Official Languages Committee on June 23rd, 2011

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Welcome to the third meeting of the Standing Committee on Official Languages today, Thursday, June 23, 2011.

We are here today to determine committee business and to continue debate on the routine motion concerning the questioning of witnesses.

We have in front of us today a live motion on the floor. It's the subamendment moved by Mr. Bélanger, and it concerns the order of questioning.

Do we have any speakers to this proposed subamendment?

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

Mr. Chair, I don't want us to be playing games forever. Discussions took place at our last meeting on Tuesday, and the meeting was adjourned. There seemed to be a consensus. I am asking Mr. Gourde point-blank: does that agreement still work?

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Mr. Gourde, would you like to respond?

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC]

I believe other motions had already been moved before this one. Before dealing with it, we should at least debate and vote on the motions that had already been put forward.

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

Is Mr. Gourde saying that I should have faith in him?

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC]

Majority rules.

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

That means no then.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Is there any further discussion on Mr. Bélanger's subamendment?

(Subamendment negatived)

We are now back to the subamendment moved by Mr. Harris. I'll read it so everybody is on the same page. You should each have a copy of this.

Mr. Harris's subamendment reads as follows:

That the order of questions shall be as follows: for the first round, seven minutes be allocated in the following order: New Democratic Party, Liberal Party and Conservative Party; for the second round, five minutes be allocated in the following order: New Democratic Party, Conservative Party and Liberal Party; for the third round, five minutes be allocated in the following order: Conservative Party, New Democratic Party and Conservative Party; for the fourth round, five minutes be allocated in the following order: Conservative Party, New Democratic Party and Liberal Party.

Is there any debate on the subamendment moved by Mr. Harris?

Go ahead, Mr. Julian.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair. First of all, I want to say how delighted I am to be here once again, standing in for Mr. Godin, who should not be away much longer.

I want to make sure that I am very clear on everything and that I follow, Mr. Chair. We have the New Democrats, the Liberals and the Conservatives. Then the New Democrats, the Conservatives and the Liberals. Next the Conservatives, the New Democrats and the Conservatives. Finally, the Conservatives, the New Democrats and the Liberals.

I think that Mr. Harris's subamendment does everything we talked about two meetings ago when I was here. It would give the Conservatives the floor and the official opposition the opportunity to start asking questions. That is in line with committee practice. I also find that proposal to be very generous to the Liberal Party. Mr. Harris managed to include all the considerations we discussed at our first meeting regarding the questioning of witnesses. So I think it is well done. I am not sure whether Mr. Harris would like to say anything, but I think he put forward a good subamendment.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you, Mr. Julian.

Mr. Weston.

[John Weston, Conservative, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I listened carefully to what Mr. Julian said. Our role here is to represent the interests of all Canadians. As far as the amendment moved by my colleague Mr. Harris goes, I do not think it achieves a balanced representation of the interests of the parties or the individuals here today. Quite frankly, there is too much focus on the Liberal Party, and that does not reflect the opinion expressed by voters in the last election.

Sadly, I have to say that I cannot support Mr. Harris's amendment.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you.

Mr. Harris.

[Dan Harris, NDP, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

I understand perfectly. In the discussions that took place between the three parties during the break at the last meeting, we found a solution that seemed to strike a better balance for the committee. We had somewhat of an agreement, but that may not have been the case within the ruling party's caucus.

I would be willing to take a step backward and start over based on the method decided upon at the last meeting.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you.

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC]

Has the subamendment been withdrawn?

[Dan Harris, NDP, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

I will withdraw it.

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

Are you introducing a new proposal now?

[Dan Harris, NDP, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

We should dispose of this one first.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

If there's no further debate, we'll just call the question.

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

Forgive me, Mr. Chair, but I am not sure what we are talking about in that case. If the subamendment has been withdrawn—

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Monsieur Harris, you have the floor. You can tell Mr. Julian in front of everybody what you're proposing to do, just so that we're all on the same page.

[Dan Harris, NDP, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

I was going to propose to withdraw that motion and then bring forward a new one that had been discussed at the end of the last meeting before we adjourned.

It would bring a speaking order of four rounds, the first round being seven minutes. It would go NDP, Conservative, Liberal, Conservative.

The second round would be NDP, Conservative, NDP. The second, third, and fourth rounds would all be five minutes long, not seven.

The third round would be Conservative, NDP, Liberal. The fourth round would be Conservative, NDP, Conservative.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Just to clarify the rules, the only way you can withdraw your subamendment and propose another subamendment is with the unanimous consent of the committee.

Alternatively, I can call the question on the subamendment. If it's defeated, you can move another subamendment. Why don't we proceed in the second fashion rather than the first?

Seeing no further debate on your subamendment, we'll call the question.

(Subamendment negatived)

If you wish, you can move your other subamendment. You've just read it into the record, so you don't need to repeat it.

[An hon. member]

Could it be read again?

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Okay. Please repeat it, Mr. Harris.