Human Resources Committee on May 4th, 2006

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Mr. Chairman, my impression here is that under (c) they do in fact get questions.... Oh, I see, it's “the opposition and the Liberals”. It's the opposition and the government in that case.

[Lynne Yelich, Conservative, Blackstrap, SK]

But, Mr. Chair, they get a full slate in the very first round.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

What I've seen in number (c) is that it's back and forth between opposition, so that would be shared among opposition members. Is that correct? Is that the intent?

In French, it's all the opposition; in English, it is only the official opposition. We'd want to change it to make sure that it was all opposition. Would that be acceptable?

[Tony Martin, NDP, Sault Ste. Marie, ON]

Yes, if that's what's intended, it would be acceptable.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Ms. Yelich.

[Lynne Yelich, Conservative, Blackstrap, SK]

But it says “and the Liberals”, which meant the government at the time. Are you going to put “Conservatives” there?

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

That's correct. Yes, we're switching “Liberals” and “Conservatives” there.

[Lynne Yelich, Conservative, Blackstrap, SK]

Excellent.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

All right. Here's the way motion 13 should read now. Everything should remain the same. When we get to the first round, it should be the Liberal Party in number (a), it should be the Conservative Party in number (d), and then in number (c) it should be back and forth between the opposition parties and the Conservatives, at the discretion of the chair.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

I think you mean under the second round that (a) would be the Liberal Party and (b) would be the Conservative Party.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Okay.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Yes. Thanks for pointing that out.

Mr. Martin, is that okay? Is that acceptable?

[Tony Martin, NDP, Sault Ste. Marie, ON]

I'm not sure how the Bloc feels about this, but I feel there should be something to indicate that we would in fact be in the mix on the second round. If the chair decides to go back and forth between the Liberals and the Conservatives, he can do that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Well, I read it this way, and correct me if I'm wrong. It will be Liberal, Conservative, and then it will be one of the opposition. It will be one of the other oppositions, so you would be included in that round.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

But what it says and what it means is obviously this side of the room is the opposition, and we would be included in the part after the first round and (a) and (b) of the second round. Obviously, so would they. That's my reading of it. Obviously, the other party should clearly not be excluded from that round.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Monsieur Lessard.

[Yves Lessard, Bloc, Chambly—Borduas, QC]

Mr. Chairman, in the 38th Parliament, we did in fact give the Chair similar latitude and he pretty much followed the order set out in the first scenario. Shouldn't we keep to this order for the second round of questions? However, questioners would have five minutes, not seven. This way, it's clear to everyone.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

I believe the second round is five minutes.

The proposal, Mr. Lessard, is that the second round be exactly the same as the first round, with five minutes.

Mr. Lake.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

I would just point out that obviously this is different from what happened last time around. I wasn't here, but it looks like the government got every second one in the second round last time. You'd be changing that if you went this way.

[Lynne Yelich, Conservative, Blackstrap, SK]

I think we should have some confidence in the chair and have it remain as it was. We should pass the motion. The question is the discretion of the chair; would he be fair. I'm certain he would be.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

May I suggest that as a compromise we look at the second round as Liberal, Conservative, and then opposition, Conservative, and then other opposition, so the NDP and then back to the Conservatives. That would be the intent.

[Jean-Claude D'Amours, Liberal, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Mr. Chairman, I fully agree with Mr. Lessard's suggestion. For the first round of questions, party representatives would each have seven minutes and would proceed in the following order: the Liberal Party, the Bloc Québécois, the NDP and the Conservative Party. For the second round, according to Mr. Lessard, the same order of questioning would be followed, except that representatives would each have five minutes.

Would Mr. Lessard care to move a motion to that effect?

[Yves Lessard, Bloc, Chambly—Borduas, QC]

I so move.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

I just want to point out that last year, and from what I saw happen in other committees, it went back and forth because of the number of members from the government. It gave all their members a chance to speak.

The real question that I think Mr. Martin is asking for here is to make sure he has a second chance to speak, and that everyone in every one of their respective parties would have a chance to speak. That's where I'm thinking his intent was going.

My thought would be that as it's proposed here, and as it worked under the 38th Parliament, it would be Liberal, Conservative, and then it would be the Bloc, then Conservative, and then it would be the NDP, and then Conservative. That's the way it worked in the last government with the Liberals, in reverse. That would be the suggestion, just to make sure Mr. Martin has an opportunity to get a second chance.

Is that okay? That's really the question Mr. Martin is asking, if he could participate for a second round, even though he may not be entitled to a second question.

Any other points?