Evidence of meeting #28 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 chair.
A recording is available from Parliament.
6:25 p.m.
NDP
Jack Harris NDP St. John's East, NL
I think what Glen is saying does make some sense. If, at the end of June, we're going to be looking back and forth between CSC and Levesque, even if we've finished it, we won't get it to the House. That doesn't make real sense. If we're serious about trying to finish Levesque, we would have to start it a little earlier or change CSC from the ninth to the 14th and leave the border one for a little later.
6:25 p.m.
Liberal
Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I only added to do Levesque on the 16th and the 21st because colleagues said we couldn't get it done in a day. I have to say that if we really want to table it in the House, we need to get it done in a day. I think there's going to be a fair amount of differences of opinion in terms of where the Levesque study goes, and it's incumbent on us to get that done that day, or quite frankly, I don't think it will get tabled in the House. As Glen expressed concerns about getting it done, I think it's incumbent on us to do it and get it back to the analyst.
Everybody seems to have agreed, except for the Conservative Party, that we need to do these two meetings on IMVE. It's later in the month. Mr. Chair, we're trying to come to consensus here, but maybe we do just need to go to a vote and see where this goes.
6:25 p.m.
Conservative
Glen Motz Conservative Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Pam is probably right that we need to vote on this and then go back and fix it, because I think we will have to go back and fix it.
On the 26th we already have the racism study ongoing. The 31st can be for finishing racism and Levesque. We can combine those. We have Blair and Lucki. We finish the Levesque on the seventh and we go from there with the things that are left. We should have it done by the second, then, or we could be done by the second if we really put our minds to it. Then it gets to the House.
6:25 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
The irony on Levesque, Glen, is that there's probably no agreement among the parties, so it's actually potentially going to be three separate reports. There's likely little consensus among the parties. Ironically, it actually may go faster, because in the racism study we made some considerable effort to get a meeting of minds.
Pam.
6:25 p.m.
Liberal
Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON
If Robin is still on here, I wonder if she could give us a sense of how long translation is taking. With this whole talk of being able to do something on May 31, we need to wrap this up quickly so that we can give her drafting instructions today if we really want to get moving on that study.
As we move later into June, I suspect the timing is going to get longer. I'm recognizing you can't give us a definitive answer right now, Robin, because you don't know what other committees are doing. I wonder if she could give us a sense, Mr. Chair—if that's okay—of translation time.
6:25 p.m.
Robin Whitehead Committee Researcher
I can't give a definitive answer, but I have been told that translation has been experiencing a lot of delays because a lot of committees are working to finalize reports.
I think it is wise to expect that it will take at least a couple of weeks to translate any significantly sized document. I think the guidelines they usually say is 1,600 words, but I don't know to what extent that is applicable at this time of year, and I won't know until I have the meeting with translation.
I'll have to get the instructions on drafting first so that I get a sense of what you're looking for in the report in order to have a sense of the length and to be able to give them a heads-up about what we're looking for.
6:25 p.m.
Liberal
6:25 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
We certainly can. Anyone can ask for it, so we're asking for a recorded vote on the motion, as amended. Since the mover and the person amending were one and the same, it's one motion.
Mr. Clerk, could you call the roll?
6:25 p.m.
The Clerk
Yes, Mr. Chair. The vote is on the amendment by Pam Damoff. I will call the roll now.
Ms. Damoff.
6:25 p.m.
Liberal
Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON
I'm sorry. On a point of order, since I amended my own motion, is it not on the motion as amended?
6:25 p.m.
Liberal
6:25 p.m.
The Clerk
It should be on the amendment, and then the main motion as amended or as unamended.
6:25 p.m.
Conservative
Damien Kurek Conservative Battle River—Crowfoot, AB
On a point of order, as just a technicality, is someone allowed to amend their own motion without unanimous consent of the committee? I'm just curious as to what the rules of committee procedure are on that.
6:25 p.m.
The Clerk
It has been done. Usually it's another member moving the motion, but we probably have examples of it being done this way in the past.
Typically, generally speaking, it's another member moving it, but it's how the committee wishes to proceed.
6:25 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
Technically, I can't recognize points of order in the middle of a vote. We are in the middle of a vote.
Mr. Clerk, please continue.
(Amendment agreed to: yeas 7; nays 4 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Thank you.
Colleagues, we want to move now to the Levesque conversation. That should be in camera. We are prepared to—
6:25 p.m.
Liberal
Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON
Chair, on a point of order, we only voted on our amendment.