Committee
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 1 - 60 of 2286
Miriam Burke
View Miriam Burke Profile
Miriam Burke
2022-06-13 18:33
Honourable members of the committee, I see quorum, and I believe we're ready to begin.
I must inform you that the clerk of the committee can only receive motions for the election of the chair. The clerk cannot receive other types of motions, cannot entertain points of order, nor participate in debate.
We'll now proceed to the election of the chair.
Pursuant to the order adopted by the House on Monday, May 16, 2022, the chair must be a member of the government party.
I'm ready to receive motions for the chair.
Mr. Fragiskatos.
Miriam Burke
View Miriam Burke Profile
Miriam Burke
2022-06-13 18:34
It has been moved by Mr. Fragiskatos that Mr. Hardie be elected as chair of the committee.
(Motion agreed to)
The Clerk: I declare the motion carried, and Mr. Hardie duly elected chair of the committee.
I invite Mr. Hardie to take the chair.
View Ken Hardie Profile
Lib. (BC)
I'd like to thank the academy.
If the committee is in agreement, I'd like to invite the clerk to proceed with the election of our vice-chairs.
Miriam Burke
View Miriam Burke Profile
Miriam Burke
2022-06-13 18:35
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Pursuant to the order adopted by the House on Monday, May 16, 2022, there shall be one vice-chair from each of the recognized parties.
I'm now prepared to receive motions for vice-chair from the official opposition.
Ms. Dancho.
View Raquel Dancho Profile
CPC (MB)
I nominate Michael Chong as vice-chair from the official opposition.
Miriam Burke
View Miriam Burke Profile
Miriam Burke
2022-06-13 18:36
It has been moved by Ms. Dancho that Mr. Chong be elected as vice-chair of the committee from the official opposition.
Are there further motions
Miriam Burke
View Miriam Burke Profile
Miriam Burke
2022-06-13 18:36
Is it the will of the committee to adopt the motion?
(Motion agreed to)
The Clerk: I declare the motion carried, and Mr. Chong duly elected vice-chair of the committee from the official opposition.
I'm prepared to receive motions for the vice-chair from the Bloc Québécois.
View Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe Profile
BQ (QC)
Mr. Chair, I'd like to nominate Stéphane Bergeron as vice-chair for the Bloc Québécois.
Miriam Burke
View Miriam Burke Profile
Miriam Burke
2022-06-13 18:37
It has been moved my Mr. Brunelle‑Duceppe that Mr. Bergeron be elected as vice-chair of the committee for the Bloc Québécois. Is it the will of the committee to adopt the motion?
(Motion agreed to)
Miriam Burke
View Miriam Burke Profile
Miriam Burke
2022-06-13 18:37
I declare the motion carried, and Mr. Bergeron duly elected Bloc Québécois vice-chair of the committee.
I'm prepared to receive motions for the vice-chair from the NDP.
View Robert Oliphant Profile
Lib. (ON)
I am very pleased to nominate Heather McPherson as vice-chair from the New Democratic Party.
Miriam Burke
View Miriam Burke Profile
Miriam Burke
2022-06-13 18:37
It has been moved by Mr. Oliphant that Ms. McPherson be elected as vice-chair of the committee from the NDP.
(Motion agreed to)
The Clerk: I declare the motion carried, and Ms. McPherson duly elected NDP vice-chair of the committee.
Mr. Chair.
View Ken Hardie Profile
Lib. (BC)
Thank you, Madam Clerk.
I think we are blessed with one of the very experienced clerks on the Hill, who will be undoubtedly invaluable to the person sitting in this chair over the next little while.
We'll do some of the official stuff first, and then get into the routine motions.
Welcome to meeting number one of the House of Commons Special Committee on the Canada–People's Republic of China Relationship.
Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format, pursuant to the House order of November 25, 2021. Members are attending in person in the room and remotely using the Zoom application. Regarding the speaking list, the committee clerk and I will do the best we can to maintain a consolidated order of speaking for all members, whether participating virtually or in person.
I would like to take this opportunity to remind all participants in this meeting that screenshots or taking photos of your screen is not permitted. The proceedings will be made available via the House of Commons website.
I would like to remind all of those present in the room to please follow the recommendations from public health authorities, as well as the directive of the Board of Internal Economy on October 19, 2021, to remain healthy and safe. As the chair, I will be enforcing these measures for the duration of the meeting, or for as long as the measures themselves last, he hastens to add, and I thank members in advance for their co-operation.
