Evidence of meeting #1 for Industry, Science and Technology in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was chair.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4 p.m.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
Mr. Lake, could you go over that again, just so we understand the speaking order and the time allocation in your proposal?
4 p.m.
Conservative
Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB
Sure. Do you want me to read the whole motion one more time, or do you want me to just explain it?
4 p.m.
Conservative
Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB
Mr. Clerk, if I explain it in a way that isn't consistent with the way I wrote it, please let me know if you can.
There would be four questions for the first round of seven minutes each, and they would go Conservative, NDP, Conservative, Liberal. Then the next round would have seven five-minute questions---
4 p.m.
Conservative
Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB
It's seven five-minute questioning rounds, so seven times five. There are seven members each speaking and each having five minutes, which would go Conservative, NDP, Conservative, NDP, Conservative, NDP, Conservative. That way every member of the committee gets one round to ask questions before anybody gets a second. Of course if you want to transfer your time, you can do so within your own party, or whatever the case is.
4:05 p.m.
NDP
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
If my memory serves me correctly, the first round was basically seven minutes for each party, and then we moved into the five-minute round. I think that's more in keeping with the traditions of the committee.
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB
We had four parties, though, so there were four questions in the first round at that time. This is consistent with that.
4:05 p.m.
NDP
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
But it was based on that principle. We sort of adopted a bit more the practice of trying to get every member involved. That was new over the last couple of years. I don't know if it would be a friendly amendment, but we could do Conservative, NDP, Liberal and then move to the five-minute slot of Conservative, NDP, Conservative, NDP, Conservative, NDP, Conservative.
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB
If you want to go back to the NDP getting two rounds, as has been done in the past, we could.
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
4:05 p.m.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
That's quite all right.
I think Mr. Masse's friendly amendment is actually an appropriate one, because that is how we've been governed at the committee level. That being said, it looks as though the third round then replicates the first round. If we're looking at a one-minute presentation, we're looking at an hour and a half. We would basically have time for that third round, which would be then Conservative, NDP, Conservative, Liberal.
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB
I can't remember the last time we actually got to the end of a third round of questioning in this committee. Typically, if we have had a little bit of extra time it has been just the first two. So it would be Conservative and then NDP, and that would be it.
June 15th, 2011 / 4:05 p.m.
NDP
Glenn Thibeault NDP Sudbury, ON
Could you not put in there “at the discretion of the chair”? Was that a different motion in that motion?
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB
Exactly. If time permits, further rounds shall repeat the pattern of the first two at the discretion of the chair. That's sort of the way it's always been.
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
4:05 p.m.
NDP
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
We're going to find out right now. Mr. Lake is going to reread it now, and then we'll vote.
