Evidence of meeting #2 for Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was chair.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Peter Kent Conservative Thornhill, ON
Yes.
That's not my understanding, Mr. Chair. My understanding is that it is possible to hold two two-hour meetings, one with the ministers and one with officials. There would in fact be a four-hour day that day.
Liberal
Han Dong Liberal Don Valley North, ON
The clerk has confirmed that there will be four hours of availability for the room—
The Clerk
Sorry; as a clarification, there are additional spaces, but I have to inquire if they are available. There is only one spot available every evening from 6:30 to 9:30, so I will have to look into whether it's available. It's possible that another committee has already booked that spot.
Liberal
NDP
Leah Gazan NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
Very quickly, in terms of keeping peace and order in this committee, I would support that motion for an extended meeting if it's not going to infringe on other critical studies that we need to complete in this committee and knowing that this is also very important. I say that because this is a real opportunity for us to facilitate research that will help Canadians.
I think that both are equally important. As long as it's not going to infringe on the studies we've committed to, I'd certainly support that motion.
Liberal
Anthony Housefather Liberal Mount Royal, QC
My goal here was not to not listen to my colleagues; my goal here was to try to find a temporary solution for the situation that I understood we were faced with. I do want to reach consensus and I do want to make sure that everyone understands that we're all trying to work together, so let me state my proposal.
In the event that the clerk is able to book that room, which is a first-come, first-served room, for two additional hours on Thursday night, and if one of the ministers is able to come at that time as opposed to the earlier time, I'm completely happy to have two two-hour meetings with the ministers and with the officials. In the event that for some reason the room is not available and the clerk cannot obtain that room or, alternatively, neither of the ministers and their staff is available at this notice to come at that time, I suggest we go forward with an initial one-hour meeting with each minister. Then, if we're able to find additional time, great. I'm perfectly happy to have them both for two hours instead of one hour if the clerk can make that happen and it's feasible.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sean Casey
Thank you, Mr. Housefather.
I think there are two ways we can proceed here. If we can go forward by consensus that if we are able to secure four hours of meeting time, we will be there for the four hours to have a full hearing from ministers and officials, we can go that route. That's by consensus.
Otherwise, we can go the more formal route. I would ask someone to put forward an amendment, because Mr. Housefather can't amend his own motion, which he has just proposed. We'd vote on the amendment and then vote on the main motion.
The difficulty here is that I see consensus in the room with respect to four hours of time, but if we don't have four hours of time, then clearly there isn't a consensus and it may be necessary to vote on it. That's the predicament the chair finds itself in.
Go ahead, Ms. Falk.
Conservative
Rosemarie Falk Conservative Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK
When will we find out if space is available?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sean Casey
I would expect that if the clerk hasn't already asked for that time, he's going to do so very soon. How long it takes him to get back to us, I'm not sure.
Can you help us with that, Mr. Clerk?
Liberal
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sean Casey
I believe we have an amendment to Mr. Housefather's motion, which is that if additional time is available on November 4, that each minister appear for one hour, plus one hour with officials, for a total of four hours. That's the amendment.
Is there any discussion on the amendment?
Go ahead, Mr. Kent.
Conservative
Peter Kent Conservative Thornhill, ON
Mr. Chair, I understand the conundrum you face, but I think on principle I would vote against the amendment to that motion. It's unacceptable, and I think we should pursue and do our best to ensure that we can get two separate two-hour meetings with ministers and their officials.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sean Casey
Thank you, Mr. Kent.
Is there any further discussion on the amendment?
Are we ready for the question? I believe we should probably go with a recorded vote. It doesn't appear that we have consensus in the room.
To be clear, what we're voting on now is an amendment to Mr. Housefather's motion to the effect that if time is available on November 4, that the ministers appear for one hour each, along with one hour with departmental officials, for a total of four hours.
That's the amendment. Go ahead, Mr. Clerk.
(Amendment agreed to: yeas 7; nays 4 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Now we're on the main motion. As you will recall, the main motion is that the ministers appear with their officials for one hour each and, to be clear for context, this would be the case if we only had two hours available to us.
Is there any further debate on the main motion?
Conservative
Peter Kent Conservative Thornhill, ON
Again, Mr. Chair, I respectfully suggest that this motion is a slippery slope, which sort of defies full scrutiny and accountability for—again, as my colleagues have said—an historic expenditure over these past seven months.
NDP
Leah Gazan NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
I just want to be clear here.
My understanding is that we're both trying to achieve the same thing, which is two hours with the ministers—one hour each—and one hour each with the staff, so in both cases it accounts for four hours in total. The issue is around the room space, and there is only one room. Am I clear? Maybe I'm missing something here.
