Evidence of meeting #17 for Public Safety and National Security in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was meeting.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON
No, I'm not going to do that anymore, Chair. It's just three hours, adding Dr. Bogoch, and adding to the list of witnesses “and any other officials as deemed appropriate by the department”.
NDP
Jack Harris NDP St. John's East, NL
On a point of order, Chair, I don't think it's in order to change your motion again after we've had a vote on the previous one. Part of the reason for doing what I did was related to the decision that had been made to create a motion to accept a change to that motion. I'm opposed to that.
NDP
Liberal
Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON
No, the ministers aren't first. The officials are first, and the ministers are after. Is that what we wanted?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
As I understand it, we are voting on, if you will, one three-hour meeting, with officials first and ministers second. I think those are the substantive changes that Madame Damoff is proposing on this vote.
Am I correct?
The Clerk
Just as a point of clarification, was there not “and other officials that the department deems appropriate” as part of the amendment? I just want us to have that cleared up.
Liberal
Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON
It's not a hill I'm going to die on, but it was something I added.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
If there's no hill to die on, my suggestion would be that we remove the hill so we can get as much consensus here as possible.
Conservative
Shannon Stubbs Conservative Lakeland, AB
Just for clarity, can you summarize again exactly what we're voting on? Please read it out so we know with total clarity.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
We're voting on one three-hour meeting. The first panel of witnesses will be the officials. The second panel will be the two ministers requested.
Jack Harris NDP St. John's East, NL
It has to be clear that the officials are here for a full two hours and then the ministers for one.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
Okay. Are we clear?
Mr. Clerk, would you call the roll?
(Amendment agreed to: yeas 6; nays 5 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
With that, we're now voting on the main motion as amended. Can we call that vote?
(Motion as amended agreed to: yeas 11; nays 0 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Okay. Some begrudging harmony broke out in the last second.
Now, this is a very tall order for the clerk and me to put this together this week. We will make our best efforts.
Is it the preference to have it this week as opposed to next week in our regular time? If we have regular time slots, we'll have to somehow or other extend our regular two-hour meeting.
Can I get a sense of whether it's preferable to have it this week versus next week?
Go ahead, Glen.
Conservative
Glen Motz Conservative Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB
Thank you, Chair.
As I indicated previously, I think it's important business. It's a critical issue. We brought it forward for an emergency debate because it's an emergency and it requires attention sooner rather than later. As well, I believe we should be able to find time for the officials and the ministers to be here this week, hopefully.
I would hate to have some of the studies that are critical to us.... The Levesque study is important. The systemic racism study is important. We need to get at them, so my push would be for this week and hopefully not on Friday morning, because I have NSICOP all morning.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
We all have conflicts at the best of times. This will be a difficult thing to pull together in four days, or really in three days.
Mr. Harris.
NDP
Jack Harris NDP St. John's East, NL
I'd very much prefer to do it this week, so that we can continue with our other work. As this is an emergency motion, given the circumstances, I would prefer to have it on Thursday or Friday of this week, if that's at all possible.
Conservative
Shannon Stubbs Conservative Lakeland, AB
Thanks, Chair.
I would note—amiably of course, after all of this—that my original motion allowed for two weeks. I'm very grateful for all my colleagues' support to have it done this week, because it is so urgent.
On a logistical matter, can we have a general consensus here that the presentations for the officials at that meeting be limited to a maximum of 15 minutes? That would maximize the question time for each and every one of the members on this committee, regardless of the size of their party.
Conservative
Glen Motz Conservative Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB
Shannon, are you referring to 15 minutes total, for all of the officials?
Conservative
Shannon Stubbs Conservative Lakeland, AB
Yes. I think that should be enough for officials to give opening comments. That way it maximizes the opportunity for us as members of the committee to do our job.