Evidence of meeting #31 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 amendment.
A recording is available from Parliament.
5 p.m.
Conservative
Rosemarie Falk Conservative Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK
I'm sorry, Chair, I'm just not sure where I can see that in his motion. I see it reading as follows:
That the committee undertake a study on Social Innovation and Social Finance, outlining how these strategies can contribute to building a more inclusive, resilient, and sustainable economy as we look towards economic recovery, and that this study shall take no less than six meetings.
I don't know if I'm.... Maybe I don't have the accurate motion, but I just don't see it.
5 p.m.
Liberal
Ryan Turnbull Liberal Whitby, ON
Yes. The motion read: “I move, as the next order of business: That the committee undertake...”, etc., which was the motion I read into the record last time. The one that Ms. Falk might be referring to is the notice of motion, which was put forth on October 15.
5 p.m.
Conservative
Rosemarie Falk Conservative Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK
Can we change a motion after we have tabled notice of it? I guess that's a question for the clerk.
Can we just change what the motion is?
5 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sean Casey
In committee business, you can present whatever motion you wish, without notice, and that was what happened. Again, I would invite you simply to delete the first few words so that your amendment achieves—
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
Rosemarie Falk Conservative Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK
Chair, that's not reflective of what's in the minutes. I guess what I'm concerned about now is that we have the motion that was given notice, but then something else that was said.... Unless that was deliberately to deceive the committee members.... I guess I just think that we should do the seniors study next, especially with the words from the committee members from our February 2 meeting.
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
Raquel Dancho Conservative Kildonan—St. Paul, MB
Mr. Chair, on a point of order, my understanding—and please correct me if I'm wrong—is that we adjourned on Thursday, correct?
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
Raquel Dancho Conservative Kildonan—St. Paul, MB
Is that not the case, then, that the next committee meeting we have in fact does not pick up where we left off and in fact starts afresh? So Mr. Turnbull would have had to get the floor and put forward his motion first for us to be debating it right now; otherwise, technically this is not in order, so how is it that we are just picking up where we left off, even though we adjourned last meeting?
5:05 p.m.
Liberal
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
Raquel Dancho Conservative Kildonan—St. Paul, MB
If we suspend or adjourn the meeting, those are the same thing, and then we pick up where we left off. Is that what you're saying?
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
Raquel Dancho Conservative Kildonan—St. Paul, MB
I'm just wondering if you're sure, Mr. Chair, because it doesn't sound like you are.
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
Raquel Dancho Conservative Kildonan—St. Paul, MB
In this case, can you confirm that we are in order with Mr. Turnbull's motion even though we adjourned last meeting?
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
Raquel Dancho Conservative Kildonan—St. Paul, MB
I'm just making sure. I'm just learning procedure like everyone else who's new, but that was my understanding.
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
5:05 p.m.
Liberal
Han Dong Liberal Don Valley North, ON
No, you've done your point of order. I think the chair just has—