Industry Committee on Feb. 16th, 2016

[Frank Baylis, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

I think your example, say aerospace industry needs investment, and you're going to say it's new business—

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Can I finish?

I'm going to let you go ahead, but it's just that we sometimes have issues that are time sensitive. You have a majority on committee, so you can turn down anything you think is unreasonable on the spot.

[Frank Baylis, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

Give me a real example of something that's time sensitive.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

We've had aerospace, and we've had issues related to, for example, the Tesla airbag situation. There are plenty of things that have been brought forward, and they've taken too long. We have a history. If you look at the previous motions that were passed here, we never got to them because of time.

I understand about the time sensitivity of getting to Ottawa, but I can assure you that anyone who is interested in a subject matter will get to Ottawa. It's more than 24 hours between when the committee meets, whether we have something done on a Tuesday and we decide we're going to meet on a Thursday. If the members have done the proper work on the issue and have to prove that case when they come here, then they'll showcase witnesses for and against an issue.

[Frank Baylis, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

But Brian, if you read this, it says it has to be new business, so how can they have done any prior work?

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

It's easy. It happens every single day.

[Frank Baylis, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

But it says it cannot be, “unless the motion relates directly to business then under consideration”, so it cannot be something we're considering; it has to be new.

You're saying that for something like, for example, an investment in aerospace, I'm going to be told I've got 24 hours to read a bunch of stuff, get here, and vote. It makes no sense.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

No, you have to listen to witnesses and hear them out, and it's up to the committee to decide what the length of the meetings will be. They will be prepared there.

[Frank Baylis, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

Your argument is that the 24 hours—

[The Chair, Liberal, Dan Ruimy]

Gentleman, if I could interject, we should be focusing through the chair.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

I'm being cut off in answering questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Dan Ruimy]

If I can interject, I think it is not clear what this motion really is. If we can get the clerk to expand on it, so we have a better understanding of what it means, it might help us to understand this and move forward.

[The Clerk]

The objective of this motion is to establish a requirement of a delay before a committee can consider a new motion by a member of a committee. For example, if a member wishes to move that the committee study the Broadcasting Act, then I would circulate the motion to all members. They'd have it in their possession for either 24 or 48 hours. Then at the next meeting the motion would be receivable, the member could move that motion. At that time, the committee would debate the motion and make a decision on the motion. It's a requirement to make the motion receivable; that is what it is really.

[Alex Nuttall, Conservative, Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, ON]

Just to clarify through you, Mr. Chair, to the clerk, in the event of the governing party around the table not agreeing with the motion, would they not be able to (a) shoot it down, or (b) move it to another meeting if they needed to table it in some fashion?

[The Clerk]

Could you repeat your question, sir?

[Alex Nuttall, Conservative, Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, ON]

If there were concerns from the governing side of the table when there is a motion that was put in 24 hours earlier, and they didn't feel prepared enough to debate the item, would they (a) not be able to then vote it down once it comes to a vote in a meeting—

[The Clerk]

Yes, sir.

[Alex Nuttall, Conservative, Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, ON]

—or (b) if they have the votes, could they also push it or table it to other meetings?

[The Clerk]

Correct.

[Alex Nuttall, Conservative, Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, ON]

What we're arguing over here is whether something makes it on to an agenda and how long we need to do so. I'll give you an example. If there's an immediate matter that comes up on Wednesday, and we're meeting on Tuesdays and Thursdays, and we're going to break for the summer, we can do a couple of things. We can stick to a 48-hour time period—and I hope my colleagues would stay here through the weekend, and we can meet the next week—or we can have a 24-hour time period, and if we aren't at the place where people think they can support or object or determine an outcome that we can get behind it as a committee, that's another thing.

We're not arguing over something very complex here. It's just how long it takes to get something on the agenda.

[The Chair, Liberal, Dan Ruimy]

Mr. Arya.

[Chandra Arya, Liberal, Nepean, ON]

I understand our members' concerns for the efficiency and effectiveness, but I still feel 24 hours is rushed. At the minimum, 48 hours' notice is required.

Can I present an amended motion?

[The Chair, Liberal, Dan Ruimy]

Sure, yes.

[Chandra Arya, Liberal, Nepean, ON]

I move:

That 48 hours' notice shall be required for any substantive motion to be considered by the committee unless the motion relates directly to business then under consideration, and that the motion shall be filed and distributed to members by the clerk in both official languages, and that motions that are received by 5 p.m. shall be distributed to the members the same day.

[René Arseneault, Liberal, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Mr. Chair, I understand the amendment to the motion proposed by our colleague, but the debate will be the same. I think we have covered the issue. If it's in the procedure, I would ask for a vote on the amendment immediately.