Evidence of meeting #30 for Industry, Science and Technology in the 40th Parliament, 3rd session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was meeting.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Marc Garneau Liberal Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC
Mr. Chair, I just want to ask you this. Since you said that you would terminate at five o'clock, can I assume that the motion that I put forward will be voted on?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
If debate has been exhausted, your motion will be put to a vote. The only other option you have is if somebody moves to extend the committee beyond five o'clock to a particular time. However, I advise you that the motion to extend the meeting beyond five o'clock is also debatable and amendable, so....
The long and short of it is that the veto that the government members have, if they so wish, is to continue this debate until five o'clock, at which point I will adjourn. The veto that opposition members have is that the six of you, in concert, have the majority on this committee. So both of you have a certain degree of control. In the interests of compromise, I think we need to arrive at a particular date. We've come to agreement on the decision to have a meeting. I think there's consensus that we should have a second day of meetings on this. The issue now is the date.
We have lots of time left, and--
Liberal
Conservative
Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB
I don't know; maybe we can come to a compromise.
On the point you make about a consensus on having a meeting, just to be clear, I don't agree that we need to have a meeting. We've heard from the witnesses. We're going to hear the same testimony again. I don't personally agree with that.
What I have tried to do is to say that it looks like there's a consensus among the opposition parties to have a meeting, and we don't have the numbers, so clearly we're going to have a meeting at some point. Now we're trying to decide on a date, and this is the back and forth. I'm hoping that there will be some compromise on the other side.
One thing I would say, and maybe there's some room for compromise in this, is that maybe we could call a two-minute time out in the meeting here. If Mr. Garneau gives us the list of witnesses that he's put forward--I assume that in the spirit of fairness he's contacted witnesses on both sides of the debate--and if we're satisfied that some of the witnesses on his list are witnesses on the opposite side from him in the debate, then clearly we can get witnesses who have had some notice. But at this point, it seems like we're being set up by the opposition parties for a debate with absolutely no notice on the other side.
Conservative
Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB
I just want to say one other thing, and that's to Mr. Bouchard's point regarding four days of preparation time for witnesses who would be called and haven't had any notice that they're going to be called. It is the summer. Some people take vacation during the summer. If they're on vacation today, a Monday, they're probably still going to be on vacation on Friday. I don't think it's reasonable that in the middle of the summer we would be calling witnesses for a meeting within the same week that we decide on the meeting. It's just completely unreasonable.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
Thank you, Mr. Lake.
Mr. Lake has suggested that we suspend for five minutes. Is it the wish of the committee to suspend for five minutes so that some informal discussions can take place, and I'll reconvene the meeting in five minutes? Is it the wish of the committee to do that?
Mr. Bélanger.
Liberal
Mauril Bélanger Liberal Ottawa—Vanier, ON
Mr. Chairman, I wouldn't oppose informal discussions. I think they can be quite productive. But I think we need to also remember that, time and again, we've had meetings convene in the same week. We do that all the time.
Liberal
Mauril Bélanger Liberal Ottawa—Vanier, ON
With three days' notice, which is a full three days' notice, I suspect that we could have a fairly significant brochette of people willing to appear before us having either point of view. So I don't think it's the impossibility of having a meeting on Friday that we're debating; it's the desirability.
Thank you.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
Just back to the proposal by Mr. Lake to suspend for five minutes, shall we suspend for five minutes?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
It is agreed by the committee to suspend for five minutes.
We'll come out of suspension and see if we have some sort of consensus.
Monsieur Bouchard.
Bloc
Robert Bouchard Bloc Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC
I would like to ask a question. If we take 10 minutes for an informal discussion, could we add this time to the end of the meeting?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
We are coming out of suspension. We have about 22 minutes remaining in this meeting called for this day, upon the request of four members, to discuss whether or not we're going to have a second day of hearings on the long-form census and when that second day of hearings will be.
On my list I have Mr. McTeague as next.
Liberal
Dan McTeague Liberal Pickering—Scarborough East, ON
Chair, I think Mr. Garneau may have some comments, but I think we have not been able to find reasonable grounds.
I want to stress something, Chair. I've been here almost as long as, and perhaps longer than, Mr. Bélanger. I know that we have had sessions during the summer; I can only say with absolute candour and clarity that I have never seen a number of people willing to come before Parliament and come before this committee to testify. The sooner we do this, the better.
I want to also signal to you, Chair, that I take it you will not be available next week. We have a caucus the following week. We are now coming dangerously close to backing up on issues that we have to deal with, that we were dealing with in June, for which Mr. Lake, as parliamentary secretary, and I believe you, Chair, pointed out very adequately and appropriately: we're not going to be able to pass even some of the minimal bills brought by private members and the government bills that have been brought before this committee.
The decision to go with changing the long-form census was one conducted by the government in the dead of summer. That it has had such a reaction is entirely the responsibility of the government. We are doing our job as parliamentarians, and not from a partisan point of view, to recognize very much the angst that exists out there. The sooner that is dealt with, we'll be able to get on with other business, Mr. Chair.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
Thank you, Mr. McTeague.
I just want to note that there's nothing to preclude the committee, if the committee agrees today, from meeting next week. There are rules and procedures in place to ensure that the meeting can be held. The vice-chair would have to assume the chair in order to hold the meeting, but there's nothing to preclude that meeting from being held. If the meeting is held, I will make you my commitment as chair that I'll work with the clerk and the other House of Commons staff to ensure that the witnesses you want to appear will appear. So at that point, it's just a question of having the vice-chair assume the chair.
Mr. Bouchard.
Bloc
Bloc
Robert Bouchard Bloc Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC
I'm referring to the last meeting we held. I think that was similar to what we're proposing today. Despite the short notice, we all came here and had the meeting. We received witnesses who provided high-quality testimony.
That is why, in my opinion, the time issue is not valid. So, I am in favour of Friday, August 20. We could very well hold the meeting, for example, from 9 a.m. to 2 p.m. since it is a Friday. I think it is quite reasonable to have the meeting on Friday, August 20, given the urgency and importance of the topic.