ETHI Committee Meeting

     Colleagues, we're ready to begin now. I have a couple of opening remarks and then I'll get to a very full speakers list.

    We passed the motion of Mr. Angus, and I wanted to advise the committee that we've already taken action in the sense of sending the request to Speakers' Spotlight in regard to the documents. As well, we're relying on you to make sure that all of your witness lists are in by next Monday. We will be reaching out to Frank Baylis as well; and anything else that's specifically embedded in the motion, we'll take action on.

    Now we'll continue with the debate that we left off from the last meeting, and here's my list: Mr. Angus; Mr. Kelly, Mr. Gourde, Madame Gaudreau, Mr. Warkentin, Madame Lattanzio, Madame Shanahan, Mr. Fergus, and Mr. Sorbara.

    Mr. Angus.

    Thank you, Chair, and thank you for clarifying that we need to get our witness lists in so that we can actually get to work.

    I want to speak briefly to Mr. Dong's motion.

    We have gone through 40 hours of obstruction of this committee. What that means, I think my Liberal colleagues really need to understand, is that there's been a poisoning of the relationships on this committee. You get elected by your party and your party sends you in to do certain stuff. Sometimes it's not all that tasteful, but you do it because you're a good loyal foot soldier, but the only thing that gets you through your career in politics is your integrity. Your “yes” means yes, and your “no” means no, as the nuns used to teach me at school.

     I've seen see 40 hours of obstruction and interference in the work of the committee, something I've never seen before, and when we finally passed the motion, the committee is immediately hijacked by Mr. Dong—something else that I've never ever seen before. The reasoning he gives us is that he's upset because he doesn't want to talk about this and that he's never had a motion passed, and the Liberals haven't had any of their motions passed.

    So rather than let our committee do the work that we need to do, we were filibustered by both Mr. Dong and Ms. Shanahan. I mention this because I'm asking my Liberal colleagues if that's how they want to play, because if it's about jumping the floor and getting motions to change subjects, we could make life a living hell. If you want scorched earth, it will be scorched earth. If your word means nothing, then for the opposition, we have nothing to get from this committee other than our own agendas.

    On the last ethics committee I was on, we worked extremely well together. We put aside our agendas. We learned to listen to each other and work, and we did extraordinary work and that work was recognized internationally. In the previous ethics committee, it was often a gong show. Dean Del Mastro and I went at it on a daily basis, but the work of the committee was never interfered with. It was never monkeywrenched by the antics that I've seen from the Liberals. When things got bad between Dean Del Mastro and me, the whips came down and we got things sorted out because the committee always had to function, but now we see that this committee is in a position where the Liberals want to make it impossible to function.

    With regard to Mr. Dong's debate or motion, I find it really irregular. I think it's really a cheap tactic to stop us from getting the basic work done on a committee study.

    So I move to adjourn debate on Mr. Dong's motion.

    This is a dilatory motion, so I'll hand it over to the clerk for a vote.

    I have a point of order, Chair.

    It's not debatable.

    Go ahead, Mr. Dong, on your point.

    Yes, thank you, Chair. I hear a little bit of echo here, but I'll do my best. I listened to Mr. Angus' debate on the motion I put forward—

    I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.

    Madame Gaudreau, is it on a technical issue? Are you not getting translation?

    I heard a bit of echo, and since Mr. Dong began speaking, it's been even worse. We can hear the floor, the member in question and the interpreter all at once. It's unbelievable.

     We'll get the IT team to work on it.

    Mr. Dong, can you conclude your remarks, please?

    Sure. I'll be very quick.

    I want to say that I want to show my respect to allow Mr. Angus to finish his remarks today, but the content of his debate today, I find very offensive. He's taking—

    It's not debatable; this is not debatable. We're going to a vote.

    Chair, do I have the floor?

    Mr. Dong, I actually—

    I will be very concise. I spoke for only 20 seconds.

    Hang on just a second.

    I've been interrupted already.

    It's not debatable.

    Please just chill a bit.

    I've already taken the liberty. Generally speaking, when a motion is moved and I have advised the clerk to take the vote, then there's no other interruption of business.

    I thought you were going to have a brief comment. I will give you 20 more seconds and then we need to get to the vote.

    Thank you, Chair. I don't want to take any more time.

    Just check the blues of the last meeting to see how much time Mr. Angus used to debate—

    This is debate.

    —and how much time I used.

    This is debate.

    I just find it very disrespectful—

    This is interrupting the our vote. He's interrupting our vote. He's interrupted our meeting. This is interrupting our vote.

    I'm being constantly interrupted by Mr. Angus.

    He's interrupting a vote. He has no right to this.

     Colleagues—

    I don't bully anybody on the committee. We are respectful members.

    He needs to show respect to our committee.

    Yes, let's do that.

    Let's get to a vote.

    Madam Clerk.

    On the motion that debate be now adjourned, please say yea if you're in favour or nay if you're opposed, when I call your name.

    The vote is 5 yeas, 5 nays.

    The Chair: I'll vote for the motion.

    (Motion agreed to: yeas 6; nays 5)

    We'll move on to Mr. Kelly.

    Thank you very much.

    I move that the committee now resume its scheduling and planning for the motion on the questions regarding conflict of interest and lobbying in relation to the pandemic spending study.

    To be clear, Mr. Kelly, you're talking about Mr. Angus' motion?

    Yes, he is.

    Yes.

    Colleagues, the motion is to move to the next order of business, and then I'll turn it over to the clerk again.

    Chair, I have point of order.

    We're going to a vote, Ms. Shanahan. Is it a technical question?

    It's a vote.

    That's what I want to clarify, whether we could speak to this motion.

    No, it's a dilatory motion to move to the business of Mr. Angus' motion.

    All those in favour please say yea and all those opposed please say nay when I call your name.

    The vote is 5 yeas, 5 nays.

    The Chair: Okay, I'll vote for the motion.

    (Motion agreed to: yeas 6; nays 5)

     Madame Gaudreau, you were next on the speaking list. Right now it is 1:14, but we had already scheduled to deal with the work plan of Mr. Angus.

    We'll move in camera to deal with that business and motion. We'll need to suspend for about 10 minutes.

    You should have received a different link and password for in camera meeting. You'll need to log out of this meeting, and then log back into the in camera meeting. We suspect it will probably take about 10 to 15 minutes for that to happen.

    Mr. Chair, can you be specific? Will it be 10 or 15 minutes until we resume?

    It will probably take 10 to 15 minutes by the time the IT team gets everybody logged in. That's about how long it usually takes.

    Mr. Chair, when we come back in, could you talk about the speakers list, because that seems to be very flou.

    Did you say fluent?

    No, I did not.

    I said “flou”, which means “unclear” or “iffy”.

    People are getting on the list before you gavel in, because it will be a separate meeting.

    I will definitely speak to that. The whole place was full before I gavelled in today.

    We'll suspend and come back.

    [Proceedings continue in camera]