Should any technical challenges arise, please advise me, so that we can suspend a few moments to ensure all members are able to participate fully.
Those are a few formalities out of the way, but I wanted to add a quick note that I've been interested in this committee since it was first struck, living on the west coast as I do, and as does the honourable member for South Surrey—White Roc. We're kind of at ground zero for many of the concerns, especially the domestic concerns about our relationship with China.
It has been very interesting to watch the proceedings from the last Parliament, to see the work that the committee had done, because it resonates very well with what I've noticed over time. There may be times, in fact, when I will regret being here and being unable to ask some questions to try to coax out a little more information on what is, I think, as has been pointed out many times, a very complex relationship. There are upsides and downsides to it. As a group, we'll accentuate the positive, but deal something with the other.
With that, I suggest the next order of business be that the committee now proceed to consider its routine motions. In preparation for this, the committee clerk has circulated a list of routine motions that committees have typically adopted. As we go along, the committee clerk can also answer any questions about the routine motions that you may have.
It's customary that somebody on the government side take the lead, leading us through the routine motions.
Mr. Oliphant.
View Robert Oliphant Profile
Lib. (ON)
I don't have to do them all, but I'm happy to start.
We'll begin with the one with respect to analyst services.
I move:
That the committee retain, as needed and at the discretion of the Chair, the services of one or more analysts from the Library of Parliament to assist it in its work.
View Ken Hardie Profile
Lib. (BC)
I suspect that some of these routine motions may be subject to further discussion, so perhaps it would be best if we indicated our approval of each one individually as we go through.
All those in favour of analyst services?
(Motion agreed to)
The Chair: In the six years that I've been here, I have nothing but total awe and respect for the analysts to absorb all of the things they hear and then turn out some pretty wonderful studies that we can present to Parliament and consider for ourselves.
Thank you, Brendan. It's good to have you on board.
Shall we continue?
View Robert Oliphant Profile
Lib. (ON)
Yes.
This is the second routine motion:
That the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure be established and be composed of the chair and one member from each recognized party; and that the subcommittee work in a spirit of collaboration.
View Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe Profile
BQ (QC)
Mr. Chair, I would like to amend the motion and replace the text that my honourable colleague has just read with the following text:That the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure be established and be composed of five members, namely the chair, three vice-chairs, and one member from each other recognized party; and that the subcommittee work in a spirit of collaboration.
View Ken Hardie Profile
Lib. (BC)
Okay.
The motion is: That the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure be established and be composed of five members, namely the Chair, the three vice-chairs and one other member from the government; and that the subcommittee work in a spirit of collaboration.
That's it. Can we say that's accepted? Are we good?
(Motion agreed to)
The Chair: Thank you.
View Robert Oliphant Profile
Lib. (ON)
Are you ready for the third one, Mr. Chair?
That the Chair be authorized to hold meetings to receive and publish evidence when a quorum is not present, provided that at least four members are present, including two members of the opposition and two members of the government, but when travelling outside the parliamentary precinct, that the meeting begins after 15 minutes, regardless of members present.
View Ken Hardie Profile
Lib. (BC)
Everybody's heard the motion. Is there any comment?
(Motion agreed to)
The Chair: Go ahead, Mr. Chong.
View Michael Chong Profile
CPC (ON)
I'd like to present the next routine motion on time for opening remarks and questioning of witnesses. I understand that there's likely not going to be support for this, but I do want to read it out to make a point in the hope that members will consider it for a future committee or in the next Parliament.
Let me read out my proposed routine motion for the rounds:
The Chair shall divide equitably, among all the other members of the committee, the time available for questioning a witness appearing before the committee, providing that a member may share or transfer his or her time to another member.
Mr. Chair, the whole reason for presenting this motion is that it would divide the time remaining after opening witness statements equitably amongst the 11 members of the committee. There are five members of the committee from the ministerial party. There are four from the official opposition party. There's one from the Bloc Québécois, and there's one from the New Democratic Party.
My observation, Mr. Chair, has been that the routine motion that has been adopted in other committees, which is very different from this one, effectively means that two members of this committee get 45% of the time on most committees, simply because we often have two one-hour panels and, once you get through that opening round of 24 minutes, then you have turns of five, five, two and a half and two and a half minutes. Effectively, two members of this committee get 45% of the time after two one-hour panels are completed. That means that the remaining nine members of this committee are left dividing up approximately 55% of the time.
