Evidence of meeting #17 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 recommendation.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ruby Sahota
Justin, could we have a recorded vote on CPC 2, please.
(Text of recommendation negatived: nays 6; yeas 5 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Andre, may I have you remove BQ 10 and NDP 2 from the report since that has been addressed, and I'll remind you that none of them will be identified by party at the end. It's a collaborative effort.
We are moving on to NDP 1.
Is everyone willing to adopt NDP 1? There seems to be general consensus on this one.
Conservative
Blake Richards Conservative Banff—Airdrie, AB
Hold on, Madam Chair. We've been talking about the other one for so long that I need a second to review this one. Sorry.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ruby Sahota
Yes. I'm sorry. I've been reviewing them all night, over and over again to prepare for today so I have them....
Conservative
Blake Richards Conservative Banff—Airdrie, AB
We talked so long about the other one that everything's blurry now. Please just give me 10 seconds.
Conservative
Blake Richards Conservative Banff—Airdrie, AB
Just to be consistent.... In fact, I may not have support on it, but who knows? Hope springs eternal. I would make an amendment to take out the words “or any future”. It would simply read “that may need modifying during the current event”. I don't think I need to belabour why I feel that way, because I've expounded on that at length. I make that suggestion for an amendment.
Liberal
Conservative
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ruby Sahota
Yes. The words “or any future” are removed.
Can we adopt NDP 2 as amended?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ruby Sahota
That's correct. It would be NDP 1. All of that will be removed anyway in the end. You're not going to see any of that, but for our record-keeping it does become NDP 1 at this point.
Conservative
Blake Richards Conservative Banff—Airdrie, AB
Pardon me, Madam Chair, I thought we were discussing NDP 1.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ruby Sahota
I'm looking for consensus on whether we can adopt NDP 2, which has now become NDP 1 as amended by you.
Liberal
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ruby Sahota
I'm sorry. It's NDP 1. I made the major mistake there, and I've moved too far past my sheet.
NDP 1 has only been amended. I'm so sorry that I'm the one messing you guys up right now. The words “or any future” have been removed from NDP 1. Is there agreement to adopt NDP 1 as amended?
Conservative
Corey Tochor Conservative Saskatoon—University, SK
I don't know what I'm voting on. Could I hear it again? I'm sorry.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ruby Sahota
Yes. It would read: “That the Clerk of the House of Commons create and present a list to the committee of all standing orders that may need modifying during the current event rendering the House of Commons unable to meet in its entirety in-person.”
It is on page 26 of the draft report and is labelled NDP 1.
Seeing as there is no disagreement, I believe NDP 1 has been adopted.
We are going to move past page 26 at this point.
We are moving on to LIB 2 on page 28. This recommendation states, “Undertake necessary steps to expand the House's capacity and operations to achieve a fully virtual Parliament, with the possibility of employing a hybrid model in the interim.”
Conservative
John Brassard Conservative Barrie—Innisfil, ON
Can I ask somebody from the Liberal side about this? I tried to broach this with Mr. Turnbull earlier. It's about the definition of “a fully virtual Parliament” in this context. What is the intent of this recommendation and how is it different from the LIB 1 recommendation which, by the way, I'll remind you, I voted against because it doesn't employ the hybrid model. What is the intent of this recommendation, Madam Chair?
Liberal
Omar Alghabra Liberal Mississauga Centre, ON
They might look similar, but they're not, because the first recommendation deals with standing orders. This recommendation asks the House of Commons to prepare its capacity and its operations to be able to accommodate a fully virtual Parliament.
To answer Mr. Brassard's question about what “a fully virtual Parliament” means, it means that it's able to do all of its duties virtually. We recognize, as I think is implicit in this recommendation, that currently the House of Commons operations are not ready, and therefore an interim or hybrid model can be continually deployed or used right now, but to prepare the House of Commons capacity.... Maybe we will never use it, but it's to prepare the capacity so that we don't end up being, because of logistics, unable to do our job if one day we come to that point.
