Official Languages Committee on Nov. 13th, 2007

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Two people would like to speak to your proposal, Ms. Folco: Mr. Bélanger and Mr. Lemieux.

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

I do not know if the amendment is necessary. I think we are making progress. All committee members were clear that if we are talking about a Tuesday, the deadline is 2:00 or 2:30 p.m., whatever, the previous Friday; if we are talking about Thursday, the deadline is Tuesday at 6:00 p.m., and so on. Perhaps we do not need to put that in a motion.

I do, however, want committee members to understand that there is another issue. The House was not sitting yesterday. Does that mean that...

[An hon. member]

it was not a working day.

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

That is right, it was not a working day. In that case, would we have had to submit the notice of motion on Thursday by 6:00 p.m.? Once the ground rules are clear, we can easily move on.

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

For me it would be Friday. That is why it is 48 hours.

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

That should be specified. If it is Monday—holidays often fall on Mondays—does that count or not, Mr. Chairman?

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Mr. Bélanger, I will look into it. I do not know the answer. I will ask someone to get you the answer. The question is, in the case of today, since yesterday was a holiday... Do you have the answer now? We will come back to that.

Mr. Lemieux.

[Pierre Lemieux, Conservative, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

This is getting a bit too complicated. Perhaps we could include a reference saying “in accordance with” and underline the paragraph in the House procedures.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Is this a friendly amendment to Ms. Folco's amendment?

[Raymonde Folco, Liberal, Laval—Les Îles, QC]

I want to add that we do what Mr. Lemieux has said.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

It would be: “in accordance with House procedures”.

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

If that is the case, Mr. Chairman, I am onside. I agree with that. We just need to understand. I think that means that a notice for Tuesday, where the Monday is a statutory holiday, must be tabled on the Thursday by 6:00 p.m.

[Luc Harvey, Conservative, Louis-Hébert, QC]

It is 48 hours on working days.

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

Right. Mr. Harvey, you are good at maths, and you catch on right away. Some here are not so good at that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Okay.

Clearly, wether the House sits or not has an impact. However, Mr. Bélanger's question is this: in cases like yesterday, where Monday is a statutory holiday, does...?

Do we agree on the amendment? The question is specific. I am going to ask the clerk to clarify the situation. The amendment will simply read as follows:

That 48 hours' notice, in accordance with House procedures, be required for any substantive motion to be considered by the Committee [...]

Are you ready to vote on the amendment?

(Amendment agreed to)

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

We will now vote on the motion as amended.

(Motion, as amended, agreed to.)

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

So we only we have one more routine committee motion left.

Mr. Godin.

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

I move:

That witnesses be given ten (10) minutes for their opening statements; that during the questioning of witnesses, there will be allocated; for the first round seven (7) minutes for the first questioner of each party in the following order: Official Opposition, Bloc Quebecois, New Democratic Party, Government; for the second round, five (5) minutes be allocated to each subsequent questioner from each party in the following order: Official Opposition, Government, Bloc Quebecois, New Democratic Party; for the third round, five (5) minutes be allocated to each subsequent questioner of each party in the following order: Official Opposition, Bloc Quebecois, Government, New Democratic Party; for the fourth round, five (5)minutes be allocated to each subsequent questioner of each party in the following order: Official Opposition, Government, Bloc Quebecois, New Democratic Party;

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you, Mr. Godin.

I am now ready to hear your comments.

Mr. Rodriguez, you have the floor.

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

Where those rules in force during the last session? Do we all have seven minutes, or five minutes?

[An hon. member]

We had seven minutes in the first round and five minutes after that.

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

Okay.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

That was the procedure that was in force prior to the prorogation.

Mr. Lemieux, we have the floor.

[Pierre Lemieux, Conservative, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

I would like to discuss something with my colleagues. For me, it is important for each party to participate in the committee's work, and where possible, for each member to participate as well. On several occasions meetings have ended and Liberal and Conservative MPs have not been in the position to participate because time has run out. I want to start by clarifying that I like to listen to Mr. Godin speak and that I always listen carefully when he does. That is one of my pleasure in life. However, perhaps we could eliminate the NDP questions on the third round to ensure that all members present have an opportunity to participate in the discussion. We often have three rounds, but rarely four. The same problem arose when we travel. The problem arises mainly when we hear from more than one witness. Each of them have 10 minutes, and if we hear from two, three or four witnesses, there is not much time left over for discussion.

I am putting that idea on the floor for discussion purposes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

If I understand correctly, Mr. Lemieux, you are suggesting that on the third round...