I don't think that's equitable or fair. I think that simply taking the time remaining for questions and comments after opening witness statements and dividing it by 11 members, with those members who wish to do so yielding the floor to another member of the committee, is a far more equitable way to divide the time.
I hope it's adopted, but if it's not, I hope members will think about it and potentially have it adopted as a routine motion at a future first meeting of a committee.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
View Robert Oliphant Profile
Lib. (ON)
I want to thank Mr. Chong for that. I think he's raising an important point. My concern would be that I'm not sure we're ready to be trial committee for this system. We think there should be discussion among all the committees about how it would work.
On the substance of it, I think there are two values. One is that each one of us is here as an individual member of Parliament coming from the House of Commons to a committee, but at the same time, we're also here as a team, so we present a party point of view.
Mr. Chong's motion helps with the first part about the individuals each having equal time, but it takes away from the concept of its being a team effort where we would then sacrifice somewhat to the smaller teams for them to have “team time”, we'd call it.
At this point, we would not support this motion but would prefer the usual routine motion.
View Michael Chong Profile
CPC (ON)
Very quickly, because I don't want to waste any time on this, to demonstrate how it would work, Mr. Chair, let's say we had a one-hour panel with one witness. That witness would be given five minutes for their opening remarks. There would remain 55 minutes in that hour remaining after the witness gave their opening testimony. The chair would take the 55 minutes, divide it by 11, and each member would be accorded 5 minutes for their questions and comments. If a member isn't interested in taking their time, they could yield the floor to any one of the other 10 members on the committee, whether it's their recognized party or not.
If, for example—and I'll finish with this—it were a single panel of 120 minutes, and let's say there were two opening witnesses statements, there would remain approximately 110 minutes in the rounds for questions and comments. That would be divided by 11, and each member would get 10 minutes for questions and comments to a witness, with those members who don't wish to use their time yielding the floor to another member of the committee.
That's how this system would work if this routine motion were to be adopted, and I'll finish there, Mr. Chair.
Thank you.
View Heather McPherson Profile
NDP (AB)
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I also thank Mr. Chong for bringing this forward.
Obviously, we all feel that the constituents we represent—as New Democrats, Bloc Québécois, Liberals or Conservatives—deserve to also have a voice in this place. While I don't have other colleagues on this committee with me, I think that people in Canada who voted for New Democrats want to have their voices heard.
I wouldn't support this motion. I think there is something to be said about having that opportunity for different perspectives to be shared, not just as individuals, but as parties, and being able to have that time and that space to prioritize those things that are important to our party protects the values that our party represents as well.
View Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe Profile
BQ (QC)
I would like to add to what my NDP colleague Ms. McPherson just said. The current motion already allows members to split the time available to question a witness. So I would be happy to see the current motion remain as it is, and have the Conservatives share their time with me.
I support what Ms. McPherson just said. I just wanted to add my two cents.
View Ken Hardie Profile
Lib. (BC)
Mr. Oliphant, did you want to speak? No.
Are there any further comments?
We should vote. I'll read the motion again:
The chair shall divide equitably, among all of the other members of the committee, the time available for questioning a witness appearing before the committee, provided that a member may share or transfer his or her time to another member.
(Motion negatived)
View Robert Oliphant Profile
Lib. (ON)
I might present the next routine motion. I'm not quite sure how to do it, because I would like to amend the routine motion slightly to follow the model that we had in the last Parliament for this committee.
I'll explain it before I move the motion, which is not really good procedure. The last time, we gave the chair the authorization to adjust the time of the opening statement, in consultation with the vice-chairs.
That was to allow discretion, because there could be some times when we have one witness and instead of giving them five minutes, we gave them 10, because that could be useful. Other times, using your discretion, it could be five minutes or seven minutes, or whatever. It worked well, I think, in the last Parliament for this committee.
What I will do is read it with that change in it. It would read:
That witnesses be given five minutes to make their opening statement; and that the Chair be authorized to adjust the time of the opening statement, in consultation with the vice-chairs; that whenever possible, witnesses provide the committee with their opening statement 72 hours in advance; that at the discretion of the Chair, during the questioning of witnesses, there be allocated six minutes for the first questioner of each party as follows for the first round:
Conservative Party
Liberal Party
Bloc Québécois
New Democratic Party
For the second and subsequent rounds of questioning, the order and time for questioning be as follows:
Conservative Party, five minutes
Liberal Party, five minutes
Bloc Québécois, two and a half minutes
New Democratic Party, two and half minutes
Conservative Party, five minutes
Liberal Party, five minutes.
