Debates of June 5th, 2014

Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada

[The Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

I have the honour, pursuant to section 38 of the Access to Information Act, to lay upon the table the report of the information commissioner for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2014.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108 (3)(h), this document is deemed to have been permanently referred to the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics.

Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner

[The Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

Pursuant to paragraph 90(1)(b) of the Parliament of Canada Act, it is my duty to present to the House the annual report of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner in relation to the Conflict of Interest Act for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2014.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108 (3)(h), this document is deemed to have been permanently referred to the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics.

Pursuant to paragraph 90(1)(a) of the Parliament of Canada Act, it is my duty to present to the House the Annual Report of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner in relation to the conflict of interest code for members of the House of Commons for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2014.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(3)(a), this document is deemed to have been permanently referred to the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs.

Interparliamentary Delegations

[The Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

I have the honour to lay upon the table the report of the Canadian parliamentary delegation concerning its visit to Turkey on March 10-14, 2014.

Certificates of Nomination

[Peter Van Loan, Conservative, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to subsection 81(3) of the Parliament of Canada Act, chapter P-1 of the revised statutes of Canada 1985, I have the honour to table, in both official languages, a certificate of nomination and biographical notes for Mary Elizabeth Dawson, who the government is proposing to be reappointed to the position of Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner.

Pursuant to Standing Order 111.1(1), this matter is to be referred to the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics.

Government Response to Petitions

[Tom Lukiwski, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's response to 13 petitions.

Interparliamentary Delegations

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 34(1) I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the report of the Canadian delegation of the Canadian NATO Parliamentary Association respecting its participation in a joint meeting of the defence and security, economics and security, and political committees and officers of the committee on the civil dimension of security and the science and technology committee, held in Brussels, Belgium, February 16-18, 2014.

Foreign Affairs and International Development

[Peter Van Loan, Conservative, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, there have been the usual discussions among parties, and I believe if you seek it, you will find unanimous consent for the following motion:

That, notwithstanding any Standing Order or usual practices of the House, the remainder of the debate, pursuant to Standing Order 66(2), on the motion to concur in the Second Report of the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development, presented on Monday, December 9, 2013, be deemed to have taken place and all questions necessary to dispose of the motion be deemed adopted on division.

[The Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

Does the hon. government House leader have the unanimous consent of the House to propose the motion?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

The House has heard the terms of the motion, is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

(Motion agreed to)

Privacy Commissioner

[Peter Van Loan, Conservative, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I move:

That, in accordance with subsection 53(1) of the Privacy Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. P-21, and pursuant to Standing Order 111.1, the House approve the appointment of Daniel Therrien as Privacy Commissioner, for a term of seven years.

[The Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

No.

[The Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

All those in favour of the motion will please say yea.

[Some hon. members]

Yea.

[The Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

All those opposed will please say nay.

[Some hon. members]

Nay.

[The Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

In my opinion the nays have it.

And five or more members having risen:

Call in the members.

(The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:)

Vote #167

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Barry Devolin]

I declare the motion carried.

[Nycole Turmel, NDP, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I want to be sure that the Minister of Justice's vote is not counted because, in my opinion, he arrived after you began to call the vote.

[Peter MacKay, Conservative, Central Nova, NS]

Mr. Speaker, it is of course to your discretion, but I heard the question being put, as I was here.

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Barry Devolin]

This is the second day that this issue has arisen. Perhaps it is time to review what the Standing Orders actually say and what the expectations of members are.

When the bells for the vote started ringing, there were 30 minutes. It is an obligation of the members to be in the chamber when the 30-minute bell has expired.

I think it is obvious to all members that over the past months, or possibly years, members have slipped into the habit of starting to enter the House or getting ready to enter the House when the clock hits zero. In fact, it is the responsibility of members who want to participate in the vote to actually be in the chamber and to be ready for the vote when the clock hits zero.

As members also know, it is standard practice that the whips for both the government and the official opposition will be out in the lobby and will come down into the chamber together and take their seats. In almost all cases, members know they need to be in their seats at that point, so the vote can proceed.

What we had happen both yesterday and today is that one of the two whips, the government whip yesterday and the opposition whip today, waited until the bells expired and very quickly thereafter entered the chamber by themselves, addressed the Chair, and then took their seat. It is, in fact, not necessary for either of the whips to enter the House. The Speaker can rise and call the vote as soon as the bells have expired. It has become standard practice, in the co-operation that makes this place work better for all of us, that those two whips do that together.

However, it is important to point out to all hon. members on both sides of the House that this is a practice; it is not a rule.

In terms of who is or is not eligible to vote, the issue is that the member needs to be in the chamber in order to hear the question. That is the test for whether they can vote or not. I know that in the past, as I said, it has become common practice that members have been in their seats, sitting, when the two whips take their seats, at which point the chair occupant rises to put the question.

However, it is important to point out that this is not, in fact, absolutely necessary.

It is impossible for the Speaker to keep track of where all 300 members are as the question is being put. To a certain extent, there is an onus on the members not only to be on time but, if they are not here on time, to own up to that and to either not participate in the vote or, if it is pointed out, to subsequently say that their vote ought not to be counted. As is the practice and as members will know, there are times when members rise on a point of order immediately following a vote and point out that another member arrived late, was not here on time, and in their view, did not hear the question being put.

On that basis, being in one's seat, while always a very good idea, is not an actual requirement for being able to participate in the vote. Hearing the question is the requirement.

I have a suggestion for all hon. members. We can avoid this unfortunate circumstance in the future if members pay closer attention to the clock and actually arrive in the House, ready for the vote to be taken, when the clock hits zero, rather than be standing in the lobby.

The Chair is pleased to hear so many members applauding that, knowing that they will all be doing that in the future.

This month is, for many of us, our 10th anniversary of being elected to this place. We all know that there are rules and that there are Standing Orders. However, to a certain extent, this place only works with the good will and co-operation of all members.

After 10 years, the Chair is also aware that toward the end of session, particularly in June when the days get longer, the weather gets warmer, and thoughts of returning to our constituents grow fonder in our hearts, it gets a little crazy around here. I would say that we have had ample evidence of that in the past two days.

I will close with this. If the Minister of Justice says he was in the chamber and he heard the question being put, the Chair will accept that on the word of the minister. I will point out to all hon. members that in the future, the way to avoid this is to actually be in their seats, where they can hear the question being put clearly.

The chief government whip is rising on a point of order.