Evidence of meeting #17 for Citizenship and Immigration in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was claimants.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Rick Dykstra Conservative St. Catharines, ON
If you'd give me a chance to explain while you're looking, it would be great. Do I have the floor, Mr. Chair?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Tilson
Just give me one second. We had a motion for four days of clause-by-clause. That was amended to make the clause-by-clause two days, the 1st and the 3rd. That's why there's a little bit of confusion up here.
It said with respect to the last two days there would be additional evenings, of up to three hours' duration, beginning the 6th, and on the last day to the end, which means 11:59.
So my interpretation is that we don't have any more meetings after 11:59, unless there is unanimous consent. That was the decision.
Conservative
Rick Dykstra Conservative St. Catharines, ON
Olivia, you asked a question. There is such a simple answer to this. We all agreed that we are going to conclude our meetings by June 3 at 11:59. What was included in that condition to be able to get it back to the House—we could have third reading and get it over to the Senate before we rose for the summer—was an agreement that, number one, we were going to meet as a subcommittee to go through what all the potential amendments were going to be from each of the four parties, so we could make sure we laid out a process to go through clause-by-clause that was fair to everybody, so all amendments could go and there would be no surprises, and there was--
Conservative
Rick Dykstra Conservative St. Catharines, ON
Yes, that's right, before the 1st, so we need to set that meeting.
The final, most important part of that is that there is an agreement here that we are going to make sure--and we in fact agreed with each other and have guaranteed it--that there will be no filibusters, no attempt to get out of any type of vote on any one of the clauses by trying to carry this out to 11:59.
So I think we have a pretty darn good process in place to take us through for those two days, and in fact I can assure the chair that we are not going to individually--I'm speaking from a party perspective--try to hold up or change anything or try to not include something for discussion or debate prior to 11:59.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Tilson
The chair doesn't recall some of those things, like agreements for no filibustering. I assume that's an agreement between the--
Conservative
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Tilson
I assume that's an agreement between the critics.
As far as I'm concerned, however, this dealing of the hearings and the clause-by-clause ends on June 3 at, if necessary--I put those words in--11:59.
NDP
Olivia Chow NDP Trinity—Spadina, ON
Mr. Chair, just for argument's sake, I'm not saying it would happen, but what would happen if a member of the government decided, because they don't like the amendments, because they think the amendments would pass, that we'd just keep talking until 11:59 and we'd never get to vote on the amendments?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Tilson
It's now been said by Mr. Dykstra, which I don't think is in the motion, and I gather the way he's saying it he can confirm this, that there's an agreement between the critics that there will be no filibustering.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Tilson
There are no time limits on debates, so I'm relying on you people. It's your show.
Bloc
Thierry St-Cyr Bloc Jeanne-Le Ber, QC
In any case, the majority will always win. There is no way around that. Everyone was acting in good faith. We will get through this. If we are dealing with a minority partner who is not acting in good faith, this partner will not be able to hold up our proceedings, because, at the end of the day, the committee will decide what the bill will look like once it has completed its work.
Conservative