(Motion agreed to)
View Peter Fragiskatos Profile
Lib. (ON)
Mr. Chair, I'll take over for the next few and then I'll yield to Ms. Yip. That's an early warning, I guess.
Regarding document distribution:
That only the clerk of the committee be authorized to distribute documents to members of the committee and only when such documents exist in both official languages, and that witnesses be advised accordingly.
(Motion agreed to)
View Peter Fragiskatos Profile
Lib. (ON)
This is a really important one. Regarding working meals:
That the clerk of the committee, at the discretion of the chair, be authorized to make the necessary arrangements to provide working meals for the committee and its subcommittees.
View Ken Hardie Profile
Lib. (BC)
Who would object to that? I'm sorry. What I just said is not official.
Is there any discussion?
Are all in favour? Are any opposed?
(Motion agreed to)
The Chair: Thank you.
View Peter Fragiskatos Profile
Lib. (ON)
The next one is on travel, accommodation and living expenses of witnesses:
That, if requested, reasonable travel, accommodation and living expenses be reimbursed to witnesses not exceeding two representatives per organization; and that, in exceptional circumstances, payment for more representatives be made at the discretion of the Chair.
View Ken Hardie Profile
Lib. (BC)
Are all in favour? Are any opposed?
(Motion agreed to)
View Peter Fragiskatos Profile
Lib. (ON)
I'll continue:
That, unless otherwise ordered, each committee member be allowed to be accompanied by one staff person at an in camera meeting and that one additional person from each House officer's office be allowed to be present.
View Ken Hardie Profile
Lib. (BC)
We called him that to be polite.
The clerk advises me that “House officer” could also include the House leader's office. Which do we prefer? Let's make this a little bit simpler.
Are any opposed?
(Motion agreed to)
View Peter Fragiskatos Profile
Lib. (ON)
I'll continue:
That one copy of the transcript of each in camera meeting be kept in the committee clerk’s office for consultation by members of the committee, or by their staff; and that the analysts assigned to the committee also have access to the in camera transcripts.
In our previous committee, we did not authorize the analysts to access in camera transcripts.
View Ken Hardie Profile
Lib. (BC)
That's the motion.
Are any opposed?
(Motion agreed to)
View Peter Fragiskatos Profile
Lib. (ON)
Just before I pass it off to Ms. Yip, this is on notice of motion:
That a 48-hour notice, interpreted as two nights, be required for any substantive motion to be considered by the committee, unless the substantive motion relates directly to business then under consideration, provided that: (a) the notice be filed with the clerk of the committee no later than 4:00 p.m. from Monday to Friday; (b) the motion be distributed to Members and the offices of the whips of each recognized party in both official languages by the clerk on the same day the said notice was transmitted if it was received no later than the deadline hour; (c) notice received after the deadline hour or on non-business days be deemed to have been received during the next business day; and that when the committee is travelling on official business, no substantive motion may be moved.
I hope I read that in a way that helped the translators.
View Ken Hardie Profile
Lib. (BC)
Thank you.
Are there any comments? Are any opposed?
(Motion agreed to)
The Chair: Ms. Yip.
View Jean Yip Profile
Lib. (ON)
I'll just carry on with the motion on technical tests for witnesses:
That the clerk inform each witness who is to appear before the committee that the House administration support team must conduct technical tests to check the connectivity and the equipment used to ensure the best possible sound quality; and that the Chair advise the committee, at the start of each meeting, of any witness who did not perform the required technical tests.
View Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe Profile
BQ (QC)
I simply propose to add the following title to this motion: Technical tests for witnesses.
View Ken Hardie Profile
Lib. (BC)
Very good. Thank you. Is there any comment on that? Is anyone opposed?
(Amendment agreed to)
The Chair: Again, are any opposed to the motion as amended?
(Motion as amended agreed to)
The Chair: Thank you.
View Jean Yip Profile
Lib. (ON)
On linguistic review:
That all documents submitted for committee business that do not come from a federal department or members’ offices, or that have not been translated by the Translation Bureau be sent for prior linguistic review by the Translation Bureau before being distributed to members. That all meetings, other than those deemed in camera, be televised or, if that is not possible, then webcast.
View Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe Profile
BQ (QC)
This relates to the motion that was to follow. I would like to add the following title: Linguistic review.
