Evidence of meeting #1 for Procedure and House Affairs in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd 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
The Chair Liberal Ruby Sahota
Maybe we could take a 30-second pause. I'm going to confer with the clerk on a couple of things before we move forward.
Okay. Procedurally, there may be some issues with Mr. Gerretsen's motion at this point, because scenario one, which the committee voted on and adopted, gives the order for questioning in that second round.
The clerk can jump in as well and help explain whether there's an issue with understanding what we just passed.
The Clerk
Yes.
As I mentioned to the chair, Ms. Blaney moved a motion on the rounds of questions that specifically set out how that would proceed. The committee adopted that through a majority, which essentially brings it to an end. It was the decision of the committee to proceed on that basis for the rounds of questions. It seems there are now some suggestions from other members to attempt to further amend that. If that is the will of the committee, the committee first needs to undo the decision they just made.
Liberal
The Clerk
Just to finish, Mr. Gerretsen, had the motion from Ms. Blaney been defeated, then there would be no problem moving a further suggestion or a different variation.
Liberal
Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON
On a point of order, Madam Chair, that's not my interpretation of it. You can go back and check the blues. Ms. Blaney said to take two and move them into another location in the speaking order. I did not interpret her motion to be saying.... It may have affected the two spots afterwards, but she didn't touch those two spots. She just moved the last two and bumped them forward by two. I did not interpret that to mean that we were done talking about that particular issue.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ruby Sahota
Justin, could that be an interpretation? I could foresee that.
Mr. Lukiwski, we'll have you speak next.
Conservative
Tom Lukiwski Conservative Moose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan, SK
Now, Madam Chair, or do you want to go to the clerk first?
The Clerk
I apologize, Madam Chair. My sense from Ms. Blaney was that she was moving a motion to adopt the routine motion as she set it out, and then the committee voted on it. If I have made a mistake, I apologize, but that was the understanding I had.
Liberal
Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON
If that's the case, then why are we even discussing the time at the beginning? That's part of the routine motion. If what the clerk is saying is correct, Madam Chair, then we've just adopted the entire thing.
I was under the impression it was an amendment to the motion, which was to move two of the items in there. If what you're saying is correct, Mr. Clerk—and I'm really not trying to enter into a debate with you—then we're done with this routine motion and there is no sense continuing to talk about it.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ruby Sahota
My understanding was that the witness portion in the first round hadn't been touched. My understanding is similar to your understanding, Mr. Gerretsen, and that's why I was saying that we could move on to the issue of the witness statements, which is also within this motion.
Liberal
Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON
Okay. I can always come back to this later on, because we can always change our stuff later on, if necessary, through a motion.
Then I will withdraw that motion, Madam Chair, and I would propose that we change the opening statements from 10 minutes to six minutes.
Liberal
Conservative
Liberal
Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON
I withdrew that motion and put forward the other one that you were getting at.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ruby Sahota
Okay.
Mr. Clerk, just to clarify, would it be okay to move a change to the opening statement time at this point?
The Clerk
Yes, you can go ahead.
I apologize. I was confused by Ms. Blaney's motion, so it can be treated as an amendment. That section has been dealt with, and now you're on to a different part of that same motion. Again, I apologize to the committee for the confusion.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ruby Sahota
Okay. That's the can of worms I was talking about, because I wasn't sure whether we had clarified if it was just for that particular part.
Go ahead, Mr. Gerretsen.
Liberal
Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON
I'll put forward a motion, Madam Chair, that we change the opening statements from 10 minutes to six minutes.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ruby Sahota
Okay.
Mr. Lukiwski, do you want to speak to this section of the motion?
Conservative
Tom Lukiwski Conservative Moose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan, SK
Just briefly, it's more of a question to Mark than anything.
Mark, do you think that six minutes is correct, or would five give even more latitude in case we start the meeting late, which happens quite frequently virtually? I have no issue with six minutes. I think I would prefer five, just to build in a bit of a buffer, but it's your motion. I would support either one.
September 28th, 2020 / 4:25 p.m.
Liberal
Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON
I appreciate that suggestion, and it's probably better, because if you tell people five and then it goes over by a few minutes.... I think you're absolutely right, so I'll accept that friendly amendment.
