Government Operations committee  If I may, Mr. Chair, what Mr. McCauley is proposing is what's called a “dilatory” motion. They are non-debatable. Procedurally, the chair has to put the question before the committee. The committee will vote on whether or not to adjourn debate on the motion. My advice to you wou

Government Operations committee  Yes. The question is on Mr. McCauley's motion that the debate be now adjourned. I will put the question by recorded division.

Government Operations committee  Mr. Chair, there are five in favour and five against. You have a tie and it's incumbent upon you to issue the tie-breaking vote, Mr. Chair.

Government Operations committee  I did hear Mr. Weiler putting forward some suggestions. However, Mr. Weiler, being the one who proposed the motion, cannot amend his own motion. Another member could move the same amendment, but procedurally, usually the mover of the motion cannot amend their own motion without t

Government Operations committee  Normally, once a motion or an amendment is before a committee, the committee can dispose of it only by taking a decision, but there are other things. A committee can agree, if there's consent, to either withdraw the motion or adjourn the debate. Once it's no longer debating that

Government Operations committee  Mr. Chair, if I may intervene on that, the subcommittee makes recommendations to the main committee. A motion adopted by the main committee doesn't have to be referred to the subcommittee, though the subcommittee may want to make recommendations as to, for example, how to run the

Government Operations committee  The chair can always convene a meeting of the subcommittee at a later date to discuss future business and then make recommendations to the main committee, or the main committee can adopt motions right now. As there is a motion on the floor, I would suggest that we should dispose

Government Operations committee  I will answer Mrs. Vignola. I put this question to the members of the Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer at the beginning of prorogation. They were in the process of reviewing the laws that govern them. There is nothing to prevent the committee from making the same reque

Government Operations committee  My recommendation is that you deal, Mr. Chair, with one motion at a time. It would create too much confusion otherwise. Procedurally, we can't entertain another motion until the previous motion is disposed of.

Government Operations committee  If I may, Mr. Chair, in the past, I believe the definition of “House officer's office” has been sufficiently fluid to be considered to include the whip's office. That is to say that in addition to each member having a staff member at an in camera meeting, it would also include so

Government Operations committee  Mr. Chair, I’ve always heard that this means that House officers include whips and that they have access to the meeting. You’re right that in hybrid format, they may only have access to the meeting in virtual mode. As for their presence in person in the room, it could be problema

Government Operations committee  Thank you, Mr. Chair. The recorded division will be on the amendment by Mr. Gerretsen to add to the motion, at the end, “provided that members have confirmed their physical presence for the meeting”. I will proceed with the roll call on this.

Government Operations committee  Mr. Chair, I have found a copy of the motion that was adopted by PROC. I believe it is the same as the one Madame Vignola read out. If you wish, I can read it back to the committee to ensure that they know what they are voting on.

Government Operations committee  The motion that was adopted by PROC is as follows: That witnesses be given five (5) minutes for their opening statements; that whenever possible, witnesses provide the committee with their opening statements 72 hours in advance; that, at the discretion of the Chair, during the

Government Operations committee  Thank you, Mr. McCauley. The motion that existed originally is the one that the chair read. However, that did give discretion to the chair. The motion that Mr. Kitchen read, which was the original one in effect, gave discretion to the chair, who at the time was Mr. Lukiwski, to