Evidence of meeting #1 for Procedure and House Affairs in the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was chair.
A video is available from Parliament.
Bloc
Christine Normandin Bloc Saint-Jean, QC
I gather that the proposal won’t prevent members from speaking. We’re simply asking that substitute members be clearly identified so that other committee members know about them.
Technically, this proposal doesn’t prevent anyone from speaking. It simply asks that substitute members be clearly identified, in particular to keep track of the number of people eligible to attend a meeting and authorized to speak.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Chris Bittle
So that we're on the same page, let's clarify this. On the one hand, you're saying that anyone can speak, but in the writing of the motion you're saying it's only those who are authorized to speak.
Does that run counter to your interpretation of the motion, and will we run into problems moving forward?
Bloc
Christine Normandin Bloc Saint-Jean, QC
A number of members may attend the committee meetings at the same time. However, the 40 members from one party sitting at the table wouldn’t all be authorized to speak. We know that there must be five Liberals—including the chair—four Conservatives and one Bloc member. This wouldn’t be a breach of parliamentary privilege.
The proposal simply states that, when a substitution takes place, the substitute member must be identified. This doesn’t prevent a member from speaking. This is about letting all committee members know who can speak, based on the rules of procedure governing the number of people eligible to attend a meeting.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Chris Bittle
Mr. Fergus, I see your hand is up.
If I can just clarify, I've seen circumstances in which one side of the table was full of members and different people were speaking at any given time on points of order and that type of thing. Are you saying that we keep the certain number of individuals at the table and that they can sub out as needed, but we're always aware of who is...? Yes, that's the purpose of the motion. Okay.
Go ahead, Mr. Fergus.
Liberal
Greg Fergus Liberal Hull—Aylmer, QC
Thank you for the clarification, Ms. Normandin. That makes perfect sense. I support your amendment.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Chris Bittle
Is there any further debate on the issue?
I have Mr. Cooper, and I see Mr. Calkins is....
Go ahead, Mr. Cooper.
Conservative
Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Sturgeon River, AB
I'm still not entirely clear on the implications of this amendment vis-à-vis Standing Order 119. Could Madame Normandin address that?
I realize it's a technical point, so I invite the analysts to address my concern that this amendment could conflict with Standing Order 119.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Chris Bittle
I'm going to bring the meeting back to order.
Mr. Cooper, in answer to your question, Standing Order 119 applies only to public meetings.
Is there any further debate on the issue?
Seeing none, I ask all those in favour of the motion to so indicate.
The motion is carried.
Go ahead, Madame Kayabaga.
Liberal
Arielle Kayabaga Liberal London West, ON
Concerning transcripts of in camera meetings, I move:
That one copy of the transcript of each in camera meeting be securely retained—
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Chris Bittle
I'm sorry. I messed up again. It was the amendment that carried.
(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
All those in favour of the motion, please so indicate.
(Motion as amended agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
I apologize. I'll figure this out eventually. It's a day one problem. I offer my apologies for that.
Liberal
Arielle Kayabaga Liberal London West, ON
You're doing fine, Chair. It's your first day.
I move:
That one copy of the transcript of each in camera meeting be securely retained by the committee clerk for consultation by members of the committee or by their staff; and that the analysts assigned to the committee have access to the in camera transcripts.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Chris Bittle
Is that agreed to on consent?
(Motion agreed to)
Go ahead, Madame Kayabaga.
Liberal
Arielle Kayabaga Liberal London West, ON
I’ll keep going.
Here's another motion I'm putting forward:
That a 48-hour notice, interpreted as two nights, be required for any substantive motion to be moved in committee, unless the substantive motion relates directly to business then under consideration, provided that:
(a) the notice be filed with the clerk of the committee no later than 4:00 p.m. from Monday to Thursday, and no later than 2:30 p.m. on Friday;
(b) the motion be distributed to members and the offices of the whips of each recognized party in both official languages by the clerk on the same day the said notice was transmitted if it was received no later than the deadline hour;
(c) notices received after the deadline hour or on non-business days be deemed to have been received during the next business day.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Chris Bittle
Thank you so much.
Is there any debate?
(Motion agreed to)
Please go ahead.
Liberal
Arielle Kayabaga Liberal London West, ON
This motion is on orders of reference from the House respecting bills. It reads as follows::
That in relation to orders of reference from the House respecting bills,
(a) The clerk of the committee shall, upon the committee receiving such an order of reference, write to each member who is not a member of a caucus represented on the committee to invite those members to file with the clerk of the committee, in both official languages, any amendments to the bill that is the subject of the said order that they would suggest that the committee should consider;
(b) Suggested amendments filed pursuant to paragraph (a) at least 48 hours prior to the start of clause-by-clause consideration of the bill to which the amendments relate shall be deemed to be proposed during the said consideration, provided that the committee may, by motion, vary this deadline in respect of a given bill; and
(c) During the clause-by-clause consideration of a bill, the Chair shall allow a member who filed suggested amendments pursuant to paragraph (a) an opportunity to make brief representations in support of them.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Chris Bittle
Is there any debate on this one? Do we have consent?
(Motion agreed to)
Liberal
Arielle Kayabaga Liberal London West, ON
The next motion is on technical tests for witnesses. It reads as follows:
That the clerk inform each witness who is to appear before the committee that the House Administration support team must conduct technical tests to check the connectivity and the equipment used to ensure the best possible sound quality; and that the Chair advise the committee, at the start of each meeting, of any witness who did not perform the required technical tests.
Liberal
Liberal
Arielle Kayabaga Liberal London West, ON
This is my final motion. It is on whips' access to digital binders:
That the clerk of the committee be authorized to grant access to the committee's digital binder to the offices of the whips of each recognized party.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Chris Bittle
It's all good. I see thumbs-up.
(Motion agreed to)
That's wonderful.
Next is Madame Brière.
