Procedure and House Affairs Committee on Oct. 20th, 2020

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Well, look, we're on a short timeline, and it's up to the government to get this done. When it decides to do it, that's what we're really going to be considering, and that's where we're going to get into the real details, notwithstanding whatever was in the Chief Electoral Officer's report.

I think studying it is good because it will prepare us to have an informed opinion on the proposal by the government, but the real decision-making happens once the government has tabled the legislation, and it has gone through a second reading debate in the House.

I'm not too hung up on that. I'm not clear on what the subamendment is and what the amendment is. I think we need some guidance from the chair on what the date is, but in principle, if the idea is that we want as a committee to report back to the House with something on an interim basis by December 1, that's fine by me. If we're not determining an end date for the study at this point, then I'm comfortable picking an interim date in December. I just think we should report something back to the House before we rise for Christmas. As long as we're on track to do that, I'm flexible.

I'm hearing from the analysts the challenges of a mid November date, so I think Mr. Doherty was quite right to suggest pushing it into December. Whether it's December 1 or December 11, I'm agnostic on that. I think it's important that we get something on the table before Christmas, and I don't want to be too restrictive about that.

If we hear good things, and we come to conclusions about things that aren't within the scope of the specific recommendations by the Chief Electoral Officer, I would like those things to be included in the report we table prior to Christmas.

I'm offering that up. With the time remaining—I know that given the IT restraints, it's not easy to just extend the meeting—I think it's important that we get to a decision.

Let's have some kind of interim date in December. Let's not put an end date on the study. Let's not restrict the interim report to the specific recommendations of the Chief Electoral Officer, but let's understand that this is a priority for the committee and that we will be addressing those in the interim report. If somebody can find the wording for that, let's get it passed and carry on.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Thank you, Mr. Blaikie.

I think Mr. Doherty might be our saving grace at this moment. There was an interim report date suggested of November 23. That was Dr. Duncan's first amendment. Then a subamendment was moved by Mr. Doherty for December 11.

I'm hearing some agreement at least between the NDP and Mr. Turnbull on not really being fussy about the date. If it's December 1, that would be okay with some members as well.

Mr. Doherty, you are next.

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

Thank you, Madam Chair.

It sounds as though we have somehow been able to come to a consensus, but I feel it is important to bring this up. Pardon the partisan comments, but the only people talking about the potential for a snap election really are our Liberal friends on this committee, so it would beg the question of what they know.

The concern is here, and our friend Ms. Duncan rightly spoke about our concern for Canadians going to the polls. It could also be said that if the government were so concerned about sending Canadians to the polls...well, by-elections were done and all of a sudden you're trying to get your by-elections done quickly, so where is that same concern for those Canadians who have to go to elect a candidate in those ridings?

The only people who seem to be thinking that every time the opposition speaks or opposes something or brings forward a motion in the House, all of a sudden it has to be a confidence motion, are the Prime Minister and the government. I'll leave it at that.

The challenge we have at this point is that we have this motion and the Chief Electoral Officer has expressed some concern as well.

Madam Chair, I think we are okay and Mr. Blaikie is all right with the amendment that Mr. Turnbull has brought forward. I'll remove my amendment from the floor and go with what Mr. Blaikie and Mr. Turnbull have come to an agreement on.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Perhaps you can move—I don't know if it was ever formally moved. It was just discussed. Maybe the clerk can help us with that, and maybe if everyone is okay with that, then it doesn't really matter at the end of the day.

Maybe, Mr. Doherty, what you could do is withdraw your subamendment and resubmit a subamendment with the date of December 1.

Would that be needed, Mr. Clerk, or could we just...?

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

Madam Chair, I think what Mr. Blaikie was mentioning was that he was endorsing my subamendment to go into December, but he did agree with Mr. Turnbull, just as long as we are agreeing that we are going to get to work now and then have to report back in whether the first week or the week of December 11.

I think, Mr. Turnbull, you suggested December 1. Is that correct?

Mr. Blaikie, you were in agreement with that? You are okay with that?

Then, Madam Chair, I move a subamendment to replace the final line of Mr. Turnbull's motion—“Monday, November 23, 2020”—with the words, “Tuesday, December 1, 2020”. The committee's interim findings would then be reported to the House no later than December 1.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Thank you, Mr. Doherty.

