Official Languages Committee on June 16th, 2011

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Mr. Harris.

[Dan Harris, NDP, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Mr. Bélanger said that previously, the New Democrats had three opportunities to speak in four rounds. However, in this case, we are talking about four opportunities in four rounds.

[Bélanger]

We could take some away.

[Dan Harris, NDP, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

In what round?

[Bélanger]

The third.

[Dan Harris, NDP, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

We could change the order for the third round and proceed as follows: the Conservative Party, the NDP, the Conservative Party. That would give the majority party an opportunity to speak again. I would like to move that amendment.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

We're on the amendment. I'm not going to allow for a subamendment to the amendment. We have to dispose of the amendment in front of us, because if you introduce another amendment, procedurally it's going to become a mess.

Mr. Aubin.

[Robert Aubin, NDP, Trois-Rivières, QC]

I see that we're taking more time than a suspension would have required, had it been granted. I call for a suspension again.

There is probably a detail I failed to understand. Mr. Galipeau acknowledged earlier the soundness of Mr. Julian's suggestion, but the tide has turned. Suddenly, that's no longer possible.

[Royal Galipeau, Conservative, Ottawa—Orléans, ON]

Mr. Chair, I asked a question that was answered. Collective memory about previous procedures contained some holes. Therefore, I asked the library people and the clerk to obtain relevant information, and that information was provided to us. Traditions used in a previous majority parliament are in line with my suggestion.

[Robert Aubin, NDP, Trois-Rivières, QC]

I understood that perfectly.

[Royal Galipeau, Conservative, Ottawa—Orléans, ON]

My suggestion is sound. It is based on what was done in previous majority governments, for instance, the 37th Parliament.

[Robert Aubin, NDP, Trois-Rivières, QC]

If my understanding is correct, tradition takes precedence over the consensus we achieved.

[Royal Galipeau, Conservative, Ottawa—Orléans, ON]

The consensus has not yet been achieved.

[Robert Aubin, NDP, Trois-Rivières, QC]

But it was earlier.

[Royal Galipeau, Conservative, Ottawa—Orléans, ON]

We were lacking information, which has been provided to us since. That information is in keeping with the basis of my original suggestion.

[Robert Aubin, NDP, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Mr. Bélanger.

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

I agree with Mr. Aubin and Mr. Julian. We might have benefited from discussing that issue. Mr. Aubin, I want to point out that consensus wasn't achieved. I didn't agree with any of the suggestions, since I had not been consulted.

Mr. Harris, it should be noted that my suggestion is perfectly in line with tradition. We are not the fourth but rather the third party. The third party was allowed to speak in every round. Earlier, we talked about the New Democrats. They couldn't speak in one round, but they were the fourth party. The Bloc Québécois, which was the third party, could speak in every round.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you, Mr. Bélanger.

Mr. Julian has the floor.

[Peter Julian, NDP, Burnaby—New Westminster, BC]

That's the issue. The Liberal Party has 34 MPs, which is fewer than what the NDP had. The issue is not whether the party is third or fourth, but how many MPs it has. Unless I'm mistaken, the Liberal Party currently has 34 members. The NDP had 36 in the previous Parliament. You are suggesting more floor time for the Liberal Party, which has even fewer members than the NDP had in the previous Parliament. That makes no sense.

That's too bad because, if the government imposes its will, Mr. Bélanger's opposition to our suggestion would make the Liberal Party lose its second round. He'd have to take responsibility for that outcome. His comment was not good for the Liberal Party, as it has clouded the issue, and that's why we're in this situation now.

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

We're not squabbling, but establishing facts.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Does anybody else want the floor?

Monsieur Bélanger.

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

Mr. Chair, I want to get back to what Mr. Julian was saying. The difference between 36 and 34 is negligible.

I want to remind him that, at 36 or 34, the New Democrats representative had the right to speak in all but one round. No, that person had the floor in every round, except for one. Those are the facts, Mr. Julian; you may ask Mr. Godin. If I remember correctly, he could not speak in the third round, but he could do so in all the other rounds. Those are the facts, and I was on the committee.

If Mr. Harris wants to move his motion, I would accept a friendly amendment that the Liberals participate in all but the third round.

[Dan Harris, NDP, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

I think the chair ruled that out of order.

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

I accept the friendly amendment.