Science and Research Committee on Feb. 2nd, 2026

[Jennifer McKelvie, Liberal, Ajax, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

We will end this panel with MP Blanchette-Joncas for two minutes.

Please go ahead.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I would simply like to say that I will be tabling a motion. Today, we have before us a strategy that the government describes as important. It says it wants to be a world leader. This will require public funds and major technological choices, not to mention issues related to fundamental rights. The government still refuses to disclose who was consulted and what input was received. We're being told there's a summary. There is therefore a lack of transparency, which I think is incompatible with ministerial accountability and the role of this committee. The motion seeks to order the production of documents that should already have been made public. It reads as follows:

That, pursuant to Standing Order 108(1)(a), the Standing Committee on Science and Research order the Department of Industry and the Department of Artificial Intelligence and Digital Innovation to table, within seven (7) days of the adoption of this motion, all of the following documents relating to the development, content, governance, and implementation of the Pan-Canadian Artificial Intelligence Strategy, namely: The complete list of all stakeholders—individuals, organizations, companies, institutions, or governments—who participated, directly or indirectly, in the public consultation, targeted consultations, or preparatory work, including identification of any contributions received anonymously, as well as any analysis, note, or justification that allowed for the acceptance of anonymous contributions; All briefs, written submissions, comments, questionnaires, responses, and documents transmitted, in their entirety, whether solicited or unsolicited.

I hope to have the support of my colleagues. This is a matter of transparency and credibility. If what was written is sound, then the public should normally know about it. Right now, even we parliamentarians can't fully know the outcome or nature of the public consultations.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Thank you, MP Blanchette-Joncas.

We will suspend the meeting so that the motion can be circulated to all the members.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC]

Madam Chair, the motion was already distributed to my colleagues before the meeting, so I don't see the need to suspend the meeting.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

I haven't seen the motion before. I will have to suspend the meeting to provide an opportunity for all members to look at the motion, and the minister has to leave.

We will suspend the meeting so the minister can leave and the officials can join us for the second panel while we look into this motion.

Thank you, Minister, for appearing before the committee and taking the time to talk about your mandate.

[Evan Solomon, Liberal, Toronto Centre, ON]

It was a pleasure. Thank you so much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

The meeting is suspended for a few minutes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

I call the meeting to order.

We have a motion on the floor from MP Blanchette-Joncas. The motion has been circulated to all the members in both official languages. We have the witnesses—the officials.

Thanks a lot for coming. I'm sorry for this delay. We will have to deal with this motion before we can start the round of questioning with you.

MP Blanchette-Joncas, go ahead

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC]

Madam Chair, when a committee member moves a motion, does their speaking time stop, or does it keep running?

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

The time stops and you have the floor. Please go ahead.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC]

Madam Chair, I would like to raise a question of privilege, because you suspended the meeting and you let….

Madam Chair, I would like you to listen to me when I speak to you. It's a matter of respect, after all. Are you listening to me?

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Yes, I'm listening. Please go ahead.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC]

That's perfect.

As a member of this committee, I feel that my parliamentary privilege has been violated. You suspended the meeting to ask my colleagues to study the motion I tabled, but you let the witness go. I had two minutes left to ask the minister questions, and now he's gone. So my parliamentary privilege has been violated. I would like you to explain how you are going to resolve this situation.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

The minister was here for one hour. We started the meeting, and at 4:36 we had to end the meeting. After an hour, he had to leave; he had some other commitments. It was said right at the beginning that the minister would have to leave because of some other commitments.

That's what it is.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC]

That's not what the minister confirmed to us, Madam Chair. He was willing to wait here. You could have let me ask my questions for two minutes and then suspended after that.

So why didn't you do that?

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Thank you for raising that question.

As I told you, like we said at the beginning, the minister had to leave. The motion had to be circulated to all the members in both official languages before we could continue the debate on that motion. That's why I suspended the meeting.

If you would like to challenge my ruling, that is perfectly fine. You can challenge it. I made a decision. That's what it was, so that members would have the opportunity to go through the motion before we tabled that.

That's what it is.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC]

Madam Chair, my parliamentary privilege is currently being violated. I understand that you may have acted quickly at the time, but do we agree that I lost my speaking time because I moved a motion? It shouldn't be.

Could you have suspended the committee meeting so that my colleagues could have the information and the minister could leave? I would have had my two minutes and then there would have been no problem. Right now, I understand that your strategy is to ask me to challenge your decision, which is nothing new. However, I'm entitled to ask this question, because I did lose the speaking time I would normally have had.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

To clarify in regard to the question you have asked, you tabled a motion. Once that is done, the debate happens. Until that motion is voted on or the debate is adjourned, we continue on that. So that every member would have the opportunity to read the motion, I had to suspend.

[Taleeb Noormohamed, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

Madam Chair, I may have a solution to propose to my colleague. I recognize that it's always difficult when you don't have time to ask your questions.

It's not under my authority, but if my colleague wishes, we could ask the minister to answer his questions in writing. That would allow us to continue our work, but it's up to my colleague to decide.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Thank you, MP Noormohamed, for your intervention.

As a member of the committee, you made a choice to table the motion.

Everyone knew; it was announced at the beginning. The minister had informed us. The notice of motion was amended to say that the minister had to leave one hour after we started the meeting, at 4:36 p.m.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC]

Madam Chair, would it have been possible to allow me to ask the minister my questions for two minutes and then suspend the meeting so that my colleagues could read the motion?

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

You did not suggest that at that time. You tabled the motion, and it had to be circulated.

I made this decision. The meeting was suspended, and now we are back. Would you like to continue now?

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC]

Madam Chair, I just want to have the same right as my colleagues and to get the speaking time allotted to me to ask the minister questions.

I'm trying to find an amicable agreement. Right now, you're trying to put the blame on me by saying that I didn't propose this. It is certainly not the first time that arrangements have been made to allow a committee member to ask questions when possible. So, yes, I hope it will be possible to have the minister appear so that I can have my speaking time. This is something I would like to explore today with colleagues.

Another point is that the minister was scheduled for two hours. Right now, we have access to him for only one hour, so I invite my colleagues to consider whether it is realistic to simply authorize a speaking right that had normally been agreed upon for a member of this committee.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Thank you for your question.

We invited him. Initially, he agreed to come for two hours, but we were told after that. That's why the clerk sent out an amended notice saying that the minister would only be here for an hour. We do not have control over ministers' calendars, and we can only request them. The time they appear before the committee is up to them. The notice was amended. He had to leave after an hour. He had some other commitments.

I gave two minutes after the second round of questioning. We had approximately six minutes, and I gave it equally to all the parties, two minutes each for the Conservatives, the Liberals and the Bloc. Then you tabled a motion, and I had to suspend so that the motion could be read by all the members.

Thank you.

Should we proceed with the motion we have?