Public Accounts Committee on Aug. 8th, 2024

[Brenda Shanahan, Liberal, Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC]

Before the witness leaves, I'd like to challenge that. I do challenge your decision.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

You're challenging the decision that this is in order.

[Brenda Shanahan, Liberal, Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC]

I'm challenging the decision that the motion is in order and that the witness be allowed to leave. We still have one more Liberal speaking spot.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Chair, I have a point of order.

You cannot retrospectively challenge a decision that has already been implemented. If the chair makes a decision, you can challenge the chair in the moment when the decision is being made. I can't decide that I don't like a decision you made an hour ago in this meeting and try to undo the proceedings that have happened since. It was ruled in order. There was no challenge. Mr. Perkins began his comments, and then Ms. Shanahan maybe got a note from a staffer, or maybe she—

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

I have a point of order on that same point.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Hold on. I'm hearing Mr. Genuis. I'll hear your point of order after.

[Blake Desjarlais, NDP, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

I have a point on that same point.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Okay. I'm taking a list of points of order, just one at a time.

Mr. Genuis, you can wrap up, and then I will hear other points of order.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

I'm done, Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Thank you.

Ms. Khalid, you have the floor, and then I will hear Mr. Desjarlais on a point of order.

I see, Mr. Desjarlais, your hand is up to speak to the motion as well.

Ms. Khalid, you have the floor.

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

To counter what Mr. Genuis said, the ruling was made and within a couple of seconds, you dismissed the witnesses and you gave the floor back to Mr. Perkins. This was not an hour beyond what the ruling was. This was right then, instantaneously.

I agree with Ms. Shanahan on challenging your ruling.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Thank you.

Mr. Desjarlais, you had a point of order.

Just one second, Mr. Brock. Mr. Desjarlais is next.

[Blake Desjarlais, NDP, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

Mr. Chair, I believe this is something we can overcome together as a committee. It's a very easy procedural issue that has obviously taken place here, and I respectfully ask that we get unanimous consent from everyone here to allow the five minutes of questioning that the members are entitled to. It's just a matter of equivalency.

I know if I was the member who was cut off from my questioning of a witness, just like if I was a Conservative member, a Bloc member or a Liberal member, that wouldn't be procedurally fair to disallow time for questions. I think it's very reasonable to suggest that if we can just allow the five minutes with the Ethics Commissioner, they can ask their questions, and then we can return to the debate on this motion.

I hope that it's fair and that members can understand that this isn't my attempt to try to delay this any longer. Maybe we can get unanimous consent to just do that. Chair, maybe you can seek unanimous consent, and maybe members could just calm down a little and allow the five minutes, and we could continue our meeting to get to the debate on the motion. I think that's the most reasonable and the most fair thing to do without descending into chaos.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Thank you, Mr. Desjarlais.

I have one more point of order from Mr. Brock.

I see hands going up, but if those are points of order, just say so because I'm differentiating those from a speaking list.

Mr. Brock, you had a point of order.

[Larry Brock, Conservative, Brantford—Brant, ON]

I'm withdrawing, Chair. Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Ms. Shanahan, you had had a point of order.

[Brenda Shanahan, Liberal, Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC]

I appreciate Mr. Desjarlais' comments. I believe the commissioner has gone, but I want to point out that I was also challenging the decision that the motion was in order because indeed it's not the topic of the meeting. It's not on notice, and it's been....

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

First of all, I'm going to address Mr. Desjarlais' point, because I think it's the most relevant and speaks to the good work of this committee.

Unfortunately, it's very difficult for me to do that because as motions come up, they have to be dealt with. Technically, you're right. I could seek UC on that, but that also opens up the possibility of other manoeuvres coming up as well. That is not how we've operated in the past. We deal with motions as they come up.

Ms. Shanahan is challenging the chair. That is non-debatable. I'm going to ask the clerk for a roll call on that to either sustain my ruling, which is a “yes” vote, or overturn it, which is a “no” vote. If you sustain it, we will turn the floor back over to Mr. Perkins to continue the debate on the motion he has put forward.

Clerk, it's over to you, please.

[Blake Desjarlais, NDP, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

On a point of clarification, is the challenge on whether the motion is in order?

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Yes. That's correct.

[Blake Desjarlais, NDP, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

It's not whether we're agreeing to the motion.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Correct. It's just whether the motion is in order to be debated now.

[Blake Desjarlais, NDP, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

I see.

(Ruling of the chair overturned: nays 6; yeas 4)

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

It is defeated.

I have excused the witness.

This meeting is adjourned.