[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]
Thursday, September 21, 1995
.1004 
[English]
The Clerk of the Committee: Members of the committee, I see a quorum.
.1005
Pursuant to Standing Order 106(1), the first order of business today is to elect a chairman. I'm ready to receive motions to that effect.
[Translation]
I am ready to receive motions to elect a chairman.
Mr. Guimond.
[English]
Mr. Guimond (Beauport - Montmorency - Orléans): I suggest Mr. Stan Keyes, the member for Hamilton West.
Mr. Harris (Prince George - Bulkley Valley): Mr. Chairman, may I speak to the motion? I would just like to say that we in the Reform Party fully agree with the nomination, and we will be supporting Mr. Keyes, we trust in the same nature the Liberal members opposite will be supporting our motions today.
[Translation]
The Clerk: Mr. Guimond moves that Mr. Stan Keyes be elected chairman of the committee.
[English]
Motion agreed to
The Clerk: I declare Mr. Stan Keyes duly elected chairman of this committee and invite him to take the chair.
The Chairman: Thank you very much, everyone, for your vote and the privilege of serving as your chairman.
I want to introduce to you Mr. Jacques Lahaie. As you know, for the period of time when we have had the transport committee meetings since the election in 1993 we had Ellen Savage as our clerk. There's been a shuffle of committee clerks and we have the luck of having Mr. Jacques Lahaie working with us now as our committee clerk. I want to welcome him to our committee.
We now go to the election of the two vice-chairpersons of the transport committee. Mr. Assad.
[Translation]
Mr. Assad (Gatineau - La Lièvre): I move that Mr. Joe Comuzzi be elected vice-chair of the committee.
[English]
The Chairman: No seconder is required.
Mr. Harris.
Mr. Harris: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to nominate Mr. Jim Gouk to the position of vice-chair of this committee. I'd like to move that.
[Translation]
Mr. Mercier (Blainville - Deux-Montagnes): I would like to nominate Mr. Michel Guimond to the position of vice-chair.
[English]
The Chairman: It's the election of the first vice-chairperson we're doing now, and then there'll be an election for a second vice-chairperson.
Mr. Harris: Could we regard mine -
The Chairman: As the second vice-chairperson?
Mr. Harris: - as notice of the motion I intend to move, so I'm first in line when we come around here?
Mr. Gouk (Kootenay West - Revelstoke): A point of order, Mr. Chairman. Is there in fact a specific definition as between the two chairs? I've never seen anything in any of our documentation. They just say ``vice-chair''. I've never seen ``first vice-chair'', ``second vice-chair''.
The Chairman: I'm just going by what's written here. It speaks of the election of the first vice-chairperson, and then there's a second vice-chairperson.
Mr. Gouk: But is that what they are, or are they just vice-chair people?
The Chairman: Yes, we're just going to elect the first vice-chairperson and then the second.
Mr. Harris: A point of order, Mr. Chairman. If we could have some clarification, does ``first vice-chair'' have the specific meaning that this is the government's vice-chair position, and does ``second vice-chair'' specifically mean that is an opposition vice-chair position? I think we need clarification, because unless ``first vice-chair'' specifically means the government's member, then in your capacity as chairman you would be bound to accept motions from either the opposition or the government.
The Chairman: I'll just state that by convention, usually the first vice-chairman's role falls to a government member, and then the second vice-chairman usually falls to an opposition member.
Mr. Mercier: On the same point of order -
Mr. Harris: As long as everyone's in agreement and we clearly specify when we go to the second vice-chair that my notice of motion is recognized first -
The Chairman: On the second one rather than the first one? Okay.
Mr. Harris: Thank you.
.1010
Mr. Guimond: I agree with Mr. Harris's comments, but I think we must add the term ``official opposition vice-chair'' on the second one. With the rest of Mr. Harris's speech I have no problem.
The Chairman: That being out of the way, we shall have nominations.
[Translation]
Mr. Mercier: Mr. Chairman, I nominate Mr. Michel Guimond as vice-chair of the official opposition.
[English]
The Chairman: Why don't we begin, though, with the election of the first vice-chairperson. By convention, that usually comes from the government side. We have a nomination of Mr. Comuzzi by Mr. Assad.
Are you going to save your motion for the second, or are you moving that here as well?
Mr. Harris: I could certainly second the motion.
The Chairman: There's no need for a seconder. Are you going to wait for the second?
Are there any other nominations for vice-chair? On division?
Seeing no other nominations, I declare Mr. Joe Comuzzi to be vice-chair.
Congratulations, Mr. Comuzzi.
Now we'll take nominations for the election of the second vice-chairperson.
Mr. Harris: Mr. Chairman, I thank you for recognizing me.
I move that Mr. Jim Gouk be nominated to serve in the position of second vice-chair on this transport committee.
[Translation]
Mr. Mercier: Mr. Chairman, I move that Mr. Michel Guimond be elected as second vice-chair.
[English]
The Chairman: Would you like to speak to that, Mr. Harris?
Mr. Harris: Thank you for the opportunity, Mr. Chairman.