We like titles in my party.
View Ken Hardie Profile
Lib. (BC)
All right. Are we all good with that?
(Amendment agreed to)
A voice: Don't we want to carry the motion?
The Chair: I thought we did. Shall this motion as amended carry?
(Motion as amended agreed to)
Ms. Yip, is this the final one?
View Michael Chong Profile
CPC (ON)
It reads:That all meetings, other than those deemed in camera, be televised or, if that is not possible, then webcast.
View Ken Hardie Profile
Lib. (BC)
It looks like they go together, but they're actually different.
All right. Are there any difficulties with this one? Are there any comments or questions? All those opposed?
(Motion agreed to)
The Chair: Just as a point of clarification, and in deference to our friend from the Bloc, should we have a title for this one?
View Robert Oliphant Profile
Lib. (ON)
With respect to future business and the work of the committee, I would like to suggest that we set a date today to receive notices of motion from all members of the committee, one that gives us a reasonable amount of time, because we're at the end of the session. I don't think it's on our minds, right now. We set a date—I'm happy for anyone to come up with that date—for us to begin our work in September.
That would give us some time to look at the ongoing issues and come up with perhaps 10 things, put them in a hopper, and try to come up with a good first couple of studies. We'd probably end up doing two studies, one to get going and a spare study when that one's not going.
I've got seven or eight motions ready to go, if we needed them. I'd sooner wait to do that, and put them all in and take the wisdom from everybody. If that's agreed to on consensus tonight, we would not entertain notices of motion. I look to the analysts and clerk for a suggestion about the best date—something reasonable for you to work with, over the summer.
I know the House is calming down and we'll be back the third week of September, but if we had a bit of work done before then, we could get going at the first meeting, once the House resumes.
View Heather McPherson Profile
NDP (AB)
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I agree with that recommendation and would love to hear the date the clerk would recommend for that.
I do wonder whether the subcommittee should meet prior to the first meeting, perhaps so we could make that decision.
View Michael Chong Profile
CPC (ON)
Mr. Chair, just so that I understand, I think what's being proposed here—which sounds good to me—is that members would submit motions for ideas for studies some time before the middle of August, and discussions would take place among members informally before our first committee meeting in September. At that first committee meeting in September, we would have an organizational meeting, where we can hopefully come to a quick agreement on the committee's work plan for the fall sitting.
Mr. Chair, is that your understanding, as well, or am I missing something here?
View Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe Profile
BQ (QC)
I don't want to look stupid, but, as I am new, I don't have as much experience as my honourable colleagues.
It seems to me that the committee has scheduled a meeting for next week. In that case, I do not understand why we should wait until mid-August to discuss the motions. Personally, I was ready to do so today. I was about to table three motions, but I was waiting for my friend Mr. Oliphant to make his proposals.
Personally, I am prepared to table motions. There is a meeting of the committee next week. So I see no reason why we should not take advantage of that two-hour period, during which the resources of the House will be available as planned. I think it would be disrespectful to the duties we perform. We are paid to work and there is a sitting next week. I am prepared to table motions tonight. If there are others, we will discuss them next week.
I do not understand why we are already talking about the end of the session when we have two hours of work ahead of us next week. I do not know whether my honourable colleagues have any comments to make on that. Personally, I am ready to start now. We have to agree now, so that we can save time. Otherwise, we will lose two hours next week. I'm not sure I understand that.
Mr. Oliphant could explain it to me.
View Robert Oliphant Profile
Lib. (ON)
My thinking is that we have work that is ongoing at the subcommittee on international human rights. We have work that's going on at the foreign affairs committee. I think we might want the foreign affairs committee to transfer a piece of work to our committee that takes a little bit of negotiation—on Taiwan, for instance.
If we can look at what everybody has in mind, I think we'll see that it's going to take more than a week to do that. I know we have notices of motion from Monsieur Bergeron, but I have no idea really what's in the mind of the other parties. I'm not even sure it's in the mind of my colleagues here.
My sense is that we take our time to do this right. We would still need a meeting to approve the subcommittee report anyway, but I'm open. I don't know, but Mr. Chong might have an idea.
View Emmanuel Dubourg Profile
Lib. (QC)
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I think the comments made by my colleagues are all valid, indeed. I want to say to my colleague Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe that it is true that we have just adopted the routine motions requiring that we table motions 48 hours in advance. However, under the proposal currently on the table, made by Mr. Oliphant, Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe may table his motions today or next week.
