Evidence of meeting #1 for Public Accounts in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was amendment.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Shawn Murphy
If you have that written down, Mr. Weston, I'll ask you to present it to the clerk.
February 3rd, 2009 / 3:40 p.m.
Conservative
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Shawn Murphy
I want to go to Mr. Christopherson next.
It has been the practice of the committee, certainly as long as I've been on it, that anyone attending a meeting of the steering committee can attend with staff, and they usually do, but if we want to put it in a motion, I guess there's nothing wrong with that.
Before we hear from Mr. Christopherson, I'm going to read it again just for clarity. The amendment would include two paragraphs in addition to the paragraph that's before you. First is that a quorum of the subcommittee shall consist of at least three members, one of whom must be from the government and one member of the opposition. Secondly, each member of the subcommittee shall be permitted to have one assistant attend at any meeting of the subcommittee on agenda and procedure.
Mr. Christopherson.
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
I was going to raise another matter relative to this issue, so I don't know whether you want me to put that on the table or speak to the proposal.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Shawn Murphy
Perhaps we'll deal with this issue first and then we'll go to your amendment.
NDP
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
I would like to speak, Chair. If I have the floor, I'd like to speak--
Liberal
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
Mr. Chair, I think Mr. Christopherson said he had a thought on this motion. Do you wish him to continue or do you want me to take--
Liberal
Liberal
Yasmin Ratansi Liberal Don Valley East, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I wanted some clarification. In the past the subcommittee's composition has always been the chair and the two vice-chairs and then the member of the opposition party, which would be the Bloc Québécois. My question is, why is this addition necessary? Have there been any problems regarding quorum in the past? The chair has always been as chosen, whether it's government or opposition, and then the opposition parties have formed the quorum of the subcommittee.
So I just wanted clarification, Mr. Chair, via you on this issue of the amendment.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Shawn Murphy
In the previous practice I guess we didn't have a quorum, but the subcommittee would never meet with two members; that would be unheard of. We have met with three, usually when one member can't attend. In that case, a lot of times, I guess in all instances, the staff would be at the meeting, although they certainly wouldn't be able to vote and speaking would be limited. Sometimes we ask the views of the party without getting into a long discussion.
I have a little problem with it and I'll just relay my concerns. I don't have a problem with the quorum, but it says that a government member or an opposition member must attend, and if they say they won't attend, you've basically shut down the steering committee. I also point out the fact that any decisions of the steering committee have to be confirmed and ratified by the whole committee to be binding, so it can't go out on its own and take a course of action that's not approved.
Normally we publish the minutes of the steering committee and they're presented at the next meeting of this committee, and sometimes they're overturned. Most of the time they're not, but they certainly have been overruled on occasion.
Mr. Christopherson.
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
I don't recall a problem and I've been on the steering committee all those years too. The subcommittee can only recommend. There are no delegated powers at all other than to spend some time usually delving into details of witnesses, procedures, getting the horse in front of the cart, that sort of thing, and then it's recommended to the committee.
So again, I'm open to any changes, but I don't hear a good reason for this one and I share the concern. Right now if we get partisan...we try not to, and we really don't that often in this committee, we really don't. But when we do, we're up front about it and we say we're partisan, and then we go and do our thing. We really do try to work together, and it just makes it too easy for one of those parties to throw a wrench into the whole deal. I see no reason for that and no gain from it.
If I can, though--I'll save my change for later--it's the makeup of the committee. It will only take me 30 seconds to throw it out.
Right now, when we have a full committee, we have the chair--and I remember this from when Mr. Williams from the Conservatives was the chair, when they were the official opposition. So we would have the representatives. But what happens is that the person who is the chair ends up being expected to play two roles somehow. First, they're the chair of the subcommittee, so now the chair is playing gatekeeper to our getting the floor; that's what he or she does at subcommittee, at the steering committee. But at the same time, in the case of our current chair, Mr. Murphy, he's the only Liberal at the meeting and is expected somehow to chair the meeting and express the concerns of the Liberal caucus, and it's not even his role. In my experience, the chair is not recognized as the lead person for any of the caucuses; it's always somebody else.
So I was going to make a suggestion that we allow a member from the chair's party to be at the steering committee. So in effect you would have four representatives, one from each of the caucuses and the chair. The chair is non-partisan, just as our current chair is at this meeting.
I've found it awkward, because when we try to get a deal and it's complex and we're talking about a lot of different pieces and we finally put together a deal that we think we can all live with, the Liberals really haven't been represented from a political point of view; and when we get to the full committee, those concerns come forward and it unravels what we've done. If we had them there at the first meeting of the steering committee, we could possibly avoid those longer discussions at the full committee.
So I leave that with you. Thanks, Chair.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Shawn Murphy
Mr. Christopherson, your last point will be another amendment, so we'll deal with the first one first and then we'll go to your other amendment.
Mrs. Crombie.
Liberal
Bonnie Crombie Liberal Mississauga—Streetsville, ON
On Mr. Weston's proposal, I think the spirit of his amendment is already implicit in the existing motion, and thus I don't think the amendment is necessary. And on Mr. Christopherson's, I think that could be revised by adding the words “two other opposition parties”. We could just say that the subcommittee on agenda and procedure be established and be composed of the chair, the two vice-chairs, and members of the two other opposition parties.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Shawn Murphy
Again, Mrs. Crombie, I'm going to deal with one amendment at a time, so we'll deal with the one we have on the floor.
Madame Faille.
Bloc
Meili Faille Bloc Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC
I would just like to point out that in the past, this motion has never caused problems, but, on occasion, the parliamentary secretary was invited to take part in order to help with the organization of the agenda and advise on the minister's availability to appear before the committee. So I do not see why it is important to amend the motion at this time.
Liberal
Conservative
John Weston Conservative West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC
I would first like to recognize the long-time members of the committee, especially Mr. Murphy and Mr. Christopherson. I have heard that this committee works very well. I did not move this amendment to be partisan, but just to clarify the role of the subcommittee. Clearly, the two members mentioned in the amendment will allow the committee to operate more smoothly.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Shawn Murphy
I'm prepared to put the amendment to a vote at this time, and we're dealing only with the amendment that came from Mr. Weston.
The vote is a tie. For the reason that I briefly....
Mr. Kramp.
Conservative
Daryl Kramp Conservative Prince Edward—Hastings, ON
Would you perhaps indulge the member just one comment?