Public Safety Committee on April 28th, 2010

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

Right.

Mr. Wrzesnewskyj, go ahead.

[Borys Wrzesnewskyj, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I believe that all of us have gathered in this particular special session to find a reasonable resolution of this particular issue, notwithstanding the difficulty of the issue itself. It's a little discouraging when our meeting begins with, as Mr. Comartin has stated, what could have been constructive commentary.... When things begin with personal slights, whether toward Mr. Holland or toward Mr. Comartin, or even in a fascinating way by stating that only one person on this side seems to make any sense.... So you're collectively saying that all but one makes any sense.

There's no room for this. In fact, I think we can rise above this. I certainly hope that within the next couple of hours, as difficult as this subject is, and as difficult as the particular knot we've put ourselves into.... And we're all collectively to blame for that. I don't think we should point fingers. But I believe reason will prevail by the end. It doesn't help our democratic process to use statements that seem to twist the reality of our system, by calling things a tyranny of the minority.

We'll have a vote. We'll have a vote on Mr. Holland's motion. It may pass or it may not pass, but it will pass by a majority of votes. And the majority vote will then decide. If it doesn't, we'll move on to the next motion.

And if there are, in fact, abuses that have been taken.... And they do take place in committees or in Parliament. Perhaps we can point to the example of the Prime Minister's misuse of prorogation this past winter. The government certainly is a minority.

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Oxford, ON]

Point of order. This is ridiculous. This is exactly.... If he wants to talk about prorogation, there have been 104 in this country. Why would the member bring that issue in here?

[Borys Wrzesnewskyj, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

I don't believe that's a point of order.

I was just providing clarification for the terminology that's been used a number of times by Mr. Rathgeber in providing examples.

I believe that in this committee we can actually rise to the occasion, if we show the goodwill, if we do not engage in personal slights, and if we try to proceed expeditiously on this. It's fascinating how, collectively, if we were to just tone it all down, we might actually serve the public in a positive way.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

Thank you.

Mr. MacKenzie, did you indicate that you wanted to...?

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Oxford, ON]

No, I'm fine, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

No more speakers?

I'll call for the vote. You wanted a recorded vote.

(Motion negatived: nays 7; yeas 4)

The motion is defeated.

I'm not sure who was first here, Mr. MacKenzie or Ms. Mourani.

Mr. MacKenzie, go ahead, and then Ms. Mourani.

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Oxford, ON]

I'd like to suggest that maybe we take a ten-minute break to sit with representatives of each of the parties and come up with something in ten minutes to bring a motion.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

I'll suspend, then, for approximately ten minutes.

[Borys Wrzesnewskyj, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

For the record, one person can't make that sort of decision for the whole committee, so I suggest you would probably find consensus around the table.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

Oh, I see. Nobody seemed to be objecting.

[Borys Wrzesnewskyj, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

You're reading our minds.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

I'm reading your minds. I am trying to do my best for us.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

I'd like to reconvene this meeting.

I will recognize Ms. Mourani, please.

[Maria Mourani, Bloc, Ahuntsic, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to thank all my colleagues for their cooperation, and now I will hand out my motion. I will read it, if I may.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

We'll just take a moment while it is being distributed.

Okay, go ahead Ms. Mourani.

[Maria Mourani, Bloc, Ahuntsic, QC]

The motion is as follows:

That, as part of the examination of Bill C-391, each party submit to the clerk a list of witnesses not exceeding a ratio of three witnesses for each of its members, excluding the Chair, by 12:00 noon, Thursday, April 29, and that the Committee devote six meetings to hearing those witnesses and that the various points of view be presented in a balanced manner at each meeting.

Mr. Chair, if everyone agrees with the principle of three witnesses per member, I could remove the deadline of Thursday, April 29 at noon, and we could discuss it in a friendly manner today and decide on our list, if possible. That is a suggestion. I can leave it or I can take it out, depending on what my colleagues think.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

Okay, thank you.

I have a speaking list started here.

Mr. Rathgeber, please.

[Brent Rathgeber, Conservative, Edmonton—St. Albert, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I would also like to thank Ms. Mourani for a great motion, which I am going to support.

I just have a question. Has she contemplated how the sponsor of the bill, Ms. Hoeppner, will be accommodated by her proposal?

[Maria Mourani, Bloc, Ahuntsic, QC]

I move that it be 30 minutes. Ms. Hoeppner could come, she would be on your list of witnesses. She could appear for 30 minutes. That would be much less time than other witnesses, but it is up to you to decide. Ms. Hoeppner is your witness.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

Can I interrupt?

I would just remind the committee that the usual practice is to have the mover of a private member's bill speak to it first, not as one of the witnesses, but to speak to it first. We can allot an hour or whatever you want for that. And then, often, we ask for the officials—

[Maria Mourani, Bloc, Ahuntsic, QC]

I think it should really be 30 minutes for Ms. Hoeppner.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

Okay, 30 minutes, or whatever. You can decide that, and then we would have the officials from the department—it can be the minister or any other officials—for however long the committee wants, maybe another half an hour. That's usual practice.

I don't know, do we as a committee want to depart from that usual practice?

Mr. Holland.

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

Mr. Chair, I am extremely disappointed with the position of the Bloc. That said, for the purposes of moving this forward—albeit in a way that I don't think is very balanced—I am going to be supporting the motion, simply because we have to hear from witnesses. Given that the Bloc has decided to support the Conservatives on that, I will have to proceed on that basis.

My suggestion and my caveat in supporting the motion is that we should identify the witnesses that we have and come to a concurrence on when those witnesses will be speaking. My reason for that, Mr. Chair, with all due respect to your suggestion, is that in the much heralded spirit of balancing out interests that was described earlier, I think each day needs to be balanced. Typically the clerk, for purposes of simplicity, puts government witnesses on one day and opposition witnesses on another day. I don't agree with that. In this instance, it is inappropriate. So my suggestion, and I will do this prescriptively by way of amendment, is that each day the committee has a balance of opposition and government witnesses.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

It's already in the motion.

Read the motion, Mr. Holland, please.