Public Accounts Committee on Feb. 3rd, 2009

[Meili Faille, Bloc, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

I move an amendment to the French version. It is not ”du personnel”; it is “de son personnel“.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

There's a technical change in French.

Is there any other discussion? All in favour of the amendment, which would include one representative from each of the four parties.

(Amendment agreed to)

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Mr. Chair, could you read what you added?

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

In addition, each party may have in attendance one representative.

[Yasmin Ratansi, Liberal, Don Valley East, ON]

You said “one”.

[Bonnie Crombie, Liberal, Mississauga—Streetsville, ON]

Or it could be “and a representative from each party”.

(Motion as amended agreed to)

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

In camera meeting transcripts. The motion is that one copy of the transcript of each in camera meeting be kept in the committee clerk's office for consultation by members of the committee.

So moved by Madame Faille.

Is there any discussion?

(Motion agreed to)

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

The next one is on notice: that 48 hours’ notice be required for any substantive motion to be considered by the committee, unless the substantive motion relates directly to business then under consideration; and that the notice of motion be filed with the clerk of the committee and distributed to members in both official languages before consideration is given.

That is moved by Mr. Kramp. Is there any discussion?

(Motion agreed to)

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Opening statements. The motion is that witnesses be given five minutes to make their opening statement, and if they have additional information, it should be deposited with the clerk of the committee; and that during the questioning of witnesses the time allocated to each questioner be as follows: on the first round of questioning, eight minutes to a representative of each party in the following order: Liberal, Bloc Québécois, Conservative, NDP, Liberal, and Conservative; on the second round of questioning, five minutes per party in the following order: Liberal, Conservative, Bloc Québécois, Conservative, NDP, Liberal, and Conservative.

So moved by Ms. Ratansi.

Is there any discussion?

Mr. Kramp.

[Daryl Kramp, Conservative, Prince Edward—Hastings, ON]

We could attempt to make some improvements on this one. I have a couple of suggestions that I would like to bring to the floor to entertain some thought from my colleagues.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Go ahead.

[Daryl Kramp, Conservative, Prince Edward—Hastings, ON]

On the first round of questioning where we have basically six people having their eight minutes now, in the principle of fairness and having more questions from more of our members, I'd like that time to be reduced to seven minutes. I'd also like the Liberal and the Conservative to be removed from the first four. In other words, we would have simply Liberal, Bloc, NDP, Conservative. Then after that we would go through the rotation period for the five minutes and we would just keep on rotating through. That way it is pretty fair all the way. We would each get one shot at the full seven minutes, and then we could just rotate. In order that we would always have a contrast, the order to start with would be for the first four: Liberal, Bloc, NDP, Conservative. Then we would start Liberal, Conservative, Bloc, Conservative, Liberal, Conservative, NDP, Conservative. Should we go beyond that, we'd just rotate through again on the second--

I will do that again more slowly. On the first four, it would be Liberal, Bloc, NDP, Conservative. On the first round of the five minutes, we would start off with Liberal, Conservative, Bloc, Conservative, Liberal, Conservative, NDP, Conservative. And should we have ample time left over, which we would hope to have by giving more available time to our members, we could simply repeat the secondary portion of that again and rotate through that.

This is for your consideration. This allows more members more of an opportunity to possibly speak more often.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

We're going to make sure everyone understands it. I will repeat it for the record.

Mr. Kramp, you are suggesting the first round would be for seven minutes and there would be only four questioners. The first would be Liberal. The Bloc would be second. The New Democratic Party would be third, followed by the Conservatives. That would conclude the first round.

Then we would go into the second round for five minutes each. The Liberals would lead off, then the Conservatives, Bloc Québécois, Conservatives, Liberals, Conservatives, NDP, Conservatives. Then if there was sufficient time for a third round, we would just repeat that rotation as in the second round.

[Daryl Kramp, Conservative, Prince Edward—Hastings, ON]

That's correct.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Is there any discussion?

Ms. Ratansi.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

I was counting the number of minutes that would translate into. In the way Mr. Kramp suggested, the Conservatives would be getting 27 minutes and the Liberals would be getting a maximum of 17 minutes, the NDP would get a maximum of 12 minutes, and the Bloc would get a maximum of 12 minutes.

Generally if you go the second round and if there are five witnesses and they have taken five minutes each, we might end up with the first round, and the second round we might cut off at the Bloc or the Liberals. The NDP would not get its second round. So would you consider Liberal, Conservative, Bloc, Conservative, Liberal, NDP, and then Conservative? I am just removing one Conservative and pushing up the NDP.

I'm asking if you would consider that.

[Daryl Kramp, Conservative, Prince Edward—Hastings, ON]

No.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Madam Faille.

[Meili Faille, Bloc, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

We support Mr. Kramp's motion. I have sat on two other committees where this was the order. It worked very well in terms of time on the floor; everyone got to speak.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Mr. Christopherson.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Mr. Kramp was good enough to give me a heads-up before the meeting, so I've had time to look at this. I don't have a problem with it.

However, I was going to raise a point, and I thank Mrs. Ratansi for being generous enough to raise it. I am a little concerned that in the second round we're so far down that we may not get that second one. Quite frankly, when you're not in the second round, half the meeting is all but irrelevant, except as a listener. One of the nice things about this is that at least there's a chance to participate. Many times we just have to cut the rotation, and we're quite a way away.... I mean, it's the seventh person, so we're over half an hour before we get the floor.

Any consideration along the lines that Mrs. Ratansi was raising to move us up even back to our normal position in the second round--Liberal, Conservative, Bloc, Conservative, NDP--would keep us in the same place. I'm worried that because of time we won't get that second round. I don't get nearly as many slots as it is, so I would make that friendly amendment.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Okay, that's a friendly amendment. If I interpret it correctly, you're moving into the fifth spot instead of the seventh.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Correct, you've got it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Let me read the second round again so that everyone's clear: “Liberal, Conservative, Bloc, Conservative, NDP, Liberal, Conservative, Conservative”.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Oui. That puts us in the same place in the second rotation.