Evidence of meeting #7 for Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was meeting.
A recording is available from Parliament.
3:45 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Candice Bergen
Just to comment on your question, Monsieur Lessard, I checked with my clerk, and he has agreed and advised me that we cannot compel ministers to do anything. If we look at the motion, though, it includes “with the agreement of the minister”, so we would have to get her agreement or their agreement. So this motion would be asking for their agreement. But you're correct, we cannot compel them to do anything.
Mr. Savage, please.
3:45 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
I would propose an amendment to the motion to take out the words “an electronic version of their remarks to be distributed one hour before the start of the scheduled meeting” and replace them with “a written version of their remarks distributed at the start of the scheduled meeting”.
I would so move, as an amendment.
3:45 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Candice Bergen
So we have an amendment on the table that we replace “a written version”.
3:45 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
“...and that a written version of their remarks be distributed in both official languages at the start of the scheduled meeting.”
3:45 p.m.
Conservative
3:45 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
Yes. I think it makes infinite good sense. It's good common sense and has been the practice across the committees here; it provides the members with the remarks of the minister, and I think it's sufficient. Anything released in advance would open itself up to various kinds of uses and abuses that certainly I don't think would be acceptable. It meets the needs of the committee to know what the minister is saying as she's speaking, and I think it certainly conforms to the gist of the motion. So with that amendment we would support it, and without that amendment we would not.
3:45 p.m.
Conservative
3:45 p.m.
Liberal
Michael Savage Liberal Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS
Yes. I agree with the comments that my colleague Mr. Lessard made about the importance of this. I don't consider it unreasonable to ask for these comments to be distributed before the meeting. I wouldn't ask that they would be, were it not that we've had circumstances where, when the minister comes, she doesn't come by herself. She comes with an army of people. The fact that they couldn't prepare comments in advance at one of those sessions we had but had to be running back and forth to wherever the office is across the bridge was ridiculous.
On the other hand, we're all here trying to make a point. We understand the minister has her schedule and we appreciate the fact that she is busy. This committee is busy as well. It has an important parliamentary function, and part of that job is to question the minister about her estimates. So if Mr. Komarnicki's amendment is to take out after “estimates”, “...an electronic version of their remarks, to be distributed one hour before the start of the scheduled meeting...”, if he's preparing a change in that to say, “...a written version of the remarks in both official languages be distributed at the start of the meeting...”, if he would change that to “prior to the start of the meeting, without delaying the start time of the meeting”, I would be okay with that.
The key point for me here, Ed and colleagues, is that we need 90 minutes. For the minister to come and have these long opening comments, which we've seen before, and then have time scheduled for committee business or something at the end, doesn't make sense. We need 90 minutes--it's not a long time--to ask questions of the minister. We all consider her a good friend and colleague and parliamentary associate. We're here for the purpose of making this a better government, and to improve what's legislatively happening in the House of Commons at the same time. So in that spirit I'd be prepared to accept that amendment if it were to say, “distributed prior to the start of the meeting, without delaying the start of the meeting”. If the 90 minutes for questioning is still part of the motion, then I will accept my colleague Ed's friendly amendment, and we can go forward and get some business done.
That's my view. I don't know how other people feel.
3:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Candice Bergen
Mr. Komarnicki, I'll ask you first, would you be willing to accept that friendly amendment to your amendment?
3:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Candice Bergen
All right.
Mr. Lessard, do you want to speak to the amendment?
3:50 p.m.
Bloc
Yves Lessard Bloc Chambly—Borduas, QC
Madam Chair, I will support this amendment. The mover did so, but he is removing an important piece, all the same. Usually, ministers who appear here already have a document. If I remember rightly, we have always been given a copy at the beginning of the meeting. I think it is a worthwhile idea to get it to us an hour beforehand, rather than at the beginning of the meeting.
That changes about 50% of the motion, but it is still 90 minutes. That is what is new. If we agree about the 90 minutes, we can leave it at that.
3:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Candice Bergen
Any other discussion regarding the amendment?
All right, we need to vote on the amendment first, and then we'll vote on the motion.
All those in favour of the amendment?
3:50 p.m.
Liberal
3:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Candice Bergen
Yes, let me read the amendment.
We would take out, after “estimates”, “an electronic version of their remarks be distributed one hour before the start of the scheduled meeting”, and we would replace it with “a written version of their remarks be distributed in both official languages prior to the beginning of the meeting, without delaying the start of the meeting”.
That's the amendment.
3:50 p.m.
Liberal
3:50 p.m.
Liberal
Michael Savage Liberal Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS
Prior to the start of the opening of the beginning of the meeting.
3:50 p.m.
Liberal
Raymonde Folco Liberal Laval—Les Îles, QC
That's about it, yes.
Prior to the meeting. That's the way it is.
3:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Candice Bergen
Do you want to put in “five minutes prior to the meeting”? You don't want to do anything like that?