Evidence of meeting #48 for International Trade in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was report.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:55 p.m.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
Mr. Chair, I do have a couple of other questions, as I signified earlier.
12:55 p.m.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
Well, we'll see what the answers to the questions are.
My next two questions are to the clerk.
In the case of the absence of a report, if a report is defeated or a motion is defeated, does that then allow dissenting opinions to move forward? When we were talking about reports back from this committee on legislation, what would that mean for the reporting back of bills?
12:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Vice-Chair Liberal Lui Temelkovski
The answer to the first question is no. In the absence of a report, you cannot submit dissenting opinions or dissension as a report. They do not form a report.
In regard to the second question—
12:55 p.m.
The Clerk
In regard to the second question, Mr. Julian, you will find that in accordance with the Standing Orders of the House of Commons, in terms of legislation the only thing the committee can report back is the bill. There is no dissenting opinion on a piece of legislation. You would have the same thing on main estimates.
That's why you have the Standing Orders there, just to respect the rules of the House of Commons. Dissenting opinions are on the substantive reports. I use the word substantive not in quantity but more in terms of quality. It could be one page, and you are entitled to have a dissenting opinion if the committee agrees to it. That's why you have conditions. Some committees choose conditions. There have been cases in the past of dissenting opinions being longer than the report, or where language, perhaps, did not meet the satisfaction of the members as well.
So the committee has a right to impose conditions on the report—that the language be parliamentary protocol, that it be 10 pages, that it be submitted to the clerk within a reasonable time, that it doesn't delay the production of the report.
These are the types of conditions we would look at—well, if there's no more debate.
1 p.m.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
Yes, well, that does lead to the debate itself. What we have now is a motion from Mr. Menzies, and we do have the opportunity to establish some parameters around it. I think it would be helpful to do that.
If Mr. Menzies indicates that he's willing to allow us to consult with our caucuses and take the time to draft the rules, rather than drafting up a blank cheque...which is essentially what this is. As Mr. André and Mr. Cardin mentioned, they're concerned about the relevance of this.
Mr. Menzies, perhaps you would indicate by a head nod whether or not you're willing to allow us to do that.
1 p.m.
Conservative
Ted Menzies Conservative Macleod, AB
I can speak to this.
There is no bogeyman in the closet. Get over yourself. This is a plain and simple administrative matter that we didn't do. It's effective in every other committee that has done it. There's nothing unique about it, nothing profoundly strategic.
We're just trying to provide the opposition and every member of this committee the option that should be provided to them—namely, the option to present a dissenting opinion. I have no idea why you're so scared of this motion.
I once again call for the vote. We've got to get going.
1 p.m.
The Clerk
Mr. Bains moves that the debate be now adjourned.
1 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Lemieux Conservative Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON
Are you saying debate comes to an end, and then we propose that we go to a motion?
1 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Lemieux Conservative Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON
Oh, you're saying you want to adjourn the meeting. Well, that's different from adjourning debate.
1 p.m.
Conservative
Ken Epp Conservative Edmonton—Sherwood Park, AB
On a point of order, Mr. Chair, before we vote, I want to be clear on the motion. Was the motion to adjourn the meeting or was the motion to adjourn the debate?
1 p.m.
Liberal
The Vice-Chair Liberal Lui Temelkovski
Mr. Bains, was your motion to adjourn the meeting or to adjourn debate?
1 p.m.
Liberal
Navdeep Bains Liberal Mississauga—Brampton South, ON
I would actually like to correct myself. I meant to say adjourn the meeting.
1 p.m.
Some hon. members
Agreed.
1 p.m.
Liberal
The Vice-Chair Liberal Lui Temelkovski
We'll have to come back to this, seeing that the time is five after the hour. We'll deal with it on Thursday.
The meeting is over.
