Okay.
Nancy, and then I want to go to Mr. Lemay.
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.
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.
3:40 p.m.
Conservative
3:40 p.m.
Liberal
Nancy Karetak-Lindell Liberal Nunavut, NU
I have one more point.
As we see in the House of Commons, sometimes an ordinary member is designated to sit in that chair if someone is not available from the whole list. I would think that same pattern would be followed.
I don't know if we need to get hung up on exactly what definition of chair we're talking about here, because we would tend to follow the same rules as the House of Commons follows. I've seen ordinary members sit in that chair when none of the other designates are available, and it doesn't disrupt the routine proceedings of the House of Commons.
3:40 p.m.
Conservative
3:40 p.m.
Bloc
Yvon Lévesque Bloc Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC
In this case, there are two vice-chairs and one chairman. One of the three should be present when we have a reduced quorum. It must, however, be possible to send the evidence from the meeting to the members of the committee afterwards. At least, that is what I understand.
In the case of an emergency meeting where witnesses appear and members of the committee cannot be present, do we send each of the committee members a transcript of the witnesses' testimony?
3:45 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Maurice Vellacott
Right. I think it's the normal custom or pattern anyhow to send out the blues to members who have not attended or were unable to be there.
3:45 p.m.
A voice
The blues are sent to all the members.
3:45 p.m.
Bloc
Marc Lemay Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
In fact, the reduced quorum is an exceptional procedure. I would like to draw your attention to what it says here: “That the Chair be authorized to hold meetings to receive evidence and to have that evidence printed when a quorum is not present, provided that at least three members are present, including one member of the opposition”.
I don't know how this could be done, but I would like us to specify the following: the chair could hold the meeting, but should he not be able to attend, at least one of the two vice-chairs would have to be present.
I sat on the heritage committee when it carried out a study on cinema. We travelled from one end of Canada to the other, and quite often the chair of the committee could not be present. One of the two vice-chairs was then in charge of hearing evidence. We have to proceed in that manner.
3:45 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Maurice Vellacott
Do we want to say something like, “the chair or, in the chair's absence, the vice-chairs be authorized to hold meetings to receive evidence, and to have that evidence printed when a quorum is not present, provided three members are present, including one member of the opposition”?
3:45 p.m.
Conservative
3:45 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Maurice Vellacott
That the chair or, in the chair's absence, one of the vice-chairs be authorized to hold meetings to receive...? You're moving that, Mr. Bruinooge?
3:45 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Maurice Vellacott
Would you like any more discussion, Nancy? Does that capture the sense of what you're intending, or do you want it to be broader to apply to any member?
I guess we should realize as well here, to quickly capsulize, that we're not talking about decisions of any kind being made in these types of meetings. We're talking about not embarrassing ourselves when we hear witnesses, and taking into account the good witnesses who have come forth.
Does this capture the intent, Nancy? Is it okay to do it in the fashion that was suggested?
3:45 p.m.
Liberal
Nancy Karetak-Lindell Liberal Nunavut, NU
I have no objection. I'll just make the comment again that I think it's understood that every time you say “chair” it does mean that in your absence it's one of the two vice-chairs.
3:45 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Maurice Vellacott
Okay. Well, I guess we'll capture it specifically, then.
Mr. Albrecht, go ahead.
3:45 p.m.
Conservative
Harold Albrecht Conservative Kitchener—Conestoga, ON
It's just a question of clarification. It mentions one member of the opposition. Is that any of the opposition parties?
3:45 p.m.
Conservative
Harold Albrecht Conservative Kitchener—Conestoga, ON
Secondly, if we're concerned about the image received on the part of delegations coming to us and there's no member of the governing party here, it seems to me that's also something that should be.... I know we can't make decisions, and I respect that, but I think if we're going to be sure that at least one member of the opposition is here, we should at least have one member of the party that's in power. This is new to me. There may be a reason that wasn't spelled out.
3:45 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Maurice Vellacott
Normally, except in the case of death or some other calamity, the chair is often there, and I intend to be here. I think it's more so there would not be any impression of any funny business going on, since the government has the chair, in this committee anyhow. If I recall correctly, in the past it was mostly so you couldn't just steam ahead and do something underhanded and to the exclusion of the opposition.
3:50 p.m.
Conservative
Harold Albrecht Conservative Kitchener—Conestoga, ON
Mr. Chair, I respect your response, but we just put an amendment in to say that the others could serve as the chair, so it is conceivable, although I admit very unlikely, that you could end up with no members on this side. I think that would give a negative impression to the witnesses who are coming here if we, as the government, aren't here.
3:50 p.m.
Conservative
Colin Mayes Conservative Okanagan—Shuswap, BC
I was just thinking that you really don't need to say, “in the absence of the chair”. I think you could say “a chair or a co-chair be authorized to hold meetings to receive evidence”.
3:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Maurice Vellacott
We don't term it “co-chairs”, but.... Are you trying to amend the motion?
3:50 p.m.
Conservative
