International Trade Committee on June 23rd, 2011

[Ron Cannan, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

Sorry. The previous committee, in the past, had scheduled meetings taking place when we were outside of the parliamentary precinct, especially on international trips, and even when delegations travelled within Canada.

The way it was worded was that “In the case of previously scheduled meetings taking place outside the parliamentary precinct, the committee members in attendance shall only be required to wait for 15 minutes following the designated start of the meeting before they may proceed to hear witnesses and receive evidence”, so long as one member from the government and one member of the opposition was present.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Is that fair?

[Ron Cannan, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

If we're on an international trip and somebody gets held up or something, at least we can hear from the witnesses, as long as there are two people there.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

That's fine for me.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Okay, we'll accept that, all inclusive, as part of the motion.

(Motion agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

Are we to entertain a motion on the rounds of questioning?

Go ahead, Mr. Cannan.

[Ron Cannan, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

Thank you, Chair.

There's been somewhat of a set pattern from the other committees, and I just put it forward for discussion.

The first round would be for seven minutes. It would start off with the NDP, then go Conservative, Liberal, Conservative. The next round would be NDP, Conservative, Conservative. The third round would be NDP, Conservative, NDP, Conservative, Conservative, Liberal.

The first round would be seven minutes and subsequent ones would be five minutes.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Could you run that by me again, a little slower?

[Ron Cannan, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

Sure. It would be NDP, Conservative, and then Liberal, Conservative; NDP, Conservative, Conservative; NDP, Conservative, NDP, Conservative, Conservative, Liberal.

That way everybody gets to speak at least once.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

It's not been the traditional--

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Just a second.

Okay, Mr. Easter.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

That hasn't been the way it's been traditionally done. Certainly the first round is fine, but I know with the committees I've been on, we always gave both the third and fourth parties the opportunity to come in prior to that. Sometimes they didn't use it and sometimes they did.

The government has the majority. I see the point. I know when we were on the government side, sometimes it was disappointing that you'd have three members of the governing party not getting the opportunity to question.

The opposition party's job is to hold the government to account. I think the questioning from the opposition side is crucial, so I would argue against having the Liberal's second round down that far.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Mr. Holder.

[Ed Holder, Conservative, London West, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

In response to Mr. Easter, I recall having been on this committee since I was elected in 2008, when the NDP, frankly, only had one question on international trade each time. To be honest, the fact that there's actually a second question, even if it's far down the list, I would say is certainly significantly augmented from what the NDP enjoyed in the last session.

I've seen committees where the third party is now limited to one representation in the first round and that's all. My sense in looking at it is that the Liberals now have a second question in there, and hopefully there will be time for all of us to be able to get all of our questions in.

What is key, though, and I think the point was made earlier, is that it is important that all members have their first opportunity to ask questions. This isn't so much about the opposition trying to hold the government to account; this is getting to the truth.

Frankly, the opportunity to ask questions of our witnesses is a privilege that we should all enjoy. I'm comfortable with supporting the motion as it stands.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

The other point of clarification, from the chair's perspective, is whether the first round is seven minutes. Is that what the motion is? Then it's five minutes. The Liberals would have seven minutes. Is that it?

[An hon. member]

Yes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Okay.

Mr. Thibeault.

[Glenn Thibeault, NDP, Sudbury, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I don't see any problem with the first round whatsoever. I sit on the industry committee as well, and it's very similar.

We've been hearing how other committees have been working, so I think the first round is something we could all agree on. It's the second and third rounds...and I think I'll look to those who have been on this committee before to clarify a few things first. Then, if we want to, we can try to have some discussion into the second round.

How often do you get to a third round in this committee? Is it something you get to often? Is it something you don't get to too often?

If it's only seven minutes per...that's 28 minutes in, in the first round. I think we should be looking at having more questions in the second round. Then in the third round you can start all over again. If there is an opportunity, leave it to the discretion of the chair, or something along those lines, in relation to having the third round.

What we've been talking about in other committees is trying to do NDP, Conservative, NDP, Conservative, and, if possible, having a Liberal question in there and having more of a load-up on the second round. And then leave the third round to the discretion of the chair, or something along those lines.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Are you looking at change?

[Glenn Thibeault, NDP, Sudbury, ON]

Well, I'm putting that out there for discussion. I'd really like to see some discussion about changing the second round.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Okay.

Mr. Shory.

[Devinder Shory, Conservative, Calgary Northeast, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

In response to Mr. Easter, I have one thing in my mind: that all members are equal. Every member should have an opportunity to ask a question before we go to the Liberals for a second time. As a matter of fact, I would suggest that we should restart after all members have asked their questions.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Okay. The discussion will go to Mr. Ravignat.

[Mathieu Ravignat, NDP, Pontiac, QC]

I think in the interest of making sure we have a well-balanced view of all parties present...there are seven spots for six; membership is six, right? I see six people here. You have seven. I'd be in favour of making a proposal that one additional slot be given to Mr. Easter.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rob Merrifield]

Mr. Keddy.

[Gerald Keddy, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margaret's, NS]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Just for clarification, the lineup as suggested reflects within one percentage point the representation in the House. The point of members speaking at committee comes directly from representation in the House.

The other point, with respect to Mr. Easter...I remember when Mr. Easter was chair of a committee. I sat on that committee as a rump party of 20 members and we got one chance to speak in the first round and no chances in the second round or the third round. Once in a while we got to speak at the discretion of the chair, but seldom.

It's broken up and is a direct representation of the parties in the House.