Evidence of meeting #42 for Industry, Science and Technology in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was retirees.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sherry Romanado
We have MP Jaczek, and then we will go in camera. One moment.
MP Jaczek, go ahead.
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
Helena Jaczek Liberal Markham—Stouffville, ON
Thank you, Madam Chair.
We heard from the clerk about the witnesses scheduled for Thursday. I would be extremely interested in hearing from them. I think it's always important to get a balanced view in what we hear. I feel it's important that we continue the discussion.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sherry Romanado
Okay.
We can't go in camera until we deal with the motion before us with respect to moving directly to clause-by-clause consideration. Is there any other debate on the motion before us to move immediately to clause-by-clause consideration?
I don't know if you have your hand up again, Mr. Poilievre, or if you just didn't remove it.
12:15 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
Sorry. I was wondering why my shoulder was getting so tired. It's because I forgot to put my hand down.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sherry Romanado
Is there any further debate on the motion before us to move to clause-by-clause consideration immediately? If so, please raise your hand.
Okay, with that, I will move to a vote.
I'll turn it over—
12:15 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
I'm sorry; I have a point of order.
I understood that we were going to go in camera to find out about the witnesses.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sherry Romanado
I got clarity from the clerk that we can't actually go in camera until we finish with the motion before us, unfortunately. My apologies for the confusion.
12:15 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
To be clear, we're being asked to vote on whether or not we're going to hear witnesses whose identities we don't even know about.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sherry Romanado
If it's the will of the committee, we can ask the clerk to give us that information. Is it the will of the committee?
It is.
Okay, Mike, go ahead.
12:15 p.m.
The Clerk
We just have two outstanding witnesses that have been invited for next Tuesday. We have the Association canadienne des retraités and we also have the Canadian Union of Public Employees.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sherry Romanado
Now we are aware of what is still outstanding. We have witnesses scheduled for Thursday of this week and for Tuesday of next week. The plan was to do clause-by-clause study next Thursday.
Is there any further debate on the motion to move immediately to clause-by-clause consideration? If so, please raise your hand.
12:15 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
I propose a friendly amendment. I propose that we hear from the witnesses who are outstanding and then go to clause-by-clause consideration.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sherry Romanado
There's no such thing as a friendly amendment, but we have the amendment before us to have the outstanding witnesses for Thursday—
12:15 p.m.
Conservative
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sherry Romanado
You're sometimes overly friendly.
With that, we have some folks scheduled for Thursday and next Tuesday. If there's any debate on the amendment to the motion....
I'm just trying to figure out the wording, because the motion that was put forward is that we immediately go to clause-by-clause study. I'm not sure if there is a possibility of amending it. It says to go immediately to clause-by-clause study. I'm going to turn to the clerk for a second to see if he can clarify that.
12:15 p.m.
The Clerk
In this case, with the way the motion is structured, it would just be a reversal of the intent of the motion. The proper form would just be to vote against the motion.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sherry Romanado
Thank you. I'm not sure if that's clear.
I see MP Erskine-Smith has his hand up. Go ahead, MP Erskine-Smith.
June 1st, 2021 / 12:15 p.m.
Liberal
Nathaniel Erskine-Smith Liberal Beaches—East York, ON
There are two things.
First, I'm not sure everyone by the name of Carney would find you so friendly, Pierre.
Second, on the purpose of the motion, wouldn't it be possible simply to amend it? It's also possible for us to add witnesses in the future. Couldn't we simply say that we will hear from these two additional witnesses and then move immediately to clause-by-clause study? That would be consistent with the existing timeline and would then formalize the existing timeline, perhaps excessively in some ways.
We could vote it down and proceed as is, but if people just want the comfort that we're only going to hear from two additional witnesses, I'm fine with that too. It really makes no difference to me. As it stands, we have two additional witnesses and then we're moving to clause-by-clause study.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sherry Romanado
As the clerk explained, MP Erskine-Smith, we cannot amend the motion as it is structured. If we want to, we would vote on it, and if the motion is defeated, then perhaps we could have a further plan—
12:15 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
I have a point of order, Madam Chair.
I didn't hear the clerk say that we couldn't amend it at all. I think he said that my particular amendment was out of order, but I didn't hear him say that there are....
I've never heard of a motion that can't be amended at all. The only motion that can't be amended at all is the motion to challenge the chair, which we're not proposing. I don't know how we can just dismiss every single amendment as out of order.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sherry Romanado
It is amendable, but not the original motion as it is structured and not in the way you proposed. They were in conflict. His recommendation was that if we like, we could vote on the original motion, and then, if you wish, we could propose a work plan.
Right now, we have scheduled witnesses on Thursday and witnesses outstanding for Tuesday. My thoughts were that on Thursday of next week, we would do clause-by-clause consideration. The motion before us right now is to move immediately to clause-by-clause consideration. I need to know what the will of the committee is with respect to that motion. I wanted you to see where we're at in terms of the plan.
Is there further debate on the motion?
Go ahead, MP Erskine-Smith.
12:20 p.m.
Liberal
Nathaniel Erskine-Smith Liberal Beaches—East York, ON
With the two witnesses you listed, are we set to hear from department officials as well? That would obviously expand the witness list.
12:20 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sherry Romanado
There are more than two witnesses. There are two witnesses outstanding to respond to the invitation for next Tuesday, but there are witnesses who are confirmed for this Thursday, just so we're clear. I'll ask the clerk if he can confirm. I think we have ISED officials coming for clause-by-clause study, but I'll double-check with the clerk.
12:20 p.m.
The Clerk
Yes. Right now I've given the department a heads-up that they may be required for clause-by-clause, and I was waiting to see what the will of the committee was and if they wanted to invite them for that.