Evidence of meeting #2 for Status of Women in the 39th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was motions.
A recording is available from Parliament.
3:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Yasmin Ratansi
The next one is the 48-hour motion.
Now that Mr. Stanton has provided clarification, I have to give some time for the opposition to consult.
On notice of motions, the only change that Mr. Stanton is proposing is that the timing be from the time the notice is given to the members.
Mr. Stanton, if I understand you, if somebody gave a motion today at the end of the meeting, the 48 hours would be up on Wednesday at say 4 p.m.
3:55 p.m.
The Clerk
No, from the time the motion has been distributed to the members.
3:55 p.m.
Liberal
3:55 p.m.
Conservative
Bruce Stanton Conservative Simcoe North, ON
Madam Chair, it really again simply speaks to getting some continuity and consistency with the way in which the time clock is established for motions. Reading from the way the motion on last session's routine motions reads, I would put a semicolon at the end of what would otherwise be the end of the first sentence and add the first point in the government proposed motion. That would read: “and that the period of notice be calculated from the time the motion has been distributed to the members of the committee by the clerk of the committee.”
3:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Yasmin Ratansi
I ask the clerk if that would create any confusion. Would it be objective, or would it be subjective in terms of when this got distributed? I don't want to create confusion. I simply want to understand.
3:55 p.m.
The Clerk
When we talk of distributing it to members normally, it's the time when we distribute it electronically. Some of your members might not be here, you might have substitutes or whatever. So if somebody would give notice in the meeting right here and now, I would not say it has been distributed to members. It would be considered to have been distributed to members once I'd been able to have it in both official languages, laid out and sent electronically. From that time on, that is when you would have the 48 hours running.
3:55 p.m.
The Clerk
Yes, because some members might not be present, and today things are pretty much done electronically.
3:55 p.m.
Liberal
Maria Minna Liberal Beaches—East York, ON
I'm trying to understand. I have some problem with the wording. I'll tell you why.
First, I don't have a problem with the 48 hours being deemed to start when the clerk's office receives it, because that's what it's been traditionally. They receive it and then they send it out. In any other business that's normally how it works when something is received and there is a time.
The other thing is that the wording is a bit generic, in that I don't know whether this necessarily means when the clerk, as she said, distributes it electronically or distributes it to the committee here. It just says when it has been “distributed to the members of the committee”, but in what form? I don't know if we want to be clear on that. I have some problems.
The other thing, Madam Chair, is that I don't want to delay things. My concern is that we tend to find ways to make life hard for ourselves and delay processes. If a motion has been received by the clerk at 3:20 on a Monday afternoon, and it's noted, that to me is deemed to have been received, and the 48 hours will start at 3:20 on a Monday afternoon. Presumably the clerk, as soon as she can--within the next few hours or so--will send it out to everybody, but the timing starts. I don't understand the need for it to be distributed--and then, of course, the wording of distribution to me isn't clear, so I have some serious problems with it.
I don't understand why we need to delay things and make work harder for ourselves.
3:55 p.m.
The Clerk
I just want to add something. I did receive motions last week, and not one of them was translated. We cannot distribute things that are in one language only--so, sure, if somebody comes here and has the motions in both official languages and would like to distribute them to members, there's no problem.
4 p.m.
Liberal
Maria Minna Liberal Beaches—East York, ON
What I might suggest as the wording is that the 48 hours are deemed to start when received, as long as it's received in both official languages, so that the clerk doesn't have to be doing the translation. Then they can immediately turn them around and send them out.
November 19th, 2007 / 4 p.m.
Conservative
Sylvie Boucher Conservative Beauport—Limoilou, QC
I would like to point out that when we sent the motions, we sent them in both official languages.
4 p.m.
The Clerk
The proposals were in both official languages, yes.
4 p.m.
Conservative
Sylvie Boucher Conservative Beauport—Limoilou, QC
Exactly, the proposals and all the rest of it.
I think it is very important that the 48-hour notice be deemed to start when the motions are sent to members. I have sat on other committees where monumental mistakes have been made, both by government and opposition members. In some cases, there was no 48-hour notice and the voting was done instead by a show of hands. We have to work as a team in the committees, yet under this other system, some members were sometimes unfairly disadvantaged. To my mind, the 48-hour notice allowed us to ensure that the same rule is applied to everybody.
4 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Yasmin Ratansi
According to the clerk, the understanding....This is really confusing. I'll tell you why it's confusing.
From my perspective, I sit there and ask what 48 hours is and when it is calculated and if it is calculated when the clerk receives it, even if it's received in one language and is unilingual. It really muddies the water rather than clarifies, and as Ms. Mathyssen pointed out, the routine proceedings have been working fine.
The floor is yours, Mr. Stanton, but the clerk says there are times when the motions you will be sending if we adopt this thing won't come till the next meeting or the meeting after, depending on what was deemed to have been received, so it can create a confusion rather than a clarification.
Mr. Stanton is next. Then we have Ms. Davidson and then Ms. Minna. Did I see any other hands up? Yes, there is Madame Demers.
Go ahead, Mr. Stanton.
4 p.m.
Conservative
Bruce Stanton Conservative Simcoe North, ON
I would just point out, Madam Chair, that in the existing motions it simply says 48 hours' notice, so my question, through you to the clerk, would be how one determines that time clock now.
4 p.m.
The Clerk
In the past, the 48-hour notice has been done by counting like the little children, by counting how many sleeps, so if you sent it to us and we were able to send it out at 5 o'clock on Monday, even though the meeting would be at 3:30 and it's not a frank 48 hours, it would be fine.
4 p.m.
The Clerk
At the moment, I don't know. If it says that the period of notice be calculated from the time the notice has been distributed, it seems to want to restrict it a little more. It's up to the committee to decide if that's the way they want it to make sure that everybody has enough time or whatever.
4 p.m.
Conservative
Bruce Stanton Conservative Simcoe North, ON
I would only say again, this is not an attempt to in any way delay anything. It's just trying to be consistent, and being more concise as to how one measures that 48 hours so that there isn't discretion given in terms of what meets the rule. It either does or it doesn't. And if it doesn't meet that next meeting, then it goes to the meeting following.
I agree with Madam Minna with regard to how it's distributed. I think we'd all agree that we could put, “when it's electronically distributed”, because again, we know--as the example was given here--if it's submitted to the clerk in both official languages and can be sent out right away, the clock starts running then. But if it needs to be translated and you have some work to do before it can get running....
And remember, this is just a notice of motion. Once these are submitted, they will appear on the agenda. Those are the standing orders. That's the normal course. But this makes it fair for all parties. Everyone lives by the same rules, and we know what the rules are.
Again, that's why I support the proposal.