Citizenship and Immigration Committee on June 23rd, 2011

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Chair, I would then look to the New Democratic caucus. I appreciate one of the New Democratic members making reference to the issue of tradition. There is a need for us to look at tradition. I don't believe there is a case that can be cited. You have to ask why it's coming up now. I don't understand it.

I look to Mr. Dykstra in asking why it is, or whether he would consider an amendment that would put us into the first round. Quite frankly, I don't mind saying that we'll sit in a committee as long as they want to sit. If you want to sit for three or four hours so that every member gets the opportunity to ask a question, I'm okay with that. But I believe we need to ensure that all political parties represented on this committee are included in the first round. Is that not a fair request to make? This way you still get your members to ask the question. If you don't think that's fair, then at least tell me of another committee, especially in a majority situation, in which a third party has never been able to ask a question in the first round.

[Rick Dykstra, Conservative, St. Catharines, ON]

I'm happy to respond quickly to Mr. Lamoureux.

Certainly every committee is allowed to work their process in terms of how they determine speaking orders. Then it comes to a vote and they come to an agreement as to how they would do that. There certainly are other committees working through similar processes as these to adjust for or make available the opportunity to question witnesses.

Look, I put a lot of thought into this and a lot of time into this. And my belief is that the best way for this to be broken down in terms of who speaks and for how long is to have the percentage of time based on the proportion of seats you hold in the House of Commons. I can't think of a fairer way to address this issue. It puts either the NDP or the Conservatives, our party, in a deficit position if you're allocated more time.

Now, I will say this. You're kind of hung up on this issue of first and second round. When we ask questions, this is set up to ensure that every party has the opportunity to question witnesses, whether it be a one-hour meeting or a two-hour meeting. I can also tell you that in a one-hour meeting, if we were to have three witnesses speak for 24 minutes, the first and second rounds would equal 36 minutes. That gives you the full hour.

If you'll notice, the Conservative Party is third in the second round. On a regular basis, the individual who fits into that time schedule will not get his or her full time allocation, because the meeting may start a couple of minutes late or a witness may go on a little longer and may take up a couple of minutes of time. Therefore, in the spirit of fairness, rather than put you guys in the third position, I determined that the best thing would be to make sure that you always get your full time allocation. We would then be in a position of receiving probably less in the second round than you have.

You may not be happy with this, but in terms of fairness, and if you want to get hung up on first round, second round, you're going to get your time to question witnesses. Your time is based on the allocation of seats you have in the House of Commons. I can't think of any other way that would be more fair.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

I'm going to suspend for five minutes.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

We're back in order.

Mr. Dykstra.

[Rick Dykstra, Conservative, St. Catharines, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

With your wise decision to adjourn, I think we have come to what would be considered a fair compromise. That is, we would simply add the Liberal Party to the first round of questioning. Our first round of questioning would consist of four sections of time, if you will. The first would be Conservative, at seven minutes; the second would be the NDP, at seven minutes; the third would be the Liberal Party, at five minutes; and the fourth would be the Conservative Party, at seven minutes.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

And the second round would remain the same?

[Rick Dykstra, Conservative, St. Catharines, ON]

No, the second round would then go New Democrat, Conservative. The third round would be Conservative, New Democrat, Conservative. And the fourth round would be the same.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

The fourth round would be Conservative, New Democratic.

[Rick Dykstra, Conservative, St. Catharines, ON]

Right.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

And if by chance we get to a fifth round--

[Rick Dykstra, Conservative, St. Catharines, ON]

We'd go back to the original sequence again.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

The first sequence being round one.

[Rick Dykstra, Conservative, St. Catharines, ON]

Right.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Is that a friendly amendment?

Mr. Lamoureux.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Grudgingly, yes, I believe it is, Mr. Chair.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Could I make--

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Don't wreck this.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

No, I'm not. Don't worry, Mr. Chairman.

I'd like to make one more friendly amendment, which is in the fourth line, where it says “when there are three witnesses, each witness...”. I think that should say “when there are three or more witnesses”. There could be a time when you have four witnesses, so I think it should be “three or more”.

[Rick Dykstra, Conservative, St. Catharines, ON]

Mr. Weston pointed that out as well.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Are you clear on that, Madam Clerk?

Is everyone clear on the amendments?

Ms. Sitsabaiesan, you're on the speakers list, as is Mr. Davies again. Did you wish to speak on--

[Rathika Sitsabaiesan, NDP, Scarborough—Rouge River, ON]

I actually have a question on the amendment--not the second amendment, but the first amendment.

When we get to the fifth round, if we do, it goes Conservative, New Democratic, Liberal, Conservative again. My question is whether it is again seven, seven, five, and seven minutes, or is it all five minutes for the fifth round?

[Rick Dykstra, Conservative, St. Catharines, ON]

We go back to the original cycle again.

[Rathika Sitsabaiesan, NDP, Scarborough—Rouge River, ON]

Okay.

[Rick Dykstra, Conservative, St. Catharines, ON]

So that we don't complicate things we would go back to the original.

[Rathika Sitsabaiesan, NDP, Scarborough—Rouge River, ON]

I just wanted that clarification. Thank you.