We have the opportunity this morning to show all Canadians, from Newfoundland to the Queen Charlotte Islands, including the province of Quebec, which, as we all know, is part of Canada, that this transport committee can in fact do the right thing. Notwithstanding that all the other committees that have elected officers thus far have done them on the specific instructions of the Liberal whip and have had no opportunity to express their real feelings about who should fill the chairmanship and vice-chairmanship positions, given the integrity of the members on this committee, on which I was pleased to serve for a period of time.... It was probably one of my most enjoyable times in this Parliament, because I got to feel a real sense of wanting to get the job done and a real sense of the integrity of every Liberal member whom I see in this committee now.
I think there is a burning desire within the hearts of these Liberal members to do the right thing this morning, and that is to elect a second vice-chair to this position who truly represents all of the Canadian people, and that the decisions that are made in this committee will be truly representative of all the Canadian people.
Indeed, this committee will probably make some decisions that will be of a long-term nature that will affect the Canadian people five or six or ten years down the road.
I believe that only a person from a party that truly represents all of Canada should serve in the position of vice-chair.
In addition, the very idea that a committee dominated by Liberal members could ever consider electing a member of a party that has the specific goal of breaking this country up, of destroying this confederation that we know as Canada, this great country - the very thought that this committee, which is dominated by Liberal members, avowed federalists, could ever consider electing a separatist to a position of vice-chair of this committee is completely reprehensible.
The Liberal members and every true federalist in this committee today, sitting at this table, prepared to vote, should vote with their heart, not at the directions of their party, and should do the right thing and elect a person to the vice-chair position who truly represents all Canadians.
.1015
The Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Harris.
Any other interventions? Mrs. Terrana.
Mrs. Terrana (Vancouver East): I would like to say that first of all, if there is a party that represents all of Canada, it's the Liberal Party. But apart from that, I also think Quebec will not separate from Canada. I also think they are a big component of Canada, and if the people of Quebec have chosen to vote for Mr. Guimond or Mr. Mercier, they want them as their representatives. We should also be able to satisfy their needs, and they are the only ones who can tell us what the needs of Quebec are.
The Chairman: Mr. Guimond.
[Translation]
Mr. Guimond: The question raised by our Reform Party colleague is an interesting one, but unfortunately, I feel that this debate has already taken place, both in the House of Commons and in this committee.
Colleagues, at the very beginning of the 35th legislature, the leader of the Reform Party,Mr. Manning, asked the Prime Minister of Canada, Mr. Chrétien, if he was going to recognize the big bad separatists as the Official Opposition. I would remind my Reform Party colleagues that it's not thanks to the grace and favour of the Prime Minister, Mr. Chrétien, or because of its own will that the Bloc Québécois is the Official Opposition. The rules and traditions of the British parliamentary system are such that the party that obtains the second largest number of seats in the House of Commons is de facto and officially the so-called Official Opposition.
Therefore, this is not a matter over which to express gratitude. Although the Reform Party recognizes itself as the de facto opposition, Parliamentary rules are such that we are the Official Opposition. Until further notice, Quebec is still part of Canada.
I am a member of the federal Parliament, democratically elected with a 19,000 vote majority and I'm not ashamed to be here. I believe that all my colleagues here in this committee are democrats. We may sometimes have differing views and squabbles, but people know that there is nothing personal about this. They have their work to do and we also have ours.
[English]
The Chairman: Mr. Mercier.
[Translation]
Mr. Mercier: Mr. Chairman, the candidate that I'm supporting today belongs to the Official Opposition, that is the party in opposition with the most seats. Therefore, it is quite clear that he should be vice-chairman.
[English]
The Chairman: Colleagues, I think we can, as Mr. Harris said...he requests us to do the right thing, and doing the right thing means carrying out the election of the second vice-chair in a democratic fashion. So your chair will now ask, by a show of hands, for all those who are -
Mr. Harris: Point of clarification. If I wish to have a recorded vote on this, do I make the motion now, or after...?
The Chairman: You can ask for a recorded vote, yes.
Mr. Harris: Okay. May we have a recorded vote on this, please?
The Clerk: It is moved by Mr. Harris that Mr. Gouk be elected vice-chair for the opposition.
Motion negatived: nays 8; yeas 2
The Chairman: Can we have the second vote?
Mr. Harris: Mr. Chairman, may we have a recorded vote on this?
The Chairman: On the second one?
Mr. Harris: Yes, please.
.1020
The Chairman: Sure.
Mr. Hubbard (Miramichi): What is the second one?
The Chairman: It's the motion that Mr. Guimond be the second vice-chair of the committee.
Motion agreed to: yeas 7; nays 2
Mr. Guimond: I missed my name. Don't I vote?
The Clerk: You are the candidate.
Mr. Guimond: Oh, okay.
The Chairman: It's the same as the last vote. You asked Mr. Gouk if he wanted to vote. So the last vote, to stand corrected, would be....
The chair recognizes that Michel Guimond is elected to the position of second vice-chairperson. Thank you, colleagues.
Mr. Jordan (Leeds - Grenville): I have a question. It might be a tradition here, depending on whether you're in opposition or have third-party status. Do I assume, then, if the opposition party should change at some point, in a month or two or three or six months, these will have to be restructured because tradition reigns, it seems? Is that a fair observation?
