Transport Committee on June 20th, 2011

[Denis Coderre, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

I have two comments. First, there was an election, and we have a majority government. Second, we have to ensure that the subcommittee is not here to strike another committee. Rather, it must promote consensuses on a series of agendas for future business.

We shouldn't panic and question the subcommittee's democratic nature. In any case, there is a vote afterwards in the whole committee. It all happens in committee, and you will get the expected results.

I would like us to sort something out together. Our role is to represent our fellow citizens and to be mindful when it comes to bills and relevant current issues. I don't think we need to appoint six, seven or eight members. Otherwise, we may as well strike two committees. Even when there was a minority government, we got along well, regardless of the committee. I have been a member of the Standing Committee on National Defence and the Standing Committee on Natural Resources. We went through the same thing, and it worked well.

I don't think that we necessarily need more members. Regarding quorum, let's make sure that members of the official opposition are present, since that's when they can use procedural manoeuvres.

I personally don't object to there being five members. However, let's not start appointing six, seven or eight members, because that could go on forever. We will apply the law of numbers and then identify the other issues. I think that we must ensure that we can arrive at a consensus on agenda in a subcommittee. After we achieve a consensus, we could discuss things further. Should something extraordinary happen between us, we could discuss it afterwards.

I don't think that this committee needs to start a numbers war. I'm prepared to support the original suggestion made by my colleague Mr. Albas. We could then certainly discuss the quorum and the time set aside for discussions.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Are there other comments?

Mr. Bevington.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

In actual fact, we did have five members on the transport subcommittee in the last Parliament.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Yes. I stand corrected on that.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

The standard, as I understand it, is four. Perhaps that would be the direction we should take, then, if we're worried about having too large a subcommittee: move it back to four and have that as the subcommittee. Then we can have the quorum at three and be guaranteed that there will be representation from one of the opposition parties. It's simple enough. That's parliamentary procedure. I'm willing to go along with the standard procedure as well.

In the last session we did have five, and I don't think it really caused us any grief, but this is a new configuration in Parliament and perhaps four is more appropriate. If the committee doesn't want to have a larger group, then let's have a smaller group.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Well, that suggestion can be entertained. We are actually dealing with a motion and an amendment by Mr. Poilievre that would guarantee that at least one member of the opposition would have to be there to form a quorum of three.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

Can that just be adopted as a friendly amendment? I don't think there's any opposition to that particular amendment, right? There's a broader debate, but....

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Your amendment...?

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

Yes, just my amendment.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

You're suggesting that the quorum of three has to include a member of the opposition.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

Yes: a quorum on the subcommittee shall consist of at least three members, including one member of the opposition. We're not seeking approval for the whole motion, just the amendment.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Are there comments?

Is everybody okay with that?

Monsieur Coderre.

[Denis Coderre, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

Mr. Chair, we shouldn't forget that there are two opposition parties. There's the official opposition, but there's another opposition party as well. The Conservative Party and the NDP should not organize themselves to achieve a quorum. That would be unacceptable. When we sit on a committee, we represent all Canadian voters. We also represent our percentage of the vote. I can tell you that, in the past, everyone had the same amount of floor time, even if the number of MPs was low, percentage-wise.

If we want things to work properly, we should not remove a party from the quorum, so that we can proceed without one of the parties. The idea behind a quorum is for every political party to be represented, even if some of them have fewer representatives.

That could be done in time. I know that, if there's a vote in committee, my size won't change the fact that I have a single vote. It's important to point that out, so that things can work properly.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Mr. Albas.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Just to relieve Mr. Coderre's concerns--obviously he is a vice-chair now as well, second vice-chair, and that really shows we want to work together--if he's concerned that the government will only speak with the NDP, he can rest assured that I'll be his new best friend and I will certainly talk with him any time.

[Denis Coderre, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

You're not a socialist, right? Okay.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

I'm going to ask the committee to decide on the amendment, which would include the following: the quorum of the subcommittee shall consist of three members, one of which must be a member of the opposition.

All those in favour?

(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

That's carried. We're looking at the full motion now. We'll continue to have that discussion or we can move to the vote.

Are there comments?

The question is called, then. Shall the motion on the subcommittee on agenda and procedure pass? All those in favour?

(Motion as amended agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

On reduced quorum, Mr. Toet.

[Lawrence Toet, Conservative, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

On reduced quorum, we propose that the chair be authorized to hold meetings to receive evidence and have that evidence printed when a quorum is not present, provided that at least four members are present, including one member from government and one member from the opposition. In the case of previously scheduled meetings taking place outside the parliamentary precinct, the committee members in attendance shall only be required to wait for fifteen minutes following the designated start of the meeting before they may proceed to hear witnesses and receive evidence, regardless of whether opposition or government members are present.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Comments?

Okay, everybody. Then I'll ask if we are satisfied with the reduced quorum. All those in favour?

(Motion agreed to)

Moving on to distribution of documents, Mr. Richards.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Wild Rose, AB]

I'd like to move that only the clerk of the committee be authorized to distribute to the members of the committee any documents, including motions, and that all documents that are to be distributed amongst the committee members must be in both official languages. The clerk shall advise all witnesses appearing before the committee of this requirement.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Mr. Bevington.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

If we can go through this, we can go back to the other item: time for opening remarks and questioning the witnesses.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Yes, I'm sorry. I passed over that.

Are we happy with that?

All those in favour?

(Motion agreed to)

Time for opening remarks and the questioning of witnesses. It's basically the same speaking order, I presume.

Mr. Toet.

[Lawrence Toet, Conservative, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

I move that the order of questions for the first round of questioning shall be as follows: Conservative, NDP, Conservative, Liberal. Questioning during the second round shall alternate between the government members and the opposition members in the following fashion: Conservative, NDP, Conservative, NDP, Conservative, NDP, Conservative, based on the principle that each committee member shall have a full opportunity to question the witness or witnesses. If time permits, further rounds shall repeat the pattern of the first two at the discretion of the chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

It also says that the tradition has been that we would give each witness ten minutes, or each representative of an organization.

Mr. Coderre.