BOIE
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 241 - 270 of 459
Michel Patrice
View Michel Patrice Profile
Michel Patrice
2020-06-01 16:23
Your question was about interpretation, Ms. DeBellefeuille, correct?
View Claude DeBellefeuille Profile
BQ (QC)
In fact, according to the last motion adopted last week, parliamentary committees have recovered their usual powers, that is, they can discuss matters other than COVID-19 and other motions, and the subcommittees are back. During the adjustment and transition period, parliamentary committees were instead setting up informal committees, which were the equivalent of subcommittees. Simultaneous translation was also discussed. Even the Bloc Québécois members agreed not to have access to any interpretation.
In light of last week's motion, you will understand that, if committees regain their usual powers, all members must also be able to regain all their privileges in subcommittees, that is, to be able to communicate and be heard in their own language and to hear the language of other members.
Is the House prepared to extend that welcome to all members of Parliament?
Michel Patrice
View Michel Patrice Profile
Michel Patrice
2020-06-01 16:24
Ms. DeBellefeuille, I'm going to ask Mr. Eric Janse to answer, since he's the ideal person, being the director for committees.
Eric Janse
View Eric Janse Profile
Eric Janse
2020-06-01 16:24
Thank you for your question, Mrs. DeBellefeuille.
Indeed, according to the motion that was passed by the House last week, committees, which are now allowed to sit, have more powers than they had before, including the right to sit in camera. It used to be a little more complicated with Skype and two devices. Now our colleagues in the IT department have found a solution using Zoom. It's much easier.
To answer your question, yes, subcommittees and steering committees can now meet with access to interpretation. However, this takes the same resources as a public committee meeting; in terms of scheduling, the committee whips have agreed to take this into consideration.
View Anthony Rota Profile
Lib. (ON)
Ms. DeBellefeuille, do you have any questions?
View Claude DeBellefeuille Profile
BQ (QC)
I think we've scheduled a meeting of whips this week to come to an agreement on these various organizational matters, because for us it is preferable, and even required, to hold subcommittees with access to interpretation.
There may be some provisions that need to be discussed with the whips so that the committees can be held with access to interpretation this week. So there may be some changes. That's what I understand.
View Anthony Rota Profile
Lib. (ON)
Perfect. Mr. Rodriguez, do you have a question or comment?
View Pablo Rodriguez Profile
Lib. (QC)
Mr. Chair, I'd have a comment.
I have always assumed that the subcommittees could function in a normal way and that they would have access to translation. That is, of course, the least we could do.
View Claude DeBellefeuille Profile
BQ (QC)
Excuse me, Mr. Rodriguez, you meant to say “interpretation,” didn't you?
View Pablo Rodriguez Profile
Lib. (QC)
Yes, access to interpretation.
View Anthony Rota Profile
Lib. (ON)
Are there any other comments or questions about this?
View Claude DeBellefeuille Profile
BQ (QC)
If I may be allowed to draw a brief conclusion, Mr. Chair, I trust the Liberal whip, Mr. Mark Holland, and Mr. Mark Strahl to inform the committee chairs that committee proceedings must now be interpreted.
View Anthony Rota Profile
Lib. (ON)
Do you have a comment, Mr. Julian?
View Peter Julian Profile
NDP (BC)
Mr. Chair, I completely agree with Ms. DeBellefeuille. It is important that we have simultaneous interpretation in the executive committee meetings. I myself have noticed that, during meetings of the Standing Committee on Finance, this has not been the case for several weeks. I am therefore pleased that Ms. DeBellefeuille has raised this issue. It was important. It's easy to resolve, and it's fundamental to the functioning of Parliament.
View Anthony Rota Profile
Lib. (ON)
Are there any other comments?
Since there are no further comments, we are adjourned.
We will see each other again at the next meeting.
Thank you.
View Anthony Rota Profile
Lib. (ON)
Welcome.
It's Thursday, March 12, 2020, and we'll proceed with meeting number three of the Board of Internal Economy.
The first item on the agenda is the minutes of the previous meeting.
Is everything in order? There are no adjustments; everything's fine. Do we have approval? Good.
