Evidence of meeting #1 for Official Languages in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was chair.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
I understand.
We're going to follow this according to procedure.
On the floor we have a motion that's been amended: that at the discretion of the chair witnesses be given up to 10 minutes for their opening statements, that the first round be seven minutes, and that the second round be five minutes.
That is what's currently on the floor.
Conservative
Conservative
Royal Galipeau Conservative Ottawa—Orléans, ON
Naturally, it's about the order of the participants.
The order of questions for the first round of questioning shall be as follows: the government party, the official opposition, the government party, and the third party. Questioning for the second round shall alternate between the government party members and the opposition members in the following fashion: the government party, the official opposition, the government party, the official opposition, the government party, the official opposition, the government party--based on the principle that each committee member should have a full opportunity to question the witnesses. If time permits, further rounds shall repeat the pattern of the first two at the discretion of the chair.
I repeat, the order of questions for the first round of questioning shall be as follows: the government party; second, the official opposition; third, the government party; fourth, the third party.
Should I continue?
Conservative
Royal Galipeau Conservative Ottawa—Orléans, ON
Questioning for the second round shall alternate between the government party and the opposition members in the following fashion: the government party, the official opposition, the government party, the official opposition, the government party, the official opposition, the government party--based on the principle that each committee member should have a full opportunity to question the witnesses. If time permits, further rounds shall repeat the pattern of the first two at the discretion of the chair.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
We're not going to vote on this yet because it's not a motion on the floor, but just to clarify, the first round is seven minutes and the second round is five minutes. The first round is Conservative, New Democrat, Conservative, Liberal, for a total of 28 minutes. The second round is Conservative, New Democrat, Conservative, New Democrat, Conservative, New Democrat, Conservative, for a total of 35 minutes. This means that in just over an hour we would go through each member of the committee once. And then after that we would start at the top again of round one and work our way down through round one and subsequently through round two.
Conservative
Royal Galipeau Conservative Ottawa—Orléans, ON
If we were to have a third round, then the third party would have a chance to get back in.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I would like to present an amendment to Mr. Galipeau's proposal.
Conservative
Royal Galipeau Conservative Ottawa—Orléans, ON
I didn't propose anything. I simply gave information. I didn't propose anything. You asked me for that information.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
Understood.
The other possibility is that I propose an amendment that combines your amendment and our subamendment. That's another possibility, but we will need to vote on the entire thing. It's a package deal.
What we are suggesting goes along with this committee's direction and traditions. We start with the official opposition, followed by the government, then the third party, then the government. This would preserve the principle that each member of the committee gets a chance to speak.
However, by tradition, opposition members start the first round of questions. It's an important role, especially since we are talking about official languages. It's our duty to keep an eye on the government's actions. And that's why the Standing Committee on Official Languages exists. Reversing the order means that each member of the committee can speak. We are also maintaining the tradition of the opposition's ongoing monitoring of official languages.
Conservative
Royal Galipeau Conservative Ottawa—Orléans, ON
Mr. Chair, as usual, I bow to the wisdom of my friend, Peter Julian.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
We'll have that discussion after we conclude the discussion on the motion in front of us, which concerns the rounds of questioning.
Mr. Julian.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
Thank you to Mr. Galipeau, my new neighbour in the Confederation Building. In this case, I'll present the amendment to the proposal that is currently on the table. The first round of seven minutes would go like this: the NDP, the Conservative Party, the Liberal Party and the Conservative Party.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
No, no. I'm adding an amendment. I'm changing his original suggestion that set out the time and order we just discussed. As I said, it's a package deal and, yes, it's in order.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
Okay, that's fine.
Just so everybody is on the same page, Mr. Julian is moving an amendment to the motion on the floor. The motion on the floor concerns the witnesses and the rounds of questioning and the amount of time allocated for each. Mr. Julian is about to move an amendment to include in that motion the order of questioning.
Go ahead, Mr. Julian.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
So that it's clear when we go to make a decision about Mr. Galipeau's proposal, here is the order we are suggesting. In the first round, the speakers will go in this order: the official opposition, the government, the third party and the government.
In the second round, the order would be: the official opposition, the government, the official opposition, the government, the official opposition, the government and the government.
The third round would be the same as the first round, but each person would have five minutes.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
We have an amendment on the floor. I'm going to read it out by party names so that we're all clear.
The first round would be New Democrat, Conservative, Liberal, Conservative. The second round would be New Democrat, Conservative, New Democrat, Conservative, New Democrat, Conservative, Conservative.
Is there any debate on the amendment?
Mr. Bélanger.
Liberal
Mauril Bélanger Liberal Ottawa—Vanier, ON
I'm taking note here, Mr. Chair, of how quickly one loses friends. I remember the days when we were in the official opposition and we protected the third and the fourth parties. I'm saddened by the fact that I seem to be the only one around the table who has these memories. I'm taking note of that. I would remind folks that neither victories nor defeats are permanent in this business.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
For clarification, as chair, I'm curious, having never sat on a committee in a majority Parliament before, prior to 2004, what was the common practice in most committees in terms of the first member to speak? Was it the opposition? Okay.
Liberal
Mauril Bélanger Liberal Ottawa—Vanier, ON
And then it was the other opposition parties, and finally, the government. The second round was similar.
This notion that everybody is entitled to speak at committee certainly doesn't flow from the House. We've tried to give that to everyone, but it is not the operating principle, which we're now trying to make it. That's fine. I understand where the majority lies here, but I'm saddened by the treatment that my friends from the NDP are reserving for the Liberals here. We did not do that to them.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
Thank you, Monsieur Bélanger.
Mr. Galipeau, and then Mr. Julian.
Conservative
Royal Galipeau Conservative Ottawa—Orléans, ON
I have a question that I don't expect to get an answer to right away. A point was raised that I think is important. It's about the order of questions when there's a majority government. The last time there was a majority government was in the 37 th Parliament.
Could the clerk or the analysts answer this question or find the answer? What was the order of questions during meetings of the Standing Committee on Official Languages when there was a majority government?
We've had the 38 th, 39 th and 40 th Parliaments. Few of us were here for the 37 th Parliament.