The Chairman: I'm not sure of the constitutionality of a change in opposition status of parties, but I think it would be up to the will of the committee to decide whether it would reformulate itself or make adjustments in elected individuals, etc. There will be probably be a lot of water under the bridge between now and that time, which may cause.... There's the possibility of prorogation -
Mr. Jordan: But wouldn't you agree, Mr. Chairman, that in principle, since that has seemingly been what dictated how this thing came down here, it depends on which the opposition party would be, and if the opposition party becomes another party than the one it currently is, this would have to change?
The Chairman: Yes, by convention, whoever is the official opposition party of the House of Commons usually gets the vice-chairman. By convention, that's what has happened traditionally, election after election. So it would be my probably safe guess that would happen. If you want to deal with hypotheticals, that would probably be the result.
Mr. Harris: Mr. Chairman, just as a point of clarification, traditionally...and if this does happen, with the Liberal Party, your instructions will be received from the party whip, as they were today.
The Chairman: Mr. Harris, thank you very much, but -
Mr. Fontana (London East): We're free-thinking spirits, just as you are.
An hon. member: Sure you are, Joe.
The Chairman: Order, please.
Colleagues, the vote was carried out in a democratic fashion, and the results are...
Mr. Comuzzi (Thunder Bay - Nipigon): Would it be in order to ask the clerk to do some research on the question Mr. Jordan just posed? If there is a change in the official opposition, what effect -
The Chairman: No, I don't think so, Mr. Comuzzi, because the question is hypothetical.
Mr. Comuzzi: It's not hypothetical.
The Chairman: I don't want to do it. I'll say no. But Mr. Jordan is free to check with the Library of Parliament. He will probably get an answer for himself.
Colleagues, what I want to do is -
Mr. Gouk: A point of order. A direction was requested. I move that the clerk be instructed to do that research and to report back to this committee.
I would also like to point out, just for clarification, that in fact there is lots of precedent. While the Liberals were in opposition as the official opposition, NDP members did in fact have vice-chairs.
The Chairman: Where we can go with this one is, just for the record -
Mr. Gouk: A motion is on the floor, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman: Yes. For the record, Mr. Gouk, just so you're fully informed on the issue, there was, I believe, even a debate on this issue in the House of Commons yesterday. Much of the debate that was brought forward in the House came from Hansard and Beauchesne's, etc. Much of that was put to the floor of the House anyway.
.1025
If you would like this - and you have a motion on the floor - I'd be inclined to ask the clerk to check with the clerk's office and bring forward what information he has on the subject and report to us as soon as possible.
Mr. Fontana: Mr. Chairman, obviously we all want to get on the record. It should be noted for the record that the Reform Party has yanked its own members from committees when in fact those committee members have not had the same position as the leadership of the Reform Party. So let's not be total hypocrites.
The Chairman: Order. I'm going to call the committee to order, because I don't want to lose it here. I just took it, and I don't want to lose it.
You have a motion on the floor. I want to -
Mr. Comuzzi: I withdraw the motion.
The Chairman: You can't withdraw it. He made it.
Mr. Comuzzi: Did you make the motion? I'm sorry.
The Chairman: I think he made it, Joe.
Mr. Comuzzi: I'm sorry. I apologize. I thought I did.
The Chairman: That would have been great if you could have....
After one more intervention, we'll have a show of hands.
Mr. Assad.
Mr. Assad: It's just that I want to move adjournment, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman: We already have a motion on the floor, and we'll have to deal with that first.
Mr. Gouk, may I have a written motion from you again, please. In a few words, what is it?
Mr. Gouk: I'm not sure of the exact wording I used, but that the clerks research the procedure that could be followed, or whether, in the event that the official opposition party changes, there are precedents or there is authority for the allocation of the vice-chair being revoted.
An hon. member: ``Allocation'' is a good word.
The Chairman: Colleagues, with this motion being on the floor, I want to remind you of two things. One is that we all have our own staff to do research if you're inclined to try to get answers to these kinds of questions. Second, there's also representation by all parties on the procedure and House affairs committee, which could look into the same thing as well, maybe in a more detailed fashion.
Mr. Gouk: Just for clarification, the reason for this motion is that the chair has apparently indicated that only the official opposition should have the vice-chair position. That seems to be the sentiment -
The Chairman: No. I said ``the opposition'', Mr. Gouk, not ``the official opposition''. I said that the opposition gets a choice, and it has been the convention that the official opposition gets the chair.
Mr. Gouk: Given your convention then, in order that we follow the convention that you say exists, which I question, will we continue to follow that convention in the event that the official opposition changes?
The Chairman: I'm going to put the question.
Motion negatived
The Chairman: I have a motion from Mr. Assad for adjournment of this committee meeting.
Mr. Comuzzi: Are we going to talk about business, Mr. Chairman?
The Chairman: Next. We're going to go into the steering committee right after this, and I invite all members to attend the steering committee meeting.
Motion agreed to
The Chairman: We stand adjourned.