommodate us and allow us to be assured that her process is constitutional before the clock runs out on the 15th. I think she can understand the importance of that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Is there any more discussion on the amendment?

Mr. Christopherson.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

It doesn't sound as if the government is going to give the assurance we need so I have two choices: I either take them at their word that the minister will come in, in a timely fashion, or not.

Given that we've done this in public—usually we get screwed over when we're in camera and these things don't come out publicly—at least this time everybody has seen the discussion, and if the minister is still not here weeks later, then we have a lot of grounds to make a case. Therefore, I'm going to trust the government that the minister will make herself available in a timely fashion vis-à-vis our needs too, and we'll be supporting the amendment.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Ms. Sahota.

[Ruby Sahota, Liberal, Brampton North, ON]

I don't understand why, if it's always subject to her availability, there is any opposition to this amendment.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Mr. Reid.

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

It's simply because while it's subject to her availability, any minister who is unwilling to appear before a committee to deal with the constitutionality of the system that she designed, on a deadline she designed, before that deadline expires, is not formally in contempt of Parliament but is acting contemptuously before Parliament. Morally, she can clear anything off her agenda, aside from some kind of personal health crisis or tragedy in the family, to be here. Therefore, she should darn well make herself available, and I want to make that point by voting against this amendment.

That said, if the government pushes the amendment through, I'll then be voting for the main motion as well, and I'll be asking that we make every effort to get her here next week.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Mr. Christopherson.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

We'll support the amended motion at the end of the day.

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

Can I put the motion?

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Do you mean your amendment?

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

Yes, it's the amendment. Thank you.