Procedure and House Affairs Committee on March 2nd, 2023

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

In the second paragraph of the amendment, the subamendment is removing the second “all”.

Go ahead, Ms. Khalid.

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

Thanks, Madam Chair.

I'm just wondering what the implications of removing that “all” would be in the context of this motion.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

I think that's part of the debate. If you would like my understanding, instead of it being “all political parties”, it could then thereby be some. It could be one, but it could just not be “all”. What are “all” of them? That's a good question too.

I'm going to Mr. Berthold.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I just want to mention that we support Mr. Julian’s proposal.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Thank you, Mr. Berthold.

Go ahead, Mr. Fergus.

[Greg Fergus, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

Could the clerk distribute Mr. Julian’s motion so that we can read it in its entirety, in black and white?

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Mr. Julian, while the committee is on pause, perhaps I can ask you your intention.

I'm assuming, just with the pace of the conversation, that you want to go clause by clause. Will you be moving multiple subamendments? If you don't want to share, you don't have to, but if it's this complicated to remove one word, I figure maybe there's some way that people can all be on the same page.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

I think we've had some go-arounds, Madam Chair. There are different reactions to different parts of the amendment.

Earlier, Ms. Normandin moved to divide the amendment. It would probably be the best way to proceed. I tried to do it another way, but since you are a very good chair, I will leave it to you to figure out how we can look at all the elements individually, those we support and those we don’t.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Okay.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

If no one else wishes to speak, Madam Chair, I move that we vote.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Go ahead, Mr. Fergus.

[Greg Fergus, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

I have concerns regarding this motion, since there could be a series of changes. The document with Mr. Cooper’s amendments in red and black has been distributed by the clerk.

First, Ms. Normandin moved that paragraph (a) be removed, and we are now coming back to the text before us, that is, the original wording proposed by Mr. Julian. In the second part, he is proposing to change Mr. Cooper’s amendment by removing the word “all”. Once again, it may be better for Mr. Julian to propose all his amendments together, so that we can have a complete picture.

I understand why he wants to proceed like this, to obtain unanimous consent for each element. I understand, but it is confusing.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

I appreciate the feedback and I always appreciate ways to do this better. I think this also reflects upon discussions and where we stand on things or hear things. Everybody hears them differently. We interpret them differently, and our ideas of what is easier are very different as well.

Since I have nobody left on my speaking list, I am calling the question on the subamendment as proposed by Mr. Julian.

(Subamendment agreed to: yeas 11; nays 0)

We go back to the amendment as amended as amended. Is there discussion or shall we call the vote?

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

I want to clarify what we're voting on, because what you said wasn't clear to me.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

It's the amendment as amended. It was amended by Madame Normandin, followed by the subamendment by Mr. Julian. It's Mr. Cooper's amendment.

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

Could we have that read out to make sure we know what we're voting on? I'm now confused with so many subamendments and amendments and how many different changes there have been. I'd like to be very clear on what we're voting on, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Paragraph (a) has been removed.... Sophia's going to read it all to you, as amended twice.

Sophia, go ahead, please.

[The Clerk of the Committee, Ms. Sophia Nickel]

It is that the motion be amended, (b), in the second paragraph by replacing all the words after the words “the government” with the following: “and from political parties”; (c), by adding the following after the second paragraph: “that the inquiry investigate abuse of diaspora groups by hostile foreign governments”; and, (d), by adding the following after the last paragraph: “that the individual heading this inquiry be selected by unanimous agreement by the House leaders of the officially recognized parties in the House of Commons and that this inquiry does not impede or stop the committee's study on foreign election interference, including the production of documents and calling of witnesses”.

(Amendment as amended agreed to: yeas 6; nays 5)

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

The debate goes to the motion as amended.

Mr. Cooper has the floor. If anyone would like to speak, please raise your hand or give me a signal.

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Edmonton, AB]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I want to indicate that, once we vote on Mr. Julian's motion, you do not have the implied consent of the official opposition to adjourn the meeting, as we expect to take up the unfinished business from yesterday.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Thank you for repeating that to me, Mr. Cooper. I appreciate the reminder.

If I'm not seeing any debate on the motion as amended, are we okay to call the question?

(Motion as amended agreed to: yeas 6; nays 5 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

Go ahead, Mr. Cooper.

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Edmonton, AB]

Madam Chair, I move to resume debate on the subamendment.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

The clerk has informed me that is absolutely suitable, and that means we are now voting on the subamendment where we left off yesterday.

I'm sorry. I got that wrong. We vote to resume debate because that is what Mr. Cooper has asked for.

Mr. Julian, do you have a point of clarification or a point of order?

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

He's asked to resume debate.

Is your ruling that it's not debatable?

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

The clerk is telling me that we would vote on that. I would call it to a vote.