Status of Women Committee on April 23rd, 2009

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

I would like to suggest, Mr. Lemieux, that we have a lot of work to do in this committee. The points you made were already effectively made by Ms. McLeod, Ms. Gordon, Ms. Glover, and by Ms. Hoeppner with regard to the veracity and by Ms. Neville with regard to whether the facts are straight or not.

The question we were then dealing with was if we should get the facts, or if we should withdraw the motion because it's inappropriate. Ms. Demers is withdrawing the motion. We have to get unanimous consent to withdraw the motion and then we will move on.

So while I appreciate it, I would like to ask you to be as quick as you possibly can, because we really need to get on with the work of this committee and those points have been eloquently made by many members on your side of the table already.

[Pierre Lemieux, Conservative, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

As I mentioned, I think part of the confusion.... I didn't mean to cause disruption to the committee, but I was actually here at the last meeting to participate. This is an extremely important debate on a motion, because it involves the committee, and if it actually passes, the government--

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

There's no further debate, Mr. Lemieux. The motion was withdrawn, and we have to decide whether we--

[Pierre Lemieux, Conservative, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

I know, Chair, but I sat here before the motion was withdrawn. The clerk had recognized me. He acknowledged the fact that I wanted to speak. You were talking, Chair, and then you immediately turned to Madam Demers and I was the next speaker on the list. I was not given the opportunity to talk, and now that I've been given the opportunity to talk, I've been cut off.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Mr. Lemieux, can you please make your point so we can move on?

[Pierre Lemieux, Conservative, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Absolutely. I'd be glad to make my point.

I'm just saying that I was here last time to make these points. I'm not sure what was said before I arrived, but I'd still like to make my points that I'm surprised that Madame Demers brought this motion, that she actually deposited it in front of this committee, when it is so factually incorrect. It's a very bad reflection on Madame Demers to not understand excommunication and to not understand about the role of the Vatican in this.

The point that I was making, Madam Chair, before I was interrupted, was that a nine-year-old girl cannot be excommunicated in this affair because she is not able to exercise her full consent. What is required for excommunication is very clear in canon law. So this is a very critical point, that the nine-year old girl is not excommunicated.

Secondly, the Vatican has made no pronouncement whatsoever on this issue, and it's very important to underline that. There was a bishop who actually commented on this affair, but he was responding to a question. When he commented on the affair, he wasn't asked if he was excommunicating anybody. He was asked what canon law says about excommunication in circumstances such as this. All he was doing was describing what is in canon law. He was not excommunicating her. So she has not been excommunicated, and neither has the mother or the doctors. No one has been excommunicated by fiat, by an actual declared statement. Instead there was some elaboration on canon law.

I think the third point, Madam Chair--

[Anita Neville, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

Point of order.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Ms. Neville.

[Anita Neville, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

Madam Chair, I appreciate that Mr. Lemieux feels strongly about this issue and I appreciate that he's signed in. The motion has been withdrawn. If he wanted to speak to it, I would suggest he might have arrived on time and participated in the whole debate. But the debate is concluded. I appreciate your courtesy in allowing him to continue, but we do have a full agenda and much work to do. That's my point of order.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

In fact, I did ask Mr. Lemieux to be quick—

[Pierre Lemieux, Conservative, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

I am being quick.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Yes, and I will allow you one more minute to finish your discussion.

[Pierre Lemieux, Conservative, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

I guess what I'm saying is that I couldn't have come earlier, because I thought that this whole—

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Can you finish your discussion, please?

[Pierre Lemieux, Conservative, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Yes, I certainly can.

What I'm saying, Madam Chair, is that this is a factually incorrect motion and that Madame Demers should be better informed on these matters before she puts a motion like this in front of a committee, because this motion could technically have made it to the House, and it would have been a very embarrassing situation for the House, both from the point of view of the factual inaccuracies contained within the motion, but also, as you quite rightly mentioned, Chair, because it is a matter of church affairs, concerning the good standing or not good standing of Catholics, and has no business in the public realm, in the House asking for comment. It shouldn't even be up for debate here in the committee.

I thank you for your indulgence. I thank my committee members for their indulgence in allowing me the opportunity to speak, because I came to the last meeting to speak and was not given the opportunity.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

I think you made that point, Mr. Lemieux. Thank you very much for your position.

I would also like to clarify, since everyone seems so bent on clarifying everything. You commented that I did not allow you to speak, when you had a signed form. We were discussing this. The signed form came after the discussion; it did not come the moment you arrived, Mr. Lemieux. So I am following the rules to the letter.

Now we have moved on—

[Pierre Lemieux, Conservative, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Chair, can I comment?

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

No, Mr. Lemieux, I will not allow you to comment. Please. I am now calling for....

Ms. Mathyssen, is this with regard to procedure about unanimous consent for withdrawal of the motion?

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Well, it has to do with the tone of what's gone on in the last few minutes. Quite frankly, Madam Chair, I'm appalled in many ways: first of all, that a member of our committee has been impugned, that this disruption has been tolerated. I understood Ms. Hoeppner's explanation very well, thank you very much. I did not need to be hit over the head with yet more and more.

Quite frankly, I feel that the abilities of this committee are being questioned when people come and not only disrupt but put into question the intent of committee members. Like my colleague, Madam Neville, I understand Ms. Demers to be a woman of great integrity, and her concern was such that she brought this for discussion. We've discussed it; we've gone through it; now I would like to get on with the business of this committee.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you very much, Ms. Mathyssen.

I think we will now move to getting on with the business of the committee.

Yes, Mr. Lemieux?

[Pierre Lemieux, Conservative, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

On a point of order, I'd like to comment. Please allow me to—

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Mr. Lemieux, excuse me, but as the chair I would like to comment, because it is my duty as the chair to ensure that this committee behaves with respect for each other.

When we're going to spend the time being personal about each other.... I admit I allowed you to make comments about Madame Demers, but I will tell you, I have been at committees for the last 16 years, and when members of the committee impugn the integrity of other members, the chair has usually stopped the debate and asked for an apology. It didn't matter which side did it.

We have to show that as parliamentarians we can deal with each other with mutual respect, that we can run committee work and get on with the business of committee in a respectful manner. When we start disrespecting each other at committees, we cannot work together. We have to respect each other's integrity.

You have accused Ms. Demers of not having done her homework, of not knowing what she's talking about. I consider this to be really impugning the integrity of the committee, of the motion, of the discussions by the committee. Ms. Hoeppner is very eloquent. She said what she had to say. We heard it all, and I think Ms. Mathyssen made a point.

Now I would like to move to the orders of the day, and unless you're speaking to—and I will only allow you to speak to—what is on the floor now, which is unanimous consent for withdrawal of a motion.... If you wish to speak to the process of withdrawal of the motion, I will allow you to speak. If you just wish to continue a debate in which we impugn each other, I will not allow it to continue. It is not in the best interests of the committee.

And Ms. Glover, the same goes for you. If you wish to speak to the matter of withdrawal of the motion, then I will allow you to speak. But if you wish to continue this personal kind of fighting that goes on, I will not allow it. It does not allow this committee to work well, and it is my duty to make this committee work well.

So we have a withdrawal of the motion from the mover of the motion, and unless you're speaking to the procedure concerning it....

I will allow you to speak, Mr. Lemieux, to the procedure of withdrawal.

[Pierre Lemieux, Conservative, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Thank you, Chair, for having recognized me.

I actually wanted the opportunity to defend myself against the comments of Ms. Mathyssen.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

No, I am sorry, you cannot have that opportunity.

[Pierre Lemieux, Conservative, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Chair, you're allowing her to—