header image
The world according to David Graham


acva bili chpc columns committee conferences elections environment essays ethi faae foreign foss guelph hansard highways history indu internet leadership legal military money musings newsletter oggo pacp parlchmbr parlcmte politics presentations proc qp radio reform regs rnnr satire secu smem statements tran transit tributes tv unity

Recent entries

  1. PMO Staff Run Government; Ministers Represent It
  2. On A Mostly Harmless Birthday
  3. The Trouble With Political Communications
  4. Politics: War By Other Means
  5. On the function of Social media
  6. C-18 is an existential threat, not a benefit, to democracy
  7. On Missing A Little More Than A Sub
  8. The Realpolitik Of Open Nomination
  9. What Is An Open Nomination, Really?
  10. Alberta election about identity, not policy
  11. The Trouble With Electoral Reform
  12. Mr. Bains Goes to Rogers
  13. Question Period
  14. Why do lockdowns and pandemic restrictions continue to exist?
  15. Parliamentary privilege: an arcane concept that can prevent coups
  16. It's not over yet
  17. Trump will win in 2020 (and keep an eye on 2024)
  18. A podcast with Michael Geist on technology and politics
  19. Next steps
  20. On what electoral reform reforms
  21. 2019 Fall campaign newsletter / infolettre campagne d'automne 2019
  22. 2019 Summer newsletter / infolettre été 2019
  23. 2019-07-15 SECU 171
  24. 2019-06-20 RNNR 140
  25. 2019-06-17 14:14 House intervention / intervention en chambre
  26. 2019-06-17 SECU 169
  27. 2019-06-13 PROC 162
  28. 2019-06-10 SECU 167
  29. 2019-06-06 PROC 160
  30. 2019-06-06 INDU 167
  31. older entries...

2016-11-21 18:23 House intervention / intervention en chambre

Committee witnesses, European Union, Government bills, Second reading, Standing Committee on International Trade, Trade agreements,

Accords commerciaux, Comité permanent du commerce international, Deuxième lecture, Union européenne,

Madam Speaker, earlier today in debate several members of the NDP referred to something that happened at the international trade committee.

I want to quote the member for Essex, who stated, “Today, the Liberal-dominated trade committee has made it clear that it only wants to hear from groups that will benefit from CETA. It has gone to extraordinary lengths to restrict its brief study of CETA from receiving input from Canadians, by passing a motion that restricts the committee from accepting written submissions except for those from the handful of witnesses who are selected to appear.”

There are a number of problems with this statement.

The first is that the committee did not meet today.

The second is that the relevant motion was put forward by the member for Essex, not by a Liberal.

Further, the member for Salaberry—Suroît commented:

In committee, the Liberals recently moved a motion in camera...

If we are discussing that, it would be a privilege issue because we would be discussing something that was discussed in camera.

Therefore, I am wondering if the member knows what on earth her colleagues are talking about on this file.

Madame la Présidente, plus tôt aujourd'hui, durant le débat, plusieurs députés néo-démocrates ont mentionné une chose qui s'était produite au comité du commerce international.

Je vais citer la députée d'Essex, qui a dit: « Aujourd’hui, le Comité, à majorité libérale, a indiqué clairement qu’il souhaite uniquement entendre des groupes qui profiteront de l’AECG. Il a fait l’impossible pour restreindre les interventions des Canadiens dans le cadre de sa brève étude de l’AECG en adoptant une motion qui limite les mémoires pouvant être soumis au Comité à la poignée de témoins qui ont été sélectionnés pour comparaître. »

Il y a plusieurs choses qui clochent dans cette affirmation.

La première est que le comité ne s'est pas réuni aujourd'hui.

La deuxième est que la motion en question a été présentée par la députée d'Essex et non par un libéral.

De plus, la députée de Salaberry—Suroît a fait le commentaire suivant:

En comité, les libéraux ont récemment déposé une motion, à huis clos [...]

Si nous en discutions, ce serait dans le cadre d'une question de privilège, car nous parlerions d'une chose dont il a été question à huis clos.

Je me demande donc si la députée sait de quoi diable ses collègues parlent dans ce dossier.

Watch | HansardEcoutez | Hansard

Posted at 13:26 on November 21, 2016

This entry has been archived. Comments can no longer be posted.

2016-11-21 18:12 House intervention / intervention en chambre | hansard parlchmbr tv |

2016-11-21 18:31 House intervention / intervention en chambre

(RSS) Website generating code and content © 2001-2020 David Graham <david@davidgraham.ca>, unless otherwise noted. All rights reserved. Comments are © their respective authors.