Evidence of meeting #65 for Transport, Infrastructure and Communities in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was meeting.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:20 p.m.
Liberal
Jennifer O'Connell Liberal Pickering—Uxbridge, ON
He's moving that we adjourn debate on that to move to subcommittee.
12:20 p.m.
Liberal
Vance Badawey Liberal Niagara Centre, ON
What I'm asking for, Mr. Chairman, is to adjourn debate so that we can go to subcommittee and follow the direction that Mr. Bachrach has already mentioned with respect to—
12:20 p.m.
NDP
Taylor Bachrach NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.
An amendment by itself does not convey the will of the committee unless the motion it amends is also carried. The clerk can correct me on that, but that's my understanding. If we adjourn debate at this point, we have an amendment that's been carried, but we have nothing to attach it to. Therefore, the terms of the amendment would not be binding on the committee.
I appreciate that we want to have the subcommittee meeting to hash out some of the business matters, but to the very first point I made, it seems like the summons is also somewhat germane here. The witnesses have not proven to be co-operative in the absence of a summons. I do think that it behooves us to deal with the Conservative's main motion in order to get those witnesses queued up.
I also acknowledge that their list of witnesses in this summons is quite long. The amendment sets a limited number of meetings, so we might not hear from all of the witnesses who are summoned. Some of them might get a “thanks but no thanks” message from us.
I don't think we can move to a subcommittee at this point and adjourn debate. I'll leave it at that. That's my impression of where we need to go.
12:20 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Peter Schiefke
Thank you, Mr. Bachrach.
There's a point of order from Ms. O'Connell.
12:20 p.m.
Liberal
Jennifer O'Connell Liberal Pickering—Uxbridge, ON
Thank you.
I was trying not to interrupt Mr. Bachrach in the interest of moving along. However, it's my understanding that Mr. Badawey moved a motion to adjourn debate, referring the motion to subcommittee. It's my understanding that there's no debate on the adjourning debate motion.
12:20 p.m.
NDP
Taylor Bachrach NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
That is correct, but he didn't move that as a motion. I heard him ask if that was part of the amendment that we had made, and it wasn't.
12:20 p.m.
Liberal
Jennifer O'Connell Liberal Pickering—Uxbridge, ON
I thought he moved the motion to adjourn debate. If he'd like to—
12:20 p.m.
NDP
Taylor Bachrach NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
It would be in order. I'm happy to vote on a motion to adjourn debate.
12:20 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Peter Schiefke
The clerk just informed me that it is not debatable to adjourn.
We'll entertain Mr. Badawey.
12:20 p.m.
Liberal
Vance Badawey Liberal Niagara Centre, ON
To the clerk, just for clarity, can I have a comment before I put the motion? I know I can't do it after. I'm asking if I can do it before.
12:20 p.m.
Liberal
Jennifer O'Connell Liberal Pickering—Uxbridge, ON
Can you clarify that a vote “yes” means that we adjourn debate?
12:20 p.m.
Liberal
Vance Badawey Liberal Niagara Centre, ON
I would put that motion forward so that we can carry on with Taylor's direction. I would put a motion forward to adjourn debate.
12:20 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Peter Schiefke
It's a recorded vote.
(Motion negatived: nays 6; yeas 5)
We have gone forward with Mr. Bachrach's amendment. Are there any hands up for discussion?
Yes, Ms. O'Connell.
12:20 p.m.
Liberal
12:25 p.m.
Liberal
12:25 p.m.
Liberal
Jennifer O'Connell Liberal Pickering—Uxbridge, ON
I'm sorry. With all due respect, Mr. Chair, there's no such thing as a friendly amendment.
12:25 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Peter Schiefke
I know there's no such thing. If you would like to speak to it, you definitely can.
12:25 p.m.
Liberal
Jennifer O'Connell Liberal Pickering—Uxbridge, ON
No. Could we first hear the amendment and the names again?
12:25 p.m.
Bloc
Xavier Barsalou-Duval Bloc Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC
My intention was to add Steven Robins, head of Strategy at the Canada Infrastructure Bank, Aneil Jaswal, director of Sector Strategies at the Canada Infrastructure Bank, and Bill Morneau, former minister of Finance.
Those are the three people I'd like to add to the Conservative motion list.
12:25 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Peter Schiefke
Thank you, Mr. Barsalou‑Duval.
Are there any other questions, thoughts or concerns?
Go ahead, Mr. Rogers.
May 2nd, 2023 / 12:25 p.m.
Liberal
Churence Rogers Liberal Bonavista—Burin—Trinity, NL
I'm trying to make some sense of this in terms of the number of witnesses we are talking about bringing forward to the committee. Mr. Bachrach suggested three per panel or whatever, so we're going to add more names to what appears to be a long list.
How do we determine the priority for the list and the proportional representation for each of the parties at the table?
I'm not sure if this amendment makes a lot of sense when we're trying to restrict the number of people we're bringing to the committee for four meetings.