Evidence of meeting #146 for Citizenship and Immigration in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was quebec.
A recording is available from Parliament.
3:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair (Mr. Robert Oliphant (Don Valley West, Lib.)) Liberal Rob Oliphant
I am going to call to order the 146th meeting of the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration. Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), we continue the study of migration challenges and opportunities for Canada in the 21st century.
We welcome our witnesses today. As we are coming to the end of our study, we reviewed our evidence and we found some areas that we really wanted—
Yes, Mr. Maguire.
3:45 p.m.
Conservative
Larry Maguire Conservative Brandon—Souris, MB
I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.
When we were here on Monday.... I guess that was our last meeting. I see you have a new number on this. I thought we were going forward with the suspended meeting that we had. I was speaking at that time, and I certainly wasn't done with my remarks. I just wanted to raise that issue. Having prepared for that as well, I just wanted to know what the situation is, because if that was the case, we would have carried forward with the same number on the meeting.
3:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Rob Oliphant
As members will remember, during our meeting on Monday the bells rang at 6:18 p.m. for a vote. I needed unanimous consent to continue the meeting. That unanimous consent was denied. Unanimous consent was also sought at that time to adjourn the meeting, and it was denied. Therefore, pursuant to Standing Order 115(5), the meeting was suspended at that point.
As has been the case at every meeting since I've been the chair, and even prior to that, when we have suspended the meeting for votes, we have resumed the meeting immediately after the votes, unless there has been some notice otherwise. For clarity, I did say, as soon as I had suspended the meeting, that we would be returning after the votes. There was no specified time, except that we did have the convention in this committee of returning after votes. When we returned after the votes, I waited a significant amount of time and did not reach a quorum. We had no quorum to continue the meeting. So, due to the lack of quorum, the meeting was adjourned.
Page 1097 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice, third edition, is clear on this. It states, “Meetings under way may be adjourned if quorum is lost during the sitting.”
In fact, we did find a precedent for this committee, which happened on June 13, 2013, during the time when Mr. Tilson was chair of the standing committee. That meeting was adjourned for the lack of quorum following a suspension, even though it had not been recommenced. Those minutes are available for that meeting of June 13, 2013.
3:45 p.m.
Conservative
David Tilson Conservative Dufferin—Caledon, ON
I would like to speak to Mr. Maguire's point of order, Mr. Chairman.
3:45 p.m.
Conservative
David Tilson Conservative Dufferin—Caledon, ON
You are quite right. The recollection of what happened at the last meeting was that the bells rang. After several proposals, you agreed to suspend the meeting. You suspended the meeting. You did not indicate on the record when the meeting was suspended until. My recollection....
Quite frankly, the Liberal members left because they didn't hear this discussion, but I did, because the NDP member....
February 27th, 2019 / 3:45 p.m.
Conservative
David Tilson Conservative Dufferin—Caledon, ON
Alistair came to you after you had suspended the meeting and asked, “When are you suspending to?” You have to remember that everybody had left the meeting. I don't know where all the Conservatives were, but I was sitting here and I heard the discussion.
That didn't take place on the record, so as far as I'm concerned, Mr. Chairman, the issue of the suspension was made, and it would be assumed—and there are other precedents that say that, which I will refer to—that it should proceed to the next meeting.
Let's say that your understanding is correct that you continued the meeting. The meeting was never called. The meeting was never recalled. As we showed here, only half the committee was here. You never called on the record for this meeting to continue at that time. It was not on the record.
However, let's say you did. The same book you referred to, on pages 402 and 403 says:
should the House adjourn for lack of quorum, any Order of the Day under consideration at the time, with the exception of non-votable items of Private Members' Business, retains its precedence on the Order Paper for the next sitting. The lack of quorum means only that the House adjourns for the day.
There's another quote, on page 401, that talks about what the process is when members are not present in the House:
If fewer than 20 members are present, the Speaker may adjourn the House until the next sitting day. The Speaker may take such an initiative only until the moment when the House is called to order; once the sitting has begun, "control over the competence of the House is transferred from the Speaker to the House itself...the Speaker has no right to close a sitting at his own discretion”.
