Evidence of meeting #22 for Public Safety and National Security in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was chair.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Shelly Glover Conservative Saint Boniface, MB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I too will not agree to this motion. In fact, I'm quite surprised that it has been brought forward after all of the testimony we've heard.
When Mr. Holland originally made his motion I clearly and distinctly heard the word “expert” being used. Yet the motion that has now been distributed—in English, I might add—doesn't have the word “expert” in it. So I'm first of all concerned that the motion that was made is not in fact the motion that is presented to us, because they're not the same words.
So I'd ask you, Mr. Chair, to first clarify that for me, because I know for sure that word is missing. What other words are missing, I now have to wonder. I don't know how quickly we can get a copy of the blues, but the motion before us on paper is not the motion Mr. Holland made.
I don't know how we can clarify that. But I do want to speak to the motion he made, and in particular the word “expert” he used. I would ask whether Mr. Holland will withdraw his motion and start again with this motion.
I don't know how you're going to do that, Mr. Chair. I have more to say on the motion, but before I begin we need clarification on what Mr. Holland plans to do, because what he said is not what is written here.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
Okay, actually, that's a question for the chair. I will suspend again for a moment.
Liberal
Liberal
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
No. You have been a member of Parliament for more than a week or two, I think. When the meeting is suspended, you can't just suddenly talk. We're not even in session right now.
Liberal
Conservative
Liberal
Mark Holland Liberal Ajax—Pickering, ON
--while I have been attacked. I asked a simple question. There was a question posed of me about what was moved and what was before this committee.
Conservative
Liberal
Conservative
Liberal
Mark Holland Liberal Ajax—Pickering, ON
I tried to provide clarification, and you're going to attack me over providing clarification. I think everybody needs to take a step back and take a deep breath.
Conservative
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
I'm going to reconvene this meeting so that what is happening here can be on the record.
Mr. Holland, you are being very disrespectful to the chair. We were suspended. I was discussing something with the clerk, and you all of a sudden decided that you're going to take over the meeting, raise a point of order, completely disrupt the order we have here, and then be upset because I didn't recognize you, because we were suspended.
You're not even listening now. You continually talk over everybody. You do not pay any respect. Somebody else is talking, and you continue to interrupt. I cannot accept this. I wish that as chair of the committee I could do something to get you to follow the rules of this committee. This is completely absurd.
I'm going to suspend now, and I'm going to discuss your motion with the clerk to see how we proceed. If the motion you moved is not the same as the motion we have before us, I have to find out from the clerk how we proceed. That's what I was trying to do. You continually interrupt. Please. I suspend again.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
Let me reconvene.
The clerk has clarified that if Mr. Holland wants to clarify his motion, he can say that the motion he has distributed to the committee is the one we are to debate. Or does he want the one that he verbally put on the record? What do you wish to have?
Liberal
Mark Holland Liberal Ajax—Pickering, ON
Ms. Glover posed a question about what I had moved. I tried to respond, and I appreciate now having the opportunity to respond. Why I wasn't initially, I don't know.
My point was very simple. What I read and what is before you are the same. I can read the motion so that we're 100% clear. Mr. Chair, the motion you read and the motion I read are the same motions. I'm being admonished for trying to make that clarification. I simply was trying to answer the question posed by Ms. Glover, stating that what I read orally into the record was exactly the same as what you, Mr. Chair, read and what is before the committee in print right now.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
We have made that clarification.
Ms. Glover, you may proceed.
Conservative
Shelly Glover Conservative Saint Boniface, MB
Thank you.
Mr. Chair, I'm in a bit of a dilemma, because in fact Mr. Holland is wrong. Many of the members on this side did hear him use the word “expert” in the motion he made orally. There is no word “expert” within the motion that is written. I would submit to the chair that an oral motion, a verbal motion, is acceptable. But a written motion must be in both official languages and must be raised with 48 hours' notice.
At this point, we're in a dilemma. I am wanting to address the verbal motion he put forward that included the word “expert”. However, without fixing this mistake, I'm at a loss as to how to proceed. I ask for your indulgence again, Mr. Chair. How would you like us to proceed?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
Before I take that point of order, let me just consult for a moment.
Okay, just to clarify, the motion can be tabled. Because we're in clause-by-clause, it does not have to be translated. It can be brought to the meeting, and it is in order.
You had a point of order.
Liberal
Mark Holland Liberal Ajax—Pickering, ON
The only point of order I would make is that the motion I read into the record continued with me making verbal statements. That might have been the source of the confusion. I was making comments supporting my motion. They were not part of the motion.