The objective behind this is for the subcommittee to have all these motions so that it can prioritize them and then propose a work plan to the committee as a whole. This does not mean that the important motions that Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe wants to bring forward will not be analyzed.
Given what may actually happen over the summer, the key is that all parties table all their motions and we do this work once and for all based on the priorities that will have been established.
That's it, Mr. Chair.
View Ken Hardie Profile
Lib. (BC)
If I could offer something, we have an opportunity through the presentation of motions to develop a landscape of the things that we see as important and worthy of our consideration. The scheduling and stages of when we talk about them can certainly be up to the subcommittee. Between now and the date that we've picked, August 15, the field is open for people to submit as many motions as they see fit.
What I detect—and I can stand to be corrected—is that there's a sentiment that if we accept a motion now, we've nailed it down to the schedule and it's going to be first. Based on what we've seen with the changing situation in the relationship with China, I think that's probably not prudent at this point. It's unnecessary, given that we're not going to have any substantive work on it anyway for some period of time.
In other committees, we've adopted a fairly open approach to bringing forward all motions. Bring them in. Put them into the hopper. Let's see what the interests of the committee in total are and leave it to the subcommittee—or the whole committee, as we see fit—to determine the sequencing of these motions.
It's also been a practice at the committees I've been on that we spread it around. We'll take a motion from the Bloc and then a motion from the Conservatives, the Liberals and the NDP, so that each of us in turn has an opportunity to marshal the committee's energies behind a certain subject or study.
As chair, I'll make a suggestion that we invite motions, put them on the table and put them into that landscape that we're creating in order to find out what the interests of the committee might be.
Are there any thoughts on that?
Go ahead, Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe.
View Raquel Dancho Profile
CPC (MB)
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I wasn't sure what Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe was saying, or if he wants to clarify it. I was going to make a suggestion.
Mr. Oliphant and Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe, you have some good ideas.
I don't know if Ms. McPherson wanted to do a study on Taiwan, but I think the Liberals, the Bloc and the Conservatives wanted to do one.
This is obvious. Everyone has their own good ideas. I do think Mr. Oliphant laid out a very responsible plan. I love the idea of having an intro from the officials. That sounds like a great way to kick off this committee. But I also appreciate that Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe's team has done the hard work of already bringing forward a motion. I suggest that we have the subcommittee meet and talk about this. I think we're really getting into the weeds here.
I think you'd get a lot more done if the four of you could meet and settle on what to do. We have the time next Tuesday or Monday. I would suggest that the four of you get in a room and finalize this. Otherwise, we could be here for another 45 minutes and not get a lot done. I would suggest that this happen on Monday of next week.
View Ken Hardie Profile
Lib. (BC)
We don't either, you know.
Does that represent to all members a reasonable agenda for a meeting next week, next Monday?
Some hon. members: Yes.
The Chair: Very good. We'll make it so.
Is there any other business?
We're adjourned.
Erica Pereira
View Erica Pereira Profile
Erica Pereira
2022-06-02 15:49
Welcome, members. I see that we have a quorum, so I will get started.
Due to a vacancy in the position of chair, the committee must proceed directly to the election.
I must inform members that the clerk of the committee can only receive motions for the election of the chair.
The clerk cannot receive any other types of motions, cannot entertain points of order and cannot participate in debate.
We can now proceed to the election of the chair. Pursuant to Standing Order 106(2), the chair must be a member of the government party.
Ms. Bendayan, you have the floor.
View Rachel Bendayan Profile
Lib. (QC)
Thank you, Madam Clerk, and it is a great pleasure and an honour to be able to nominate my colleague Ali Ehsassi.
Erica Pereira
View Erica Pereira Profile
Erica Pereira
2022-06-02 15:50
It has been moved by Rachel Bendayan that Ali Ehsassi be elected chair of the committee.
Are there any further motions?
Is it the pleasure of the committee to adopt the motion?
(Motion agreed to)
The Clerk: I declare the motion carried and Mr. Ehsassi duly elected as chair of the committee.
Mireille Aubé
View Mireille Aubé Profile
Mireille Aubé
2022-04-08 13:01
Honourable senators and members of Parliament, there is quorum.
As Senate joint clerk of your committee, it is my duty to preside over the election of the Senate joint chair.
I'm ready to receive a nomination to that effect.
Results: 1 - 60 of 2286 | Page: 1 of 39

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
>
>|
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data