Evidence of meeting #22 for Science and Research in the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was going.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Bloc
Bloc
Maxime Blanchette-Joncas Bloc Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC
The member did not move a motion, Madam Chair. You asked if he was moving a motion.
I want to raise my question of privilege before he moves his motion. That's what I asked.
Bloc
Maxime Blanchette-Joncas Bloc Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC
Madam Chair, I'm just trying to come to an amicable agreement. I get the feeling that things are a bit topsy-turvy at the moment. You unilaterally decided that there would be only five minutes for all committee members in the second round of questions. You didn't check the House resources beforehand to see if we could continue the study period so that all members of the committee could get the speaking time they should normally have.
That now makes me doubt how this committee operates. Normally, the available resources are checked and then committee members are asked whether they want to continue the meeting. However, what I'm seeing today, Madam Chair, with all due respect, is that you did the opposite and didn't consult the members of the committee.
I'm trying to understand. Today, I lost two minutes in the first hour. You told me that it was up to me to ask if I could do that and table the motion. Then you decided to suspend the meeting without my consent. Again, I even told you that my colleagues had received the motion beforehand.
In the second hour of the meeting, and I asked you once again in good faith, at the start of my speaking time, until what time the resources were available. You told me that you couldn't answer me and that, if I didn't speak right away, my clock would keep running.
Madam Chair, I'm simply trying to do my parliamentary job as a member of this committee and get my full right to speak. It's hard for me to understand why you're trying to push this committee to end when we simply want to ask questions of the witnesses we've been awaiting for several weeks.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Salma Zahid
Before we got to you for the five minutes of questioning, it was mutually agreed by all members, after a suggestion from MP Baldinelli, that we would adjourn the meeting after the five minutes. Every member agreed, and we started with that. That's why I went through some of the things that I had to ask everyone at the end of the meeting before we could adjourn.
MP Noormohamed.
Liberal
Taleeb Noormohamed Liberal Vancouver Granville, BC
I want to make sure that we are all on the same page. The chair indicated that our colleague had used the time. The clock was running. In order to ensure that everybody was treated equitably, Mr. Baldinelli suggested that in the event that we do not get an answer during the course of that period, which did not happen, we would give those additional five minutes to our colleague so that everybody got their five minutes.
I think everyone is trying to work collaboratively. We're doing our best to figure out how we can all get answers to questions when the minister isn't here. We did all the things we could possibly reasonably do, but there is a limit.
I suggested gently that we should adjourn the meeting. I'm now going to move that we adjourn the meeting, noting that we have the minister coming. If we run the clock on this thing, we're going to end up in a situation where the minister isn't going to be there and we're going to have to deal with that.
We are all trying our damnedest to make sure that everyone gets the time they need to ask the questions. We did something here that I don't think has been done in a very long time. We said, “You didn't get the last two minutes to ask the minister questions. Submit them in writing.” We're doing everything we can as a collective team to try to make this work, but there's a limit.
I'm now going to move that we adjourn the meeting, with the consent of my colleagues.
(Motion agreed to: yeas 8; nays 1)