Mr. Clerk, could we have a vote on that subamendment, please?

[The Clerk]

The vote is on Mr. Doherty's subamendment.

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

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Mr. Clerk, does the subamendment make the original amendment null and void then?

[The Clerk]

No, strictly speaking the committee would now have to adopt the amendment as amended, so this would be back to Ms. Duncan's amendment, which has just been amended by Mr. Doherty's subamendment.

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

I have just a quick point of order. I am wondering if we might be able to do this by unanimous consent instead of by recorded vote.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Is anyone opposed to the amended amendment?

(Amendment as amended agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

The official date for an interim report is December 1.

Yes.

[The Clerk]

The committee would also need to agree to the motion as amended.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Is there any opposition to the motion as amended?

(Motion as amended agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

It is carried. This will be our first study.

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

On a point of order, Madam Chair, maybe this can be considered at a later date, but I would suggest that while we are dealing with the motion right now on the study we've just agreed to undertake, we put an end date on it.

Do we all agree that we're just going to undertake the study and will see where it takes us, or are we going to commit to an end date?

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

At this time the motion didn't commit to an end date, but I absolutely think the committee may want to put one in at some point, so that this doesn't go on forever.

The subcommittee on agenda could make a recommendation on it after it has received each party's list of witnesses. We then might I have a better understanding as to how much time we would need for the complete study.

I would propose that we first and foremost hear from the Chief Electoral Officer on Thursday, since he is on standby and is willing to come, and that the committee decide on a date by which to submit proposals for all witnesses.

We have the next meeting filled, but we would have to decide on next week at this point and on when the committee would like that deadline to be, so that we can get the ball rolling and hold a discussion concerning how many witnesses to have.

In the past what we've done is to group them by themes and have panels according to those themes of the study. Of course, you could suggest what those themes are and how you would like them grouped, and the clerk and I would do our best to make sure that we move accordingly.

Mr. Blaikie.

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Thank you.

I was just going to say that I think, given that we're trying to get this study up and going quickly, we may want to choose witnesses for next Tuesday already but may not want to feel that we've established a final witness list by then.

It might be prudent to have a preliminary witness list submitted by the end of the week, or even by Thursday, if we understand that we're just submitting a few names to get started. Then we could talk about a deadline for filing a final witness list. That might at least allow us to get started with filling slots for Tuesday and Thursday next week.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

That's a great suggestion, Mr. Blaikie.

I think the clerk has something to add.

[The Clerk]

I was just going to make the point that the motion you've just adopted, as it's worded, gives me some witness material to work with already. There is reference to the Chief Electoral Officer, to the provincial chief electoral officers who have had or will be having elections soon, as well as to provincial public health officials and then advocates.

It's really on that fourth point that suggestions of names might be provided to me by the end of this week. Those would be useful, but at least the other ones give me material to get working on to send out invitations.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Mr. Clerk, are you saying public health officials and “advocates for those who face barriers”? Is that what you're suggesting?

[The Clerk]

Yes. I'm just looking at the wording of the motion you adopted. Its item (i), which talks about Canada's Chief Electoral Officer, item (ii) about provincial chief electoral officers who have already run elections, and then item (iii) about public health officials. There are, then, people whom we can start with.

In the meantime, any other suggestions of specific witnesses you have can be provided, if this is amenable to the committee, by the end of this week. That would be of great assistance.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Are you okay with our saying that it by the end of this week? Are you okay with a Friday deadline? What time would you like it to be?

[The Clerk]

Would 12 noon be acceptable to everybody?

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Is the committee okay with Friday at 12 noon?

Sorry, somebody said there was a challenge.

Mr. Doherty.

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

The only challenge with that is that we have two provinces holding elections right now. Their officials would be tied up for at least the next two weeks.

I would maybe put them in as placeholders, understanding that in B.C.'s election, they're still saying that it could be up to two weeks or three weeks before everything is counted. I don't know how Saskatchewan's is going to be, but I think as long as the committee is amenable to having those two groups and officials from those provinces added to this study at a date to be determined when they're available, I think they would provide great insight for this committee. I don't think they'll be able to report to the committee within the next couple of weeks.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Absolutely. This is just a preliminary list, so you can have another list that follows, but you can also add them to this list and we can schedule them out a little bit further when they would have time. They might not even have time to respond.

Mr. Tochor wants to add something.