Evidence of meeting #50 for Citizenship and Immigration in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was board.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Norman Doyle
Repeat itself. Thank you.
That's an amendment.
Mr. Telegdi, I think, to the main motion.
12:50 p.m.
Liberal
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
12:50 p.m.
Liberal
Andrew Telegdi Liberal Kitchener—Waterloo, ON
Yes. I always appreciate Mr. Siksay's contribution. The only thing that I have is that all members should be able to speak.
I wonder, in terms of the fifth round, in case we get the opportunity—and it's not very often we get that opportunity—I think instead of giving somebody seven minutes because you start a new round, if you go back to seven minutes, seven minutes, seven minutes, and seven minutes, the chances of getting beyond that for the second question is not very likely. So in that sense I like the five minutes because it affords — and I hope it can be done faster. But as soon as you say seven minutes, then somebody might feel they want to take the whole seven minutes, even though they have a 30-second question and a 30-second answer.
I like the fifth round the way it sits, because otherwise you'd have to go seven minutes. I think once you have that seven minutes at the start, that's fine. Once your round of questions is complete, if you start something else, then we start a new round.
12:55 p.m.
NDP
Bill Siksay NDP Burnaby—Douglas, BC
Mr. Chair, I'd be happy to make a friendly amendment that said “after which this schedule repeat with a five-minute time limit in all rounds”.
12:55 p.m.
NDP
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
12:55 p.m.
Liberal
Omar Alghabra Liberal Mississauga—Erindale, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Obviously we all understand why Mr. Siksay is not comfortable with the proposal. It has nothing to do with his personal contribution, but we need to set the rules, regardless of the individuals who are here.
You might not be here at the next meeting, Mr. Siksay. You might have a replacement. So it has nothing to do with the individuals who are members of the committee; it has to do with establishing rules that apply fairness to everybody, and I think the main motion proposes something that I've seen other committees do. After the first amendment has been amended again, I don't see a problem with it, making it five minutes.
As far as the second amendment is concerned, I don't really agree with it. I think the idea here is to give everybody the opportunity to speak, including the opportunity to give their time to somebody else, and also to have a fair representation of all the parties represented in committee before the second round is started. It would be unfair if the NDP gets three or four chances while they have only one seat on the committee, while the other parties have more seats and fewer chances.
Thank you.
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Norman Doyle
Thank you, Mr. Alghabra.
Mr. Gravel, did you want to make a comment?
12:55 p.m.
Bloc
Raymond Gravel Bloc Repentigny, QC
My remarks will be brief.
I agree on the motion as it stands, but I also agree with Mr. Siksay that the same speaker should not speak twice during a single round.
For example, if there are three Conservative members and one of them passes his turn on the fourth round, that means that he'll be able to speak second during the fifth round. We have to follow this procedure to the letter because it's a matter of justice for everyone. Every member is entitled to speak, and, when everyone has spoken, he or she can speak again in the fifth round. We must keep this fifth round because it is important that we have an opportunity to speak again if we have something to say.
So I agree on the wording as it stands.
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Norman Doyle
Thank you, Mr. Gravel.
The first amendment was “after which this schedule will repeat itself, with a five-minute time limit on each round.”
12:55 p.m.
NDP
Bill Siksay NDP Burnaby—Douglas, BC
Is it to delete round five, and after the round four explanation, to add “after which this schedule will repeat”—
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Norman Doyle
That it will repeat itself, with a five-minute time limit on each round.
Are you ready for the question?
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Norman Doyle
The first amendment was that we would go to the four rounds, after which the schedule would repeat itself, with a five-minute time limit on each round.
(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
The second amendment was that no individual member should be allowed to participate more than once.
(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
On the third amendment, what are we talking about here? There was another amendment here—
12:55 p.m.
NDP
Bill Siksay NDP Burnaby—Douglas, BC
I would like to move that no individual member be allowed to share their allotted time with another member.
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Norman Doyle
The amendment is that no individual member be allowed to share their allotted time with another member.
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Two out of three ain't bad, Mr. Siksay.
I'll now call the vote on the main motion.
(Motion as amended agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
The meeting is adjourned.