Subcommittee on International Human Rights Committee on Nov. 5th, 2013

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

Ms. Sims also mentioned the option of additional meetings at times outside of our regular schedule. That could prove to be necessary anyway, given the tight schedule some of these folks have.

Mr. Regan, if you're ready to go, please do.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

First of all, as a visitor to this committee in place of Mr. Cotler, and in view of this committee's title and nature, I would encourage the committee to be a model of democratic procedure, obviously, to our visitors to the committee and witnesses.

Also, I agree with Madam Sims that there may be times when there are notable visitors arriving and it may be difficult, or you may want to arrange a meeting more quickly than you had indicated.

Also, I suggest that when one party or another may assume that they might not have agreement on something or a consensus, I don't think you should assume that. It might be worthwhile to create an opportunity at least for the discussion on the basis that you might be able to find more agreement than you think about the approach to these things.

Last, if you don't mind—

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

Yes, thank you—

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Pardon me. Last, since he's not here and it's my impression that you might possibly have a text of your comments, you might be able to send those to Mr. Cotler so he could review them and make his own comments in due course.

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

We can do that for sure.

I want to say with regard to the point where I indicated anyone has the right to switch back to the normal non-consensual.... My point with that is that those are the rules. These are practices. Rules always trump practices, and my formal job is to enforce the rules. Enforcing the practice of keeping up the consensus model is ultimately the responsibility of other people. I think I would venture in the direction of starting to manipulate things if I were to take a more activist role in that regard.

Monsieur Jacob.

[Pierre Jacob, NDP, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

I would just like to add that the consensus is perfect. Mr. Reid, I fully agree with your position, and I also agree with Ms. Sims' comment. In short, these two positions are not contradictory. I also agree with Mr. Sweet's remarks.

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

Fine. Thank you.

Colleagues, is there anything else?

Turning to the subject matter for us to discuss, we have a 48-hour notice period which means.... You can introduce anything, of course, with unanimous consent, here or anywhere else, but as a practical matter it means that at our next meeting on Thursday, if you want to bring forward some subject matter, you should have notice in prior to that meeting. Obviously as well, as we just agreed, you should probably chat with each other offline, buttonhole each other in the House of Commons or phone each other and see which of these things seem best, because at our next meeting I will start the practice of asking people whether they've talked to each other or not.

Once we have some subjects before us, we'll begin that and that will be the focus of the meeting next Thursday.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

On a point of clarification, Mr. Chair, at your first discussion of topics to discuss, don't you have an open discussion about that, where people can introduce topics?

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

People are free to do that if they wish. There's no limitation at all. I'm only suggesting that if you want to actually have a motion brought forward.... Everybody has the right, of course, to move a motion, but we have a 48-hour notice requirement; otherwise, you have to get unanimous consent to move it.

Thanks very much, everybody.

The meeting is adjourned.