Procedure and House Affairs Committee on May 13th, 2020

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

I just want to clarify, Madam Chair, based on one of the other comments made, that we're not talking about an amendment to the Constitution here. This interpretation of quorum is consistent with the given testimony from, by my count, five reputable sources of expertise on parliamentary procedure and the Constitution. I have a whole bunch of quotes here. I don't want to go through them all, but I really do think that this interpretation in fact is something that we're already employing. In this meeting of this standing committee, we're already operating virtually and counting virtual presence as quorum. We're voting on motions. We're doing all kinds of work in committee business. In a sense, then, it's already implied in the way we're proceeding currently.

Again, I don't think this is a big stretch. It does not require an amendment to the Constitution. Mr. Dufresne was very clear about that. Mr. Greg Tardi was very clear about that. All of them said that the courts would not intervene, and that in fact even if the courts ever did intervene, they would tend to side, in the vast majority of cases, with the living tree approach, where they would likely interpret the specific wording around quorum to include “virtual presence”.

I think this is merely a recommendation that echoes the comments given in testimony. It's not a stretch. Australia, as an example, was the least progressive example in our briefing notes. There are many, many other examples of where parliaments, I think around the world, are operating this way.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Thank you.

I'm hoping we can keep this brief.

We have Mr. Maloney, Dr. Duncan, and then Mr. Richards.

[James Maloney, Liberal, Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON]

Chair, the Constitution says 20 is quorum. I don't think anybody is taking issue with that. The first amendment we made today was to agree to conduct a virtual Parliament. Who agreed with that and who disagreed with that at this point is sort of irrelevant.

Therefore, automatically incorporated by reference is the 20-person rule. If we're going to have a virtual Parliament, we have to abide by the Constitution, so 20 is quorum. I think we're having a conversation about nothing, frankly.

Perhaps to address Mr. Brassard's concern and Mr. Alghabra's concern, why don't we take this out as a recommendation, incorporate the quote into the body of the report, reference it as evidence, and move on?

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Is that okay with everyone? I'm getting mixed messages. I would love to do whatever you guys like so we can get going, whether it's adopt, remove, whatever.

Dr. Duncan, maybe you could help out, and then we could get some understanding.

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Madam Chair, I'll keep my intervention very short.

I'd like to recognize your work and the work of the analysts and the clerk. This is not easy, and I want to say thank you to you all.

This is an extreme circumstance. If the House has to go virtual, it will be with the agreement of all the House leaders and quorum would have to be virtual.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

I still don't understand if we have agreement to remove this and move on, or whether we're going to need a vote or agreement on it. Some are saying no and some are.... I don't understand at this point.

Mr. Richards.

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

The suggestion Mr. Maloney made could possibly satisfy everybody here. I remain concerned. I know that Mr. Turnbull indicated he doesn't think it's unconstitutional.

Certainly an argument to the contrary exists out there. In fact, Mr. Dufresne himself even indicated, and this is quoting him, “It's possible that a court could disagree”, and “what was adopted in the impugned proceeding could be invalidated.” There is a body out there that would feel that. A debate still goes on about that, the idea that a physical presence in the House would be required. That's why I made my suggestion.

However, it sounds to me that a lot of people may feel we shouldn't move forward with this. I would certainly agree because we did hear that testimony. I would be fine with the idea of adopting this quote. We should probably add the balance, this additional quote I've just indicated from Dufresne. Either way that would let us move on here. I think that might be a wise decision.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

We'll hear from the analysts, but it seems we're starting to get some consensus around moving the quote into the body of the paragraph so it's addressed, but having no recommendation in this section. That is okay.

Ms. Petitpas Taylor is next on the list and then Ms. Normandin. Maybe we can hear from the analysts quickly before that. It may have an effect on what we say.

[Ginette Petitpas Taylor, Liberal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

Madam Chair—

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Yes, Andre and then Madam Petitpas Taylor.

[Andre Barnes]

I'll be very brief. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Yesterday the committee asked me to fill in the hole I had left by moving the part about the living tree. Essentially, the quote is already there. I summarized Mr. Dufresne's testimony. It also includes Mr. Richards' quote that he gave recently about whether a court could potentially find differently from what was being suggested. That is already in version three, which, unfortunately, members haven't seen.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Okay. That's great.

Ginette.

[Ginette Petitpas Taylor, Liberal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

Madam Chair, I suggest this. I don't feel we have consensus when I'm looking at everyone on the screen right now. I would recommend a vote on this, then from there we'll be able to move forward.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Okay.

Madam Normandin.

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

I agree with that. I don't think we could simply remove this recommendation, as we would not know whether we can use a Parliament that is 100% virtual. If we do not look into this recommendation now and if it is not in our report, we won't know whether we think that the House can operate and whether the Speaker is allowed to open the House if there are only 20 people online.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Okay. I like Ms. Petitpas Taylor's recommendation to get through this. I'm having a hard time getting consensus. I know I've been told that if we don't want the recommendation, we don't even have to vote on it. However, it's unclear whether we want it or not, so I think that procedurally, it will be more appropriate to have a vote and understand everyone's wishes in the end.

Justin, could you help us with a recorded vote on this?

Yes, Mr. Brassard.

[John Brassard, Conservative, Barrie—Innisfil, ON]

Just to be clear, precisely what are we voting on? Are we voting to remove the paragraph?

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

No, we are voting on having this recommendation in the report. That's what the vote is going to be on. It's going to be the amended recommendation, of course.

The amended recommendation looks this way. It will not include the quote that is in the first part of the recommendation. It will be as follows: “Consistent with the Law Clerk of the House of Commons: The Committee recommends that during exceptional circumstances, virtual presence meets the requirements for quorum as set out in Section 48 of the Constitution Act of 1867.”

We are voting on whether or not that gets into the report.

Justin, could you could help us with that? Thank you.

[The Clerk]

Okay.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

The vote is on a modified recommendation LIB 9.

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

On a point of order, Madam Chair, I had proposed an amendment to that motion. If we're going to vote on it, should we not also vote on the amendment first?

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Sorry. Remind me. You wanted to add.... Oh, yes, the hybrid sitting. You wanted to remove “virtual” and replace it with “hybrid sitting with at least 20 members”. Is that right?

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

I would be striking the words “virtual presence of 20 members” and replacing them with “hybrid sittings with at least 20 MPs present in the chamber”.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Okay.

We could have a recorded vote on that. We'll vote first on the amended amendment, so the amendment with Mr. Richards' amendment that has been proposed.

Justin, can you help us through that?

[The Clerk]

The vote is on the subamendment by Mr. Richards.