Evidence of meeting #25 for Subcommittee on International Human Rights in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was subcommittee.
A recording is available from Parliament.
1:10 p.m.
Conservative
Russ Hiebert Conservative South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC
So it would be Tuesday and Wednesday, one to two.
1:10 p.m.
Liberal
Irwin Cotler Liberal Mount Royal, QC
I have a problem because on Wednesday at one o'clock is the women's caucus that I attend.
1:10 p.m.
Bloc
Johanne Deschamps Bloc Laurentides—Labelle, QC
In fact, I have the same objections. I would prefer that we keep the formula you are currently proposing.
1:10 p.m.
NDP
Wayne Marston NDP Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON
Our caucus meetings tend to run sometimes up till one o'clock. It's going to be tight for us. But if we're in Centre Block, I suppose that wouldn't be too bad.
1:10 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Scott Reid
Well, we wouldn't be at Centre Block, as a practical matter. Wednesday you wanted to because of the fact that....
You said twelve to one or one to two?
1:10 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Scott Reid
One to two. It might be possible; the trouble is the two rooms we normally go back and forth between are occupied between the Liberal and the Conservative caucuses. I don't know if they can make the change over that quickly because they're secured by the RCMP. So that might be problematic from that point of view.
1:10 p.m.
Conservative
1:10 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Scott Reid
Yes. We can inquire. But I think there might be an issue with those rooms.
Mr. Silva.
1:10 p.m.
Liberal
Mario Silva Liberal Davenport, ON
I'd like to raise three points. One is that I'm fine with the proposal of Mondays and Tuesdays and the time...sorry, Tuesdays and Thursdays, one to two--I'm okay with that.
Two, Wednesday is a bad idea because that tends to be the day of caucus meetings, so lunch time is a time you can actually meet with people. It's the only day I have available to meet with people, even for lunch. It really could be rushed, as it is for one o'clock.
Three, I would say that maybe what members should do is also hand in their meeting schedules, because we sort of chose Tuesdays and Thursdays from one to two based around people's committee schedules. I know my committee, for example, now meets Mondays and Wednesdays in the afternoons—it's no longer on Tuesdays and Thursdays. I'm fine with the proposal of Tuesdays and Thursdays; I don't have a problem with that. But if there are other times we could meet for two hours, I have a lot more flexibility than I did before. I can tell you that much. I'm not sure if it's the case for all members.
1:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Scott Reid
The sense I'm getting—I think it's good if everybody could submit their regular schedule of committees to the clerk.
We have a new clerk, by the way. I meant to do this right off the bat. Unfortunately, we're losing one Julie, but we're getting another.
If everybody could do that—I'm asserting that we should work on the basis of the current schedule until further notice and perhaps adjustments can be made as we go.
There were a number of documents distributed to members of the committee. I want to make sure that everybody got them. The first concerns the routine motions that we had previously adopted. Every committee, of course—and subcommittee—has its own list of such rules. They're kind of standard. We did make a slight variation. I think the only variation we actually made was that we said it's important that if you have a motion you want to get on the agenda for the next meeting, it has to be submitted by 3 p.m., not the day before but the day before that. Is that correct? I'll let you read the exact motion because I want to make sure.
We did it in French.
That a two working days' notice be given for any substantive motion to be considered by the subcommittee, and that notices of motion be filed with the clerk of the subcommittee by 3 p.m. Upon receipt of the notice, the clerk shall put the motion on the agenda of the subcommittee's next meeting and distribute it to members in both official languages.
So that's what we had agreed on last time. I just wanted to indicate that one. Everything else is the same as was discussed before, as is standard.
Yes, Mr. Marston.
1:15 p.m.
NDP
Wayne Marston NDP Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON
My apologies. My headset was cutting out so I had to change in mid...all I really need to know is that the deadline time is three o'clock?
1:15 p.m.
NDP
1:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Scott Reid
Yes, so that means Friday in the case of a Tuesday meeting and Tuesday in the case of a Thursday meeting. I guess we should make sure that everybody has your e-mail address. They can send it in to you if they want to send it that way. So we'll just make sure that everybody gets....
We also have a list of correspondence received, a list of witnesses that has been submitted vis-à-vis our ongoing Venezuela hearings, a list of witnesses who have appeared vis-à-vis the Venezuela hearings, and finally the calendar. I think we can safely go through the correspondence and the witnesses, and then I think we'll do the calendar in camera.
Before we get to the correspondence, much of which asks us to undertake one or another set of hearings, I do want to remind people that we had three criteria that we had informally agreed ought to guide us. These do not bind us, but there seemed to be some consensus on using these three rules in choosing our subjects for discussion. One was, is it something on which we think we can achieve a consensus, as opposed to having to vote on it? That's not binding, but it was something we seemed to agree on. Secondly, is it something we can get done in a timely fashion, given the fact that we never know when the next election is going to be and there's no point in doing a study that will result in us not having completed some work prior to the next election. Thirdly, is it an area where Canada can have an influence? Obviously there are some areas where we're more influential than others.
So those are the three criteria we had discussed. They're not binding upon us, but they seemed to be items on which we had some agreement.
All right. We turn now to the correspondence received. You have a considerable package here. I'll go through these things in order without comment.
1:15 p.m.
Conservative
David Sweet Conservative Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Westdale, ON
Mr. Chair, could I suggest that if we're going to deal with things that are a priority, because there will not only be the correspondence making requests but also individual members, that we move in camera?
1:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Scott Reid
All right. Whenever someone suggests that, we take a direct vote without discussion. Is there agreement to go in camera?
1:15 p.m.
Some hon. members
Agreed.
1:15 p.m.
Conservative