Procedure and House Affairs Committee on Sept. 28th, 2020

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Okay. From the beginning of the motion to its end, for all relevant numbers, we're replacing the first 10-minute opening statement with five minutes for an opening statement. Then there will be a round of six-minute questions, which will go to the Conservatives, Liberals, the Bloc, and then the NDP, at six minutes each. Then we go into the second round, with the Conservatives at five minutes; the Liberals, five minutes; the Bloc Québécois, 2.5 minutes; the NDP, 2.5 minutes; the Conservatives, five minutes; and the Liberals, five minutes.

Is that everyone's understanding as well? Okay. That's clear.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Madam Chair, I was disconnected. I'm sorry. I had to reboot. The Internet wasn't working on my Surface tablet here. Did we vote on the amendment?

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

No, of course not. We did notice your absence.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Mr. Doherty was probably the first to notice, right?

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

I can't remember who it was, but he was very worried as well.

We've paused and we're just clarifying it. What we're voting on right now will be your motion of changing the opening statement to five minutes and then inserting the language of requiring or encouraging the witnesses to present a written statement 72 hours in advance. Then, after that, the first round of allocated questioning slots will be six minutes each: Conservative Party, Liberal Party, Bloc Québécois and NDP. That is the order of that first round. That's basically all your motion would affect.

[Todd Doherty, Conservative, Cariboo—Prince George, BC]

Put it to a vote, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Okay. We'll have a recorded vote.

[The Clerk]

This is on the amendment by Mr. Gerretsen.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

(Amendment agreed to: yeas 11; nays 0 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

All right.

Go ahead, Ms. Vecchio.

[Karen Vecchio, Conservative, Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON]

Thank you. Have we finished going through routine proceedings?

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

No. We have working meals still to go back to. Then we'll be done.

[Karen Vecchio, Conservative, Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON]

That's fantastic. I just wanted to find out about that agenda piece. We're on working meals. Got it.

[The Clerk]

Madam Chair, we've now adopted Mr. Gerretsen's amendment. Ms. Blaney's amendment was adopted before that.

Now, the formality of putting the whole question on the motion as amended is needed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Okay.

[The Clerk]

This question is on the motion as amended.

(Motion as amended agreed to: yeas 11; nays 0 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Thank you.

Now we can move on to working meals, Ms. Blaney.

[Rachel Blaney, NDP, North Island—Powell River, BC]

My point was basically that now that we're moving into a hybrid model, I think it would be respectful for members to alert the clerk, within the appropriate time, that they would be physically present so that the clerk is not put in a position of having to order more meals than required. I think that would be a good savings of money, which is always important to New Democrats regardless of what the Conservatives might say—I had to bug you, Todd, come on—and I think it's respectful of the process.

I just wanted to bring that out, because we could again do this thing where every committee sort of does what it wants and we could see the clerk not knowing and having to order for everyone. I think it would be respectful if there were a timeline so that you would have to let the clerk know if you would be participating. I would love to hear people's thoughts on that and, as well, I would love to hear from the clerk if there is a ideal timeline for that process.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

I think the question of whether there is a particular timeline needed for ordering the meals is really for Justin. Today we're not working over the lunch hour, but in the past we weren't ordering meals either. When we were doing the virtual committees, we had stopped ordering meals during that time, I believe.

Is that correct, Justin?

[The Clerk]

Madam Chair, yes, we haven't ordered any meals during any of the virtual meetings. The last time we had catered meals was in early March.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

So what would be the plan at this point, going forward? For the support staff who are there and if it's over the lunch hour, would you be ordering a working meal for everybody, regardless of whether any members are present or not, or how would that work?

[The Clerk]

I could let the committee know a little bit more about the timelines associated with ordering the food. Generally the House catering require 48 hours' notice before providing a catered committee meal. That would generally be what we're looking for.

In the past, when the committee all met together in person, we tended to have a standing order to feed approximately 12 members of the committee. There were also a few extra meals for staff so they could also eat. We tend to order the food several weeks ahead of time. It's a standing order for every committee meeting we have over the lunch hour.

In this case, I would essentially need to know a full two days before the meeting whether you would be appearing in person or virtually, which may create an imposition on your own scheduling for your own time. If the committee is interested in putting into the routine motion a set timeline, it would be at least 48 hours before the meeting that I would need to know.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Okay.

Ms. Blaney, would you like to put the time in place?

I think there are some hands up. We can hear from the other members.

Essentially the clerk wouldn't be required to order the food and you could just get your own food if you did happen to show up in person. That's essentially what would be the effect of this.

Mr. Gerretsen is next, and then Mr. Turnbull and Mr. Doherty.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

I was just going to say, Madam Chair, what you've just concluded there, which is that I imagine what would be delivered would be the same stuff that is prepared and packaged up individually that we get out of the second-floor room that's next to the opposition lobby.

I think if we want to authorize the clerk to get a few meals, as required, for the support staff. If that's the regular custom, then we should do that, but in terms of members, for people here in person, our meetings are in West Block so we have access to that same room that everybody who on House duty is going to have, so why wouldn't we just bring our own meal if we are in person? I would rather take that approach than to have to try to remember, with everything else going on, whether or not I have to tell the clerk 48 hours in advance about my presence or absence.

That would be my preference, but if we insist on having to tell the clerk, then I would suggest that the default be "no" and that you have to tell him that yes, you are going to be there so that we don't end up having a number of meals that are there because somebody forgot to say they weren't going to be there.

[The Clerk]

Madam Chair, I would just add for the committee's information that occasionally when there is leftover food from the catered meals, the support staff can have access to that. The catered meals, in terms of what the committee is authorized to cover, are for the members' benefit, for the members' use.

I would further suggest that the suggestion Mr. Gerretsen put forward can also be used as a bit of an informal arrangement for the committee so as not to create an issue with the scheduling by requiring people to figure out 48 hours ahead of time whether or not they will be at the meeting in person.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

So you're essentially saying that we could do this informally and have this rule without changing the routine motion.

We have Mr. Turnbull, Mr. Doherty and then Mr. Therrien.