Evidence of meeting #2 for Indigenous and Northern Affairs in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was chair.
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Maurice Vellacott
And did you want it to read the same thereafter, “starting with the Bloc Québécois, the New Democratic Party...”?
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Maurice Vellacott
So it would be starting with the Bloc, the NDP, and you're coming back then to the Conservative Party here, I guess. So instead of saying the Liberal Party, it would be the Conservative Party. Right? We've got to change that word.
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Maurice Vellacott
Okay, Jean. So you're moving a motion that it be amended to say.... Well, we don't really have a motion, so you're not amending anything, but it would read, “ten (10) minutes for the questioner of the official opposition...”.
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
4:15 p.m.
NDP
Jean Crowder NDP Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC
I'm saying that we leave the ten at the top, and the first number, where it says nine, put seven, and then the rest of the numbers would stay the same.
4:15 p.m.
Liberal
Anita Neville Liberal Winnipeg South Centre, MB
My question is about the round of speakers. Is it the intent that it be done in a manner that each member has an opportunity to speak, rather than...?
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Maurice Vellacott
Well, this does talk in terms of giving everybody the chance. Is that okay?
4:15 p.m.
Liberal
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Maurice Vellacott
Okay. That's what this does seem to represent here.
Are there any other suggestions with respect to this motion to adjust it or to change it?
Colin.
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
Colin Mayes Conservative Okanagan—Shuswap, BC
Mr. Chair, let's say there is not full attendance of a party. Would somebody have the opportunity to speak for somebody who's absent? I think it's important to use the word “present”, that time allocation be given to only those who are present at the meeting. That is kind of understood, but I think it's important.
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Maurice Vellacott
Well, it is, because if there were no Bloc member, I would pass to the NDP, or vice versa. If there were no Liberals here, then I'd move to the Bloc.
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
Colin Mayes Conservative Okanagan—Shuswap, BC
But if each person were given an opportunity, and there were two Liberals missing and there were two here, would they have the option to speak for the other two who weren't present, to take their allocation?
4:15 p.m.
Voices
No.
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Maurice Vellacott
I think so.
If we're all okay with that, that's how I would understand it, and I would rule it that way.
Marc.
4:15 p.m.
Bloc
Marc Lemay Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
As in any committee I have sat on, the members present are the ones who speak. They are the ones who, with the chair, ensure that there is a second round after the first.
For instance, the Bloc Québecois gets the floor twice. Afterward, if on your side some members have not spoken, you get the floor until the time has elapsed. However, you cannot speak in lieu of a committee member who is absent. That's clear.
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Maurice Vellacott
Right. Merci.
Jean moves the motion....
You have a question, Todd?
4:15 p.m.
Liberal
Todd Russell Liberal Labrador, NL
The purpose of the committee is to fully examine witnesses, if we take our duties seriously. From my own perspective, I'd just like to ask the person who moved this quasi amendment--