The next item we'll look at is the parliamentary precinct long-term vision and plan.
Before we go to that, I want to inform everyone that we'll be going in camera should the person from Health Canada come here a bit earlier. Because it is a pressing matter, I want to make sure everyone is here. We may have to interrupt our meeting at some point to proceed with that.
We'll hear from our presenters: Michel Patrice, deputy clerk, administration; Stéphan Aubé, chief information officer; and Susan Kulba, director general, real property.
Mr. Holland.
View Mark Holland Profile
Lib. (ON)
View Mark Holland Profile
2020-03-12 11:19
Mr. Speaker, there have been very productive discussions among members of the board with respect to this item. I first want to thank my colleagues for those conversations, which have been very fruitful, and provide a recommendation. I thought it would be appropriate for me to start by summarizing as best I can the conversations we've had.
The intention would be to create a subcommittee, a working group, if you will, comprised of members of Parliament from all recognized parties that would be a subcommittee of the Board of Internal Economy, and would report its recommendations to the Board of Internal Economy. We've had some conversations on this to get the composition right. I'm proposing three Liberals, two Conservatives, one Bloc and one NDP for that working group.
From our own perspective, we'll be populating it with members of PROC to harmonize the process and the work PROC has been doing with the work we are doing.
The Senate would then choose its own working group format. It could have a conversation about matters specifically of import to the Senate, the Senate chamber, the Senate meeting rooms and that sort of thing. However, where there is overlap, those two bodies could meet jointly and try to find a way to get on the same page.
The Board of Internal Economy, though, and we would be seeking to do it at this meeting, would be looking to provide specific direction that the overriding principle be the preservation of heritage.
Candice, I know you had some specific thoughts about some of the pieces, some “thou shalt not touch” provisions: Thou shalt not touch the chamber. Thou shalt not touch the Hall of Honour. Thou shalt not touch the entrance for members. Thou shalt not touch la Francophonie. We would place specific direction to restore these elements of heritage and not contemplate any amendment or potential destruction of these elements of heritage.
I don't think this needs to be part of a motion, but it's important to state that the assistant deputy minister for parliamentary infrastructure of the Department of Public Services and Procurement, or his or her designate, would operate as liaison to the working group to make sure there's that connection between the ministerial side and the work of the parliamentary group. Obviously, it would be led by the parliamentary group, and the minutes of the working group meeting would be recorded and made public 30 days following a meeting.
Mr. Speaker, that builds on the conversations we had at the previous meeting, where we really heard from all members around the importance of—
View Mark Holland Profile
Lib. (ON)
View Mark Holland Profile
2020-03-12 11:23
Yes, that is my understanding. I'm looking at Charles to see if this has been circulated to members.
I think the text is available in both official languages.
Members should have that in front of them. I'm suggesting that as a framework for the motion that we can hopefully proceed with today.
View Anthony Rota Profile
Lib. (ON)
Mr. Julian, I'm sorry.
View Peter Julian Profile
NDP (BC)
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I feel that the text reflects our discussion quite well.
However, I would actually write that the government will have three members, the official opposition two members, and the third and fourth parties one member each. This would ensure that the subcommittee's work can continue if we have an election, whether scheduled or not.
View Anthony Rota Profile
Lib. (ON)
View Peter Julian Profile
NDP (BC)
I am suggesting replacing the reference to the Liberal Party by “government” and the reference to the Conservative Party by “official opposition”, and so on.
View Anthony Rota Profile
Lib. (ON)
Okay, I understand. So we will use the terms “government”, “official opposition”, “third party” and “fourth party”.
View Peter Julian Profile
NDP (BC)
[Inaudible—Editor]
View Anthony Rota Profile
Lib. (ON)
The figures will stay the same.
Do we have consensus to proceed in that manner?
Is everybody in accordance—
View Candice Bergen Profile
CPC (MB)
On the numbers.
View Anthony Rota Profile
Lib. (ON)
—on the numbers? Well, I guess we would have to....
Madam Bergen, did you want to say something?
Results: 241 - 270 of 459 | Page: 9 of 16

|<
<
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
>
>|
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data