That applies to you, sir. You have no right to do what you're doing now, because suspending the meeting means that it continues on at this meeting.
Of course, Standing Order 116 says:
In a standing, special or legislative committee, the Standing Orders shall apply so far as may be applicable, except the Standing Orders as to the election of a Speaker, seconding of motions, limiting the number of times of speaking and the length of speeches.
As I said, Mr. Chairman, the meeting on Monday, February 25 was not adjourned. It was only suspended. The chair—you, sir—suspended the meeting for votes. The meeting did not resume because it was never called. You never indicated on the record when it was to continue again.
Also in this book, on page 1098, it says:
Committees frequently suspend their meetings for various reasons, with the intention to resume later in the day. Suspensions may last a few seconds, several hours, or span even more than one day, depending on the circumstances, and a meeting may be suspended more than once. The committee Chair must clearly announce the suspension, so that recording ceases until the meeting resumes. Meetings are suspended, for example, to change from public to in camera mode, or the reverse; to enable witnesses to be seated or to hear witnesses by video conference; to put an end to disorder; to resolve a problem within the simultaneous interpretation system [and so forth].
You recalled a meeting that I was chairing back in 2010, and I recall that well.
3:50 p.m.
Liberal
3:50 p.m.
Conservative
3:50 p.m.
Liberal
Peter Fragiskatos Liberal London North Centre, ON
I'm making the point of order, Mr. Chair, simply to point out the redundancy of the argument. With all due respect to the member, we know what he's getting at. He's going into repetition now. I would like to—
3:50 p.m.
Conservative
David Tilson Conservative Dufferin—Caledon, ON
You don't know what I'm going into. I'm about to tell you what happened in 2010.
3:50 p.m.
Liberal
3:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Rob Oliphant
I will let the member continue, but I do ask you to bring your point. It was 2013, not 2010, by the way. June 13, 2013 was the meeting I was referring to.
3:50 p.m.
Conservative
David Tilson Conservative Dufferin—Caledon, ON
Well, Mr. Chairman, what happened at that meeting was that we suspended. The meeting was suspended so that we could go to the House. The meeting never reconvened. It was held at the time the House was about to adjourn for an election. There was a prorogation that took place. That committee never met again.
We met while the suspension took place. I'm simply saying, Mr. Chairman, that you do not have the right to unilaterally say that this meeting continues on another topic. We are still dealing with Ms. Rempel's motion. Because of the process that followed, you can't unilaterally say, “Well, we're going to deal with this another time, maybe next year.” You just can't do that.
3:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Rob Oliphant
Thank you.
The member has raised a point. I am, however, going to stand by the fact that the meeting was adjourned by the fact that I could not get a quorum to reconvene the meeting the same day. Following that precedent, I will declare that the meeting was adjourned.
We never reissue a notice of meeting for a meeting that is going on. You are gathered today pursuant to Standing Order 108(2) on a notice of meeting that you all received, with appropriate notice to continue this study.
I will rule that the previous meeting was adjourned, and we are now here for the sole purpose of continuing with our witnesses, who have responded to our request to hear them.
Of course, there can always be a motion. Not on a point of order, but when a speaker has a chance they can always move to change the meeting agenda. That is within your right. That's a non-debatable motion. That can happen once someone has the floor, not on a point of order.
3:50 p.m.
Conservative
3:50 p.m.
Conservative
3:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Rob Oliphant
Excuse me, the chair is speaking.
The meeting was adjourned because I did not have quorum, and this is now a new meeting.
3:50 p.m.
Conservative
David Tilson Conservative Dufferin—Caledon, ON
No, it wasn't. It was suspended. You never reconvened the meeting, Mr. Chairman.
3:50 p.m.
Conservative
David Tilson Conservative Dufferin—Caledon, ON
But you never did. You never reconvened the meeting.
Look at the record. Look at the minutes. There are no minutes.
3:50 p.m.
Liberal
