Evidence of meeting #1 for Procedure and House Affairs in the 43rd Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was chair.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON
Yes. I put that on the floor to be moved by unanimous consent. I thought we would just consent to it and move on. I'll have to withdraw. If the motion comes up later, then we'll debate it at that time.
Conservative
NDP
Rachel Blaney NDP North Island—Powell River, BC
First of all, I just want to say that I think this is an important conversation. Canadians across this country elected a minority government with three opposition parties. As we move forward, it's important to respect the fact that this is how Canadians voted. The Conservatives led us off well by presenting their motion in the House of Commons, which was voted for by the opposition parties and not the governing party, to have a committee that had three vice-chairs.
As we move forward, it's important that PROC have that conversation because this could become something negative, where we have some second opposition parties getting elected in some committees and not in others. That's not what we're here for. As a minority government we're here to work together and collaborate.
I have a motion that has been translated that I would like to present. Hopefully this is in order. I know we don't have our routine orders yet, so thank you for your support. I will be reading it out in English because my French is not very strong, but I hope everybody sees that the French is here. This motion reads as follows:
That the Committee report the following recommendation to the House: That for the remainder of the 43rd parliament, that notwithstanding Standing Order 106(2), in addition to the Chair and first vice-chair, there be one vice-chair from the Bloc Québécois and one vice-chair from the New Democratic Party for all committees listed under Standing Order 104.
This is the motion I am tabling. I hope we will have a robust discussion about this. For me it's really about encouraging a House of Commons that reflects the Canadian election results and collaboration among the parties to get things done for Canadians.
Thank you.
Conservative
Blake Richards Conservative Banff—Airdrie, AB
I would like to ask for a ruling from you, Chair, as to whether this motion would be in order.
This I believe would go beyond the mandate of this committee. What we're talking about here would be effectively a change to the Standing Orders. It doesn't actually call for it to be that. Mr. Gerretsen of course was asking for consent to change the Standing Orders with what he moved. He was doing that by asking for consent, which has been the established precedent here. In order to make that change, that would be the requirement, but also we're expected to operate under the Standing Orders, which are set forward by the House. This is asking for us to operate outside of those Standing Orders. You might find this motion would not be in order.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ruby Sahota
I want to thank Ms. Blaney for the motion that she has moved. I do find that a change to the Standing Orders would be within the mandate of this committee. Having been a senior member on this committee, I know this is very much the type of issue we look at here. If that is Ms. Blaney's wish, and that's what it seems to be from the motion here, we would then have a debate and ultimately a vote on the motion, and then it would be presented in the House.
Mr. Richards.
Conservative
Blake Richards Conservative Banff—Airdrie, AB
Can I get a clarification on that? It doesn't actually indicate that she is proposing a change to the Standing Orders. It sounds to me as though you've ruled that she is changing the Standing Orders. She's saying, “notwithstanding”, but she is not actually calling for a change to the Standing Orders.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ruby Sahota
Okay, Mr. Richards. The clerk here actually has quite a lot of experience in the matter. I haven't been able to look into it myself that much. Upon the advice of the clerk, if this were moved and adopted here, it would then be reported to the House and voted on, and essentially the effect it would have would be a change, for this Parliament, of the Standing Orders.
Conservative
Conservative
Blake Richards Conservative Banff—Airdrie, AB
Sorry, Madam Chair, but we're still on the point of order I raised.
Liberal
Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON
No. You're arguing your point of order right now.
Conservative
Blake Richards Conservative Banff—Airdrie, AB
Well, I'm asking for further clarification on the point.
Liberal
Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON
Well, the chair made a ruling. You can challenge the chair if you want.
Conservative
Blake Richards Conservative Banff—Airdrie, AB
No, I'm not challenging the chair; I'm asking for a clarification of the ruling. We don't have a final ruling until it's clarified so that all members are able to understand it. I'm seeking clarification of that ruling.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ruby Sahota
Since you have the floor, Mr. Richards, I'll let you continue with your clarification, and then I'll move back to you, Mr. Gerretsen.
Conservative
Blake Richards Conservative Banff—Airdrie, AB
Thank you, Madam Chair. I appreciate that, because it is important that we all understand what the ruling in fact is for it to be a ruling.
I've lost my train of thought here. Give me a second to recompose that.
What I guess I'm trying to understand, then, is that if it's been reported back to the House, it would then be considered a change to the Standing Orders for this Parliament. Would that then have an impact upon all other committees?
Liberal
Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON
I just wanted to get us back on track. You made a ruling, Madam Chair. Let's move on or challenge the chair.
Liberal
Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON
Ms. Blaney had the floor when the point of order came up, if I remember correctly.
