Evidence of meeting #60 for Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was chair.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Conservative
Tracy Gray Conservative Kelowna—Lake Country, BC
No, I'm talking about.... We had hands up before we briefly suspended. I'm just wondering if you're keeping on with that speakers list, or if you're starting a new list.
If you have a speakers list, could you let us know what that speakers list is?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey
Thank you, Mrs. Gray.
I had Mr. Long, and then I had a hand up from Ms. Roberts and then Ms. Ferreri.
Now I see Ms. Falk with her hand up as well.
Mr. Long, did you—
Conservative
Tracy Gray Conservative Kelowna—Lake Country, BC
On a point of order, Mr. Chair, wasn't Ms. Falk...? Didn't she have the floor before we—
Conservative
Liberal
Conservative
Rosemarie Falk Conservative Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK
Thank you very much, Chair.
I understand how with my intervention earlier.... I was trying to get clarity about where we were, to make sure that we weren't wasting time. I wasn't really afforded that opportunity, so it's disappointing for me. I want to understand. I understand that there was a motion that was moved, which said:
That amendments be submitted to the clerk of the committee in both official languages no later than 1:00 p.m, EST, Tuesday, April 11 2023; that the clerk of the committee write immediately to each member who is not a member of a caucus represented on the committee and any independent members to inform them of the study of Bill C-35 by the committee and to invite them to prepare and submit any proposed amendments to Bill C-35 which they would suggest that the committee consider during the clause-by-clause study of the Bill; and the committee begin clause-by-clause consideration of the Bill on April 18, 2023.
I understand that was the main motion, but I understand there was then an amendment, if I'm correct, to change some dates. I believe it would have been from April 20 to the 25th, if I've understood this correctly.
It's unfortunate for me, because I feel that this is a trend over and over again from the Liberal-NDP coalition to.... We're seeing it in the House right now. Debate is being limited on something that's very important and that we've heard a lot on from Canadians. Now what's concerning to me is that we're seeing this in committee as well.
I don't understand. Through you, Mr. Chair, I understand that MP Saks isn't happy that she's not getting her way. It's not even just her, but this is from the remarks that she has made. This could be the whole Liberal-NDP coalition not being happy that we're not in agreement.
We want to make sure that there is a thorough job done of hearing testimony from witnesses and from as many child care providers as possible. This is a very big country, and I think we would be doing a disservice to parents like me.... I have four young children. I said that in the previous meeting. As someone who has had difficulty finding child care, I know the real frustrations, just like I can't find formula on shelves either. I have a young baby who's not even one year yet—
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey
Mrs. Falk, I have the floor.
Please respect the chair and keep your comments to the amendment that's currently on the floor, which is in relation to the dates.
Conservative
Rosemarie Falk Conservative Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK
Absolutely.
The real frustration that I feel regarding the things that I have not been able to access and that I know other Canadian parents have not been able to access is that, if we don't do a thorough job on this.... Really from the 11th to the 20th and then the 13th to the 25th, I just....
We also had this conversation with a speed-up in a previous legislation. I think MP Gray alluded to that in her amendment comment. It's a troubling precedent that I see and that I'm living. I think we're doing a disservice by not giving the time to hear from witnesses and not doing our job thoroughly, as we're supposed to.
Mr. Chair, I do want to say, in response to MP Saks' comment about our having an agreement, at a February 3 meeting, for an end date, that I don't know where that is. When I pull up the committee business from the committee website from the February 3 meeting, it states:
The committee proceeded to the consideration of matters related to committee business.
It was agreed,— That six meetings be dedicated to the consideration of Bill C-35, An Act respecting early learning and child care in Canada, commencing Tuesday, March 7, 2023, including a technical briefing from relevant department officials, an invite to the Minister of Families, Children and Social Development accompanied by department officials, witness testimony and clause by clause consideration of the bill.
It was agreed,—That, in the context of the consideration of Bill C-35, An Act respecting early learning and child care in Canada, committee members submit their prioritized witness lists to the clerk of the committee no later than Friday, February 24, 2023.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey
Mrs. Falk, we're not discussing....
Bring your comments to the amendment that's currently on the floor for debate. This is not the witness list.
Conservative
Rosemarie Falk Conservative Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK
Chair, that is what I am doing. MP Saks was permitted to speak about an agreement. She was not told to bring her comments to the amendment.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey
Mrs. Falk, I did ask Ms. Saks to bring her comments to the amendment and I would ask you to do the same. Bring your comments to the amendment that was moved by Ms. Ferreri.
Before you resume your comments, Mrs. Falk, I want to advise the witnesses that, currently, there is a procedural motion before the committee that the committee is debating and discussing, which is the prerogative of the committee members. That's why we're not getting to the witnesses for their opening statements. I just want to clarify that the committee is within its prerogative to have this debate.
Mrs. Falk, it's back to you for comments on the amendment.
Conservative
Rosemarie Falk Conservative Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK
Thank you, Chair.
My point is that there wasn't an agreement, so I'm not understanding why the Liberals are telling us that we're prolonging this when there wasn't an agreement. We had agreed to six meetings. That is what is in the minutes.
It's unfortunate. What is the big push? What is the big push of nine days? I don't understand and it's unfortunate.
It's very frustrating, Mr. Chair, because there is this—what's the word I'm looking for?—brush painting that we're holding this up, which is not the case. From what I understand, as I had said, this kind of stuff should be discussed in planning meetings.
To the witnesses, I'm so sorry that this is happening and that the Liberals and the NDP don't want to do this planning outside of these meetings and are actually eating up witness time.
I just don't see the justification in the argument to move this up, especially when we have two riding weeks coming up here with major holidays between those riding weeks. We have to be respectful of our witnesses when it comes to rescheduling them as well. I feel that moving this original motion—
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey
Ms. Falk, your comments should be to the amendment of Ms. Ferreri, which was to change the date, and not to the original motion.
Conservative
Rosemarie Falk Conservative Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK
Right.
Yes, the original dates are not sufficient. What is being proposed by the Liberals to move this from the 11th to the 13th under the false pretense that there was an agreement.... I read the minutes from the agreement that was being referred to, and there was no agreement. Now this is being thrown on us.
I don't see why the Liberal and the NDP coalition cannot agree to the April 20 date and the April 25 date.
This is a real—
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey
Ms. Falk, the amendment was never adopted because that is what the discussion is. Nobody disagreed with it or agreed with it because this committee did not vote on it.
Conservative
Rosemarie Falk Conservative Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK
Okay, so it wasn't a formal vote, Mr. Chair, but it was remarked on from the Liberals, saying that they didn't disagree with it.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey
The committee hasn't adopted it, because we're still debating the amendment of Ms. Ferreri, which was on the two dates in question. That's what the current debate is.
Conservative
Rosemarie Falk Conservative Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK
MP Saks had already said, during the debate, that she didn't agree with it. I would assume that's what would translate to her vote and that she would vote against it.
Liberal
Conservative
Rosemarie Falk Conservative Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK
Right, but isn't the point of a debate to hear each other's side? I am expressing why I don't agree with what the Liberals have proposed in the comments from MP Saks.
Chair, am I not permitted to do that?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey
You should focus your comments on the amendment of Ms. Ferreri, which is currently on the floor.
I will move to another speaker if you have concluded your comments.