[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]
Tuesday, September 19, 1995
.1011 
[English]
The Clerk of the Committee: Hon. members, I see a quorum. Pursuant to Standing Orders 106.(1), 106.(2), and 116, the first order of business is to elect a chair.
[Translation]
I am therefore ready to entertain any motion to that effect.
[English]
Mrs. Gaffney (Nepean): Madam Chair, I am very pleased to nominate my colleague here, John Harvard, as the chair of this committee. If I could, I would like to make a couple of comments about John.
In the last Parliament John was on the committee on culture and communications, I think almost for the full term of that Parliament. So he's very knowledgeable. While this committee is now called ``Heritage'', there certainly is overlap from what was carried on before.
In John's other life, before being a member of Parliament, he obviously worked in the communications field, notably the CBC out of Winnipeg. So the culture of this country is very much in John's blood.
Third, John happens to be my seatmate in the House of Commons.
I'm pleased to nominate John Harvard.
Motion agreed to
The Clerk: I declare Mr. John Harvard duly elected, and I invite him to take the chair.
Mr. Hanrahan (Edmonton - Strathcona): I would like to move that Monte Solberg be nominated as vice-chair of the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage.
The Chair: You're getting a little ahead of me. Just let me say a couple of things first.
I want to thank Beryl Gaffney for her kind remarks. It's the culmination of one of the longest campaigns I've run, but it has ended with some success, and I want to thank Beryl and I want to thank all my committee colleagues for the confidence they've shown in me. I hope I'll do a good job. I do have a reputation of running a tight meeting. I don't like people going on and on. But I'm sure we'll get along just fine.
I understand the next order of business is the election of a vice-chair from the government side.
Mr. Boudria (Glengarry - Prescott - Russell): Before that, Mr. Chair, I wonder.... This is probably not totally in order, but I think this is the first committee meeting our colleagueMrs. Gaffney has attended since she's been back. I think it would be appropriate for us to wish her well, now that she is obviously shipshape and back with us for hard work.
Mrs. Gaffney: I look forward to being on this committee.
The Chair: Thank you.
I think we'll proceed to pick a vice-chairman from the government side, and then from the opposition side. Do I hear any nominations for vice-chair from the government side?
Ms Guarnieri (Mississauga East): Tony Ianno.
The Chair: I hear the nomination of Tony Ianno for vice-chair from the government side. Are there any other submissions? If not, I declare Mr. Ianno vice-chair from the government side.
Madam Gagnon.
.1015
[Translation]
Mrs. Gagnon (Québec): Mr. Chairman, I would like to nominate Suzanne Tremblay as vice-chair of the Sanding Committee on Canadian Heritage.
[English]
The Chair: Is this the nomination from the opposition side?
[Translation]
Mrs. Gagnon: Yes.
[English]
Mr. Hanrahan: On a point of order, we made our nomination before the Bloc and I believe it should be considered before that of the Bloc.
The Chair: Well, I don't see it in that way. I think you raised the point even before I was able to recognize the -
Mr. Hanrahan: You were in your chair, Mr. Chairman.
The Chair: I might have been, but I wasn't in a position to recognize any remarks at that time.
According to my clerk, I wasn't in a position to accept your remarks at that time anyway,Mr. Hanrahan.
Mr. Hanrahan: Then I would ask that both motions stand.
The Chair: It's my understanding that we can take only one motion at a time, so I think we'll take the Bloc's motion first.
Mr. Solberg (Medicine Hat): On a point of order, Mr. Chairman, a moment ago when you were entertaining a motion for a vice-chair from the government, you said, ``Are there any other submissions?'' So, in effect, you were asking for more than one nomination from the government side, and I think it's entirely appropriate that you carry forward with that precedent when you're talking about nominating somebody from the opposition side.
The Chair: There are two opposition parties. I think we can take only one nomination at a time. The government is in a different situation. We have to take one nomination at a time until we have success. In other words, if the Bloc nomination is successful, then that will be it. If not, then we will go on to, say, the nomination from your party.
Mr. Solberg: On a point of order, I refer the chair to section 788 of Beauchesne, which deals with the election of a vice-chair. It says ``which is conducted by the chair''. It states that only one motion may be on the floor at any one time, but that in past practice this rule has been relaxed to allow other proposed nominations to be presented as notice.
I further point out that this morning at the fisheries committee this indeed was allowed.
If the chair wishes, I can go through reams of past discussion on this issue from people who currently make up the membership of the government, from when they were in opposition:Mr. Marchi, Mr. Boudria, who is here, and of course other members as well.
I would ask the chair to remember that we are masters of our own rules here. In the interests of democracy and of having a fair election, we should entertain having both motions put forward at the same time and have a secret ballot. I think that's entirely appropriate, especially as it is in line with the government's commitment in the red book during the election to empower committees a little bit more. I think this would be an appropriate way to start.
The Chair: First, Mr. Solberg, it's not appropriate to have a secret ballot at a committee meeting.
Number two, I've heard your notice, which will be recognized, but only after we shall have dealt with the nomination from the Bloc. So the chair has decided that we will vote on the nomination of the Bloc.
All in favour of Mrs. Tremblay as vice-chairman from the opposition?
Motion agreed to
Mrs. Tremblay is the vice-chairman from the opposition side.
Let me say in conclusion, because this is the only piece of business in front of us today, that I must admit that I've not even had a briefing from the department yet. I think that once I've been able to speak to the department, I'll have a greater sense of what's on the plate and what kind of schedule we should be looking at.
So if I can beg your indulgence and ask you for your patience - just give me a little bit of time - when I get a sense of what's there, we shall be able to proceed with the work of the committee.
[Translation]
Ms Tremblay.
Ms Tremblay (Rimouski - Témiscouata): Mr. Chairman, if we have issues that we would like to put on our order of business, can we send them to the clerk so that we can discuss them at a later meeting?
.1020
[English]
The Chair: I'm certainly open to that, Madam Tremblay. I think at any time the clerk should be in a position to receive representation from you. It will be my responsibility, along with the steering committee, to make some choices about how we should set up a schedule. But if you will just give me a bit of time -
Anything else? Yes.
Mr. Hanrahan: Have you any idea when you plan to hold the first meeting?
The Chair: No, I really don't, except I hope it'll be soon. I think I'll be able to meet with representatives of the department either later today or tomorrow. Then I will have some sense of what we should be doing.
Mrs. Gaffney: Do you know on what day of the week we'll be meeting and at what time?
The Chair: That's a good question. I understand this committee has a meeting Tuesday and Thursday at 9 a.m. We may want to live with that. I would prefer something a little later in the morning.
It's something I'm going to have to discuss with my staff. I know in the other committee I've been in the habit of meeting at 11 a.m. That is better for me, but then perhaps I should be talking to all of you. That's just another detail we should deal with over the next few days.
I declare this meeting adjourned.