Subcommittee on International Human Rights Committee on July 9th, 2020

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

Thanks, Chair.

My understanding is that the House is sitting on the Wednesday. Might I propose perhaps Monday and Tuesday for the timing, given that some of us may want to take part in what happens in the House proceedings on that Wednesday?

You know, I don't want the previous testimony, which we have already heard and compiled, to go to waste. I feel we should be relying on that. I feel we should be building upon that instead of starting from scratch and hearing from the same witnesses all over again.

I think perhaps with two days of condensed meetings, with maybe three panels on each of those days—six multiplied by two gives 12 witnesses, perhaps, over those two days—that would be quite sufficient for us to come up with a very substantial statement to begin with, and then perhaps a more detailed substantial report when the House resumes in September or October.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Thank you.

[David Sweet, Conservative, Flamborough—Glanbrook, ON]

I think if we have a two-hour meeting with a three-person panel.... Normally, we don't go over two, because we generally have only 45 minutes, but if we have two hours.... I think three to four people is what the other standing committees usually do. Then we'll have enough time for them to all have opening statements and for us to have equal time for questioning.

That should be good for us to get enough experts in. I know there are plenty of people who want to weigh in.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

I saw some hands go up.

We have Alexis, and then Heather.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

I tend to agree with the Monday and Tuesday schedule. I'm fine with the six-hour sessions each day.

However, in terms of the number of witnesses per meeting, I want us to stick to three witnesses. If we invite more witnesses, we may not be able to ask certain questions in two and a half minutes, unless we decide to request that the witnesses give shorter presentations. That way, everyone would have time to ask their questions.

I would suggest to the subcommittee that we invite a maximum of three witnesses. If we decide to invite more witnesses, I would suggest that their presentations be shorter.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Thank you.

Heather.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Everything that Alexis said...all of those things.

As well, from my understanding as a new committee member, I would go to my whip and have my whip communicate with the other whips so that I would be able to join virtually. Would we be able to agree, then, not to bring forward things that need to be voted on for that day and to hold those until a later date? Is that something we can agree on as a committee?

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

We don't vote on this committee. This is a consensus-based committee. To my knowledge, in these past five years we've never voted on anything.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Let's not make the 22nd the first time.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

If we don't agree on something, we generally tend not to do it, so I don't think voting would be an issue at all.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

I've already talked to the whips, then.

[David Sweet, Conservative, Flamborough—Glanbrook, ON]

To Alexis' point, depending on the number of witnesses.... If we need to go to four, I think we would all be in agreement that we can limit them to six minutes rather than 10 minutes for opening remarks, to make sure that we have enough time for questioning. Generally speaking, they're strong enough in their opening remarks that they can usually conclude by saying that we can ask them about this or that, and they'll have some clear points to make. That can direct us.

As I said, I've seen some of the names already, and there are some very good people, from a broad spectrum of the community, whom we really want to get on record.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

I'm seeing heads nod. Is there consensus on the six minutes, if we have four witnesses? Yes.

Alexis.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Our meetings will be similar to the meetings of standing committees such as the Standing Committee on Finance or the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development. Therefore, in terms of the time given to each person, shouldn't we draw on the current approach in these committees rather than on the approach proposed here?

At this time, instead of giving each member the usual five minutes and two and a half minutes, we're giving them seven minutes and then moving on to five minutes. Since we'll be sitting in the same manner as the standing committees, shouldn't we use their procedures for speaking time?

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

We'd have to find consensus to change that.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Personally, I would rely on the existing approach. For example, in the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development, which oversees our subcommittee, six minutes are provided in the first round. In the second round, the Conservatives and the Liberals have five minutes, and the NDP and the Bloc Québécois have two and a half minutes.

If everyone agrees, I would propose that we use this approach as a reference.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

I know you're up next, Iqra, but to the members who have sat on this committee for many years, why did you adopt that?

[David Sweet, Conservative, Flamborough—Glanbrook, ON]

Because of the spirit of this committee, we've always approached it this way. Most of the other committees do it based on how many members are in the House. We've approached it as a privilege of individual members to participate in human rights, so there's been more even time. Any member has the same right to the same minutes because of the nature of who we are, and that's always been carried on. In fact, if you look at it, the minor parties probably get more time.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Under these circumstances, we have an agreement. If everyone has more time, that's good.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Fonseca]

Thank you.

Ms. Khalid, you have the floor.

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

I absolutely agree with David on this. We've had a very fair distribution of time, given the time constraints we've had in operating this committee in the past. We do whatever is fair and equitable in terms of how much time everybody gets. We've never had any time issues before in the committee, although given that we have somebody on the committee now who holds a record for talking the most in the House, I don't know how that's going to play out.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Is Kevin joining us?

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

I thought that was you, Garnett.