Evidence of meeting #2 for Official Languages in the 43rd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was amendment.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
4:05 p.m.
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
My concern is that I haven't seen the witness list, so how am I going to agree to our having three meetings? Are we going to force all the witnesses to sit in three meetings? We were told that we could bring witnesses. Now I'm told we're only going to have three meetings. That's not logical. Why don't we just say that following our witnesses, we will produce a report. If people are unhappy with the number of witnesses, that's something the subcommittee can address.
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
Patricia Lattanzio Liberal Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC
We must not restrict the number of sessions.
I understand, Mr. Angus.
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Emmanuel Dubourg
My understanding is that Mr. Arseneault is going to rephrase his motion.
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
René Arseneault Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB
Before I rephrase it, let me make a comment.
We talked about that last week, Mr. Angus, and I do recognize that Ms. Lambropoulos, Mr. Généreux and I have been on the same committee for many years. Most of those witnesses have been heard. You provided me with a list a few minutes ago that resembles the list we talked about this morning; it's almost the same names. Maybe together, if we need more than two other meetings, we will add to them. We've heard all of this since 2017, I would say, concerning the rights holders and making sure that we have the right numbers, but I understand what you mean.
Maybe we could do another motion if you want, but let's stick with the first motion. We want to produce a report after the study that will be tabled in the House of Commons. Let's start with that and maybe talk about other days after the list of witnesses. That's the motion I want to make.
4:05 p.m.
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
I would just say that I'm very uncomfortable with the principle that we've heard everything that everyone has to say and so we can just move on. Why then are we sitting in a committee? I have better things to do with my life.
If the view of this committee is, “We know all the usual players. The usual players are going to say the usual things. We can get this off,” I don't think that's a very respectful way to do this. When I call witnesses, it's because I want to hear what they have to say, because I respect their point of view.
If my colleague wants to vote to have three meetings, I am not going to vote in favour of that because I don't know. I have to leave it open depending on what the witness list will be, so that we can address issues. It is my right, as a member representing the New Democratic Party, to make sure that we are doing due diligence in our work. Maybe three days is enough, maybe four days, maybe five days, but I'm not going to agree to be locked in without seeing that witness list.
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
René Arseneault Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB
That's fine, but that motion, Mr. Angus, is not to stop what you're saying. Maybe it could be done right afterwards with another motion. I do understand, but whether it's three days of studies or four days or 15 days, my motion is about the fact that I forgot to put down that we want to have a report at the end of that study, not withstanding how many days it will take. I suggest that we stick with that motion, and then discuss that later on with the list of witnesses.
February 25th, 2020 / 4:05 p.m.
Conservative
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
Michael Chong Conservative Wellington—Halton Hills, ON
The word “study” in parliamentary language means including a report with or without recommendations. I've been on a number of committees now over the years, and every single committee I've been on has used the word “study”, and that includes a report with recommendations. So I don't think we need to revisit the motion that has already been adopted by the committee. I think the chair has sufficient direction to call witnesses. We have a deadline for members of the committee to submit witnesses. The suggested witnesses' names are to be in by this coming Friday. The motion does not restrict us from having more than two additional meetings in addition to Statistics Canada appearing.
Why don't we just leave in place the motion as adopted by the committee, and have our three meetings, and then we can discuss whether we will have further meetings beyond the three meetings? At that point we can also discuss what kind of report we will have the analysts draft and what kind of recommendations we would like to see in that report.
That's all contained in the motion that has already been adopted by the committee, so I don't think we need to adopt any further motions. To that end, you have sufficient guidance, Mr. Chair, from the members of the committee, and I think we should just proceed.
I propose that we proceed on that basis.
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Emmanuel Dubourg
Yes, but just before that, I think Mr. Godin, with his previous intervention, would like to say a few words.
Go ahead.
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC
Mr. Chair, with all due respect to my colleague from the same parliamentary group, who has much more experience than I do, I will turn to the clerk.
I want to make sure that what my colleague said is accurate in terms of all studies requiring a report. If that is the case, we are wasting our time and we could move forward.
Mr. Clerk, I apologize for putting pressure on you, but if what my colleague is saying is correct, there is no point to our conversation because there will automatically be a report.
Mr. Chair, could you ask the clerk for an answer, please?
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
Patricia Lattanzio Liberal Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC
I want things to be clear, I agree with that.
4:10 p.m.
A voice
There's a motion on the table. Is it votable?
4:10 p.m.
The Clerk
I'll answer the question.
Not every study produces a report and not every report is necessarily the product of a study. Let me explain.
If, for example, a witness made false statements, the committee could decide to report that incident to the House, not necessarily as a result of a study. A report includes any communication from the committee to the House.
Generally speaking, when a study is completed, given the time and energy invested in it, a report is produced and tabled in the House, with recommendations sometimes. Usually, there are recommendations and a government response is requested, but that's not always the case.
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
Patricia Lattanzio Liberal Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC
To sum up, I agree with my colleague Mr. Godin, who says he wants it to be clear. I agree with that. I also understand that my colleague Mr. Angus doesn't want us to limit ourselves to three meetings. So let’s adopt the amendment or the proposal of my colleague Mr. Arseneault, who is asking the committee to produce a report. To make it very clear today, let's vote on this request, without necessarily limiting the number of meetings. That way, I think we will come full circle and we can move on.
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Emmanuel Dubourg
Yes, okay.
Mr. Arseneault is going to move this motion. Just so that everybody can agree, I think the motion should call for a report at the end of our study on the enumeration of rights holders.
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
Patricia Lattanzio Liberal Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC
I'm not impatient, but we have to move forward.
