Evidence of meeting #1 for Industry, Science and Technology in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was chair.
A recording is available from Parliament.
3:45 p.m.
Liberal
Anthony Rota Liberal Nipissing—Timiskaming, ON
Is Mr. Bouchard asking for a person from each of the opposition parties to be present, or a person from any opposition party?
3:45 p.m.
Bloc
Robert Bouchard Bloc Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC
No, I am asking that the three committee members include at least one opposition member.
3:45 p.m.
Conservative
Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB
So it actually makes sense without the amendment, then, just to leave it as it is written. The amendment actually takes away the requirement for an opposition member, so let's just leave it as it is, maybe. Does it make sense to leave it as is?
I think the amendment you're moving actually takes away that requirement to have an opposition member, and I don't think you intend to do that. With your amendment, we could meet with three government members if we wanted to. I'm not sure that's what you intended. I'm thinking probably not.
3:45 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
If I could clarify, what Monsieur Vincent is proposing is to eliminate the last part of the motion, so from the clause that starts with “and provided that if no member of the opposition is present 10 minutes after the designated start of the meeting, the meeting may proceed”.
3:50 p.m.
Conservative
Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB
No, he said after the comma, the comma is after the word “present”, at least in English. He said after the comma; that was what we heard.
3:50 p.m.
Conservative
3:50 p.m.
Bloc
Robert Vincent Bloc Shefford, QC
I will read the motion in full and I will tell you where I want it to end:
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 (3) members are present, including one member of the Opposition.
3:50 p.m.
Conservative
3:50 p.m.
An hon. member
So moved.
3:50 p.m.
Conservative
Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB
You can't just move it. Now you're saying, basically, that if no one from the opposition shows up, you can't have a meeting, right?
3:50 p.m.
An hon. member
Yes.
3:50 p.m.
Bloc
Robert Vincent Bloc Shefford, QC
I did not say anything about that. The motion specifies that “...si au moins trois (3) membres sont présents, dont un membre de l'opposition...“
We take out everything that follows, that is “...et que, s'il n'y a aucun membre de l'opposition, dix minutes...“
3:50 p.m.
Liberal
Anthony Rota Liberal Nipissing—Timiskaming, ON
I would like to ask the clerk a question, please.
When do we use a reduced quorum? Are decisions made with a reduced quorum?
When do you use a reduced quorum, and what exactly is its purpose? Are there any meaningful decisions made during a reduced quorum?
3:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
I think the whole idea behind a reduced quorum is to not waste the witnesses' time. Often we have witnesses who come from across the country to see us, and for whatever reason, we may not have an exact quorum at 3:30. We have four witnesses who are at the table, members aren't here because they're tied up in other committees or in other business, and if the meeting doesn't start to receive their testimony, then it's wasted time for them.
I think the whole idea behind a reduced quorum is to allow the witnesses to read testimony into the record, while at the same time ensuring that no votes can take place and that no other debate or votes can take place. The whole idea behind this motion is just to allow the committee to receive testimony in the event that, for whatever reason, we don't have enough people here for an official quorum.
3:50 p.m.
Liberal
Anthony Rota Liberal Nipissing—Timiskaming, ON
That was my understanding, so I'm wondering what difference it makes whether we lop that wording off or keep it there. At least we can keep going, I guess.
3:50 p.m.
Liberal
Marc Garneau Liberal Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC
I believe it is important to keep that 10 minutes in there, because if the idea is to hear witnesses who've come from across the country, but nobody has shown up after 10 minutes, I think we should proceed.
3:50 p.m.
Conservative
Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB
Keep in mind that there is no voting during that time. We're not going to pass anything.
3:50 p.m.
Liberal
Marc Garneau Liberal Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC
It's just to hear witnesses; that's where I was going.
3:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
Does anybody else have any further debate on this?
Mr. Bouchard.