Evidence of meeting #1 for Natural Resources in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was witnesses.
11:15 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Lee Richardson
Then might I ask for a motion to provide that at least four members are present, including two members of the opposition?
Moved by Madam Bell.
(Motion agreed to)
11:15 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Lee Richardson
Next, regarding the distribution of documents, that the clerk of the committee be authorized to distribute to the members of the committee only documents that are available in both official languages. Is there a mover of that motion?
Mr. Trost so moved.
(Motion agreed to)
11:15 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Lee Richardson
This next one about working meals is one that sometimes has a little debate. I have my own views on this, but I'd welcome the views of the committee.
This will authorize the clerk of the committee to make necessary arrangements to provide working meals for the committee and its subcommittees. I think this is a debate that's going to come up in any event, so we may as well have it now.
Some committees, particularly those that sit between 11 a.m. and 1 p.m., have meals brought in every meeting. I personally have a problem with sitting here and eating in front of witnesses or while the committee is going on. If we can't eat before we go or after 1 o'clock.... I'm in the hands of the committee, if that's what you want to do. I would think if we were perhaps having a solid working session, where we were not having witnesses or anything, it might make sense to bring food in on an ad hoc basis.
What are your thoughts?
Mr. Harris.
11:15 a.m.
Conservative
Dick Harris Conservative Cariboo—Prince George, BC
Mr. Chairman, I agree with you. Being an hour late or an hour early for lunch is not the end of the world. I agree that eating in front of witnesses is simply not in good taste, nor is it good hospitality. If there is a motion, I would support that we don't have meals brought in unless there is a long working session, and it is at the discretion of the chair.
11:15 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Lee Richardson
Yes, I'd like that motion. If it's amenable to the rest of you, I think we might go ahead and pass this motion so it is at the discretion....
Mr. Cullen.
11:20 a.m.
Liberal
Roy Cullen Liberal Etobicoke North, ON
I wanted to raise something. First of all, my experience has been that the food is made available to all the witnesses as well, but admittedly, sometimes if they're presenting and answering questions it makes it difficult. The only thing is who's going to have lunch at 11 o'clock? Then at 1 o'clock, often you're running off to other meetings. So I don't think we should have a hard and fast rule. I don't see a great problem. People understand that people have to eat, so--
11:20 a.m.
Liberal
Lloyd St. Amand Liberal Brant, ON
I support the chair and Mr. Harris's point of view and would suggest that the motion be amended to indicate that, at your discretion, the clerk would be authorized to make necessary arrangements.
11:20 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Lee Richardson
Fine, so I will accept that as a motion from Mr. St. Amand, that “at the discretion of the chair, the clerk of the committee be authorized...” No. Why don't we say, “That the clerk of the committee be authorized, at the discretion of the chair, to make the necessary arrangements to provide working meals for the committee and its subcommittees.”
Does that pretty much handle it?
11:20 a.m.
Conservative
11:20 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Lee Richardson
Thank you. This gives us the discretion, Mr. Cullen.
The next one is witnesses' expenses. The motion is that, if requested, reasonable travel, accommodation, and living expenses be reimbursed to witnesses, not exceeding two representatives per organization; and that, in exceptional circumstances, payment for more representatives be made at the discretion of the chair.
In 20 years of this stuff, I've always wondered about that, and the extent of the budgets and how much we pay for these people. I wonder if I might ask my old friend, the previous clerk of the committee, to give us a little background on what kind of expenses are involved, how much is the budget for that kind of thing normally, before we get into the motion. It's for the interest of members. I know I'm interested.
May 9th, 2006 / 11:20 a.m.
Eugene Morawski Procedural Clerk
It depends on what you're studying and how many witnesses you want to call. For example, the fisheries committee predominantly has witnesses from the east and west coasts, so their budget is a lot higher for witnesses than that of a committee that would call witnesses from the immediate area. If you have a study that's ongoing for three or four years, or a year, and you're going to call people from overseas, from Europe and so on, the budget will depend on what your plans are.
11:20 a.m.
Conservative
11:20 a.m.
Conservative
11:20 a.m.
Conservative
Dick Harris Conservative Cariboo—Prince George, BC
This motion is actually written fairly committee-friendly, so that the chair and the committee have a lot of discretion. I think this is a good basic motion to work from, and I would move this motion, if it's required.
11:20 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Lee Richardson
Are there any other points for debate? Okay.
It is moved by Mr. Harris that, if requested, reasonable travel, accommodation, and living expenses be reimbursed to witnesses, not exceeding two representatives per organization; and that, in exceptional circumstances, payment for more representatives be made at the discretion of the chair.
(Motion agreed to)
11:20 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Lee Richardson
The next one is with regard to staff at in camera meetings: that, unless otherwise ordered, each committee member be allowed to be accompanied by one staff person at an in camera meeting.
I'll need a little help here, because I'm advised by the clerk that there has been some discussion that it's slightly different in French. Does anyone have any objections to that, or any problems with that?
Basically, the notion is that at in camera meetings we don't have any more than one staff per person, wherever they're from. They may not necessarily be parliamentary staff, apparently.
11:25 a.m.
Conservative
11:25 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Lee Richardson
It's moved then by Mr. Harris that, unless otherwise ordered, each committee member will be allowed to be accompanied by one staff person at an in camera meeting.
(Motion agreed to)