LIPA Committee Meeting

STANDING JOINT COMMITTEE ON THE LIBRARY OF PARLIAMENT

COMITÉ MIXTE PERMANENT DE LA BIBLIOTHÈQUE DU PARLEMENT

EVIDENCE

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

Tuesday, October 28, 1997

• 1103

[English]

The Joint Clerk of the Committee (Ms. Catherine Piccinin): Honourable senators and members of the House of Commons, it is my duty as joint clerk of this committee to preside over the election of the Senate joint chair. I am ready to receive motions to this effect.

Mr. Philip Mayfield (Cariboo—Chilcotin, Ref.): Before motions are received, may I suggest that we have a discussion on secret ballot of those elected to this committee.

The Joint Clerk (Ms. Catherine Piccinin): I'm sorry; I can only receive motions to the effect of electing a joint chair.

[Translation]

Senator Eymard G. Corbin (Grand-Sault, Lib.): I would like to nominate my colleague, Philippe Gigantès, for the position of Senate Joint Chair.

The Joint Clerk (Ms. Catherine Piccinin): Moved by the Honourable Senator Corbin that the Honourable Senator Gigantès be Joint Chair of the Committee. Is it your pleasure, honourable senators and members, to adopt the motion?

(Motion agreed to)

The Joint Clerk (Ms. Catherine Piccinin): I declare the motion carried and I invite the Honourable Senator Gigantès to take the chair.

• 1105

The Joint Clerk of the Committee (Ms. Danielle Belisle): Now, for the House of Commons, pursuant to rule 106(1) of the Standing Orders of the House of Commons, I am ready to receive motions for the election of a Chairman.

[English]

Motions for a chairman? Mrs. Catterall.

Ms. Marlene Catterall (Ottawa West—Nepean, Lib.): I would like to forward the name of Mr. Malhi. Mr. Malhi is travelling on parliamentary business and cannot be here today, but he's prepared to assume the position of co-chair of this committee.

The Joint Clerk (Ms. Danielle Belisle): It is moved by Ms. Catterall that Mr. Malhi be co-chair of this committee. Is it agreed by the committee?

Some hon. members: Agreed.

The Joint Clerk (Ms. Danielle Belisle): I'm going to pass it on, since Mr. Malhi is not here, to Senator Gigantès.

Mr. Jim Karygiannis (Scarborough—Agincourt, Lib.): Do you have a letter from Mr. Malhi, agreeing to this?

The Joint Clerk (Ms. Danielle Belisle): I believe Mr. Malhi has been consulted by his party.

Mr. Jim Karygiannis: Do we have a letter from Mr. Malhi, agreeing to this?

Ms. Marlene Catterall: No, we do not have a letter from Mr. Malhi.

Mr. Jim Karygiannis: Fine. Then how can we accept Mr. Malhi's position being put forward if we do not have a letter of acceptance? Mr. Malhi could have had a change of heart last night.

I do not give unanimous consent.

A voice: Even with a letter, he could have had a change of heart last night.

The Joint Clerk (Ms. Danielle Belisle): I'm sorry, all I can do here is to accept motions. If it's agreed by the committee, if there are any further changes they will have to be dealt with afterwards. I don't have any power to do anything but.

Miss Deborah Grey (Edmonton North, Ref.): Mr. Chairman, I move that we table this for discussion next week. If we were looking for someone to be class president of a grade 8 class it seems fairly likely they would need to be there that day to accept. I move that we table this until the next time this committee meets.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): Might I make a suggestion? Mr. Malhi has been consulted, has accepted. We don't have a letter, but supposing he resigns. He resigns. We elect someone else. So why don't we proceed as usual and elect him? Then if he decides not to fill his post, he resigns and someone else is elected.

Miss Deborah Grey: Further to that, though, in response to my direct comment, we're at the beginning of a four-and-a-half-year parliament. What is the rush, sir?

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): The clerk tells me this is the only committee which hasn't been organized, and there isn't much we can do until we have the other chair.

Mr. Philip Mayfield: We have a co-chair in your presence, sir. Would that not suffice for the needs of the committee?

[Translation]

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): Madam, is the presence of one joint Chair sufficient?

[English]

I am informed that there is a liaison committee for each of the two houses. If we haven't elected a chairman, the liaison committee dealing with the House of Commons cannot meet.

Miss Deborah Grey: Did we not have this meeting set for some time ago and it was moved to this date? It seems to me a previous meeting was scheduled.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): That's correct. We could not sit at the same time as the Senate. The meeting was scheduled for when the Senate was sitting.

Miss Deborah Grey: Perhaps we could reschedule this meeting, then, regardless of when it gets constituted. Perhaps Mrs. Catterall could tell us when Mr. Malhi will be back in town and we could just rearrange our lives around his schedule, if he is in fact the person you want so badly to co-chair this.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): Mr. Plamondon.

[Translation]

Mr. Louis Plamondon (Richelieu, BQ): As far as I'm concerned, this is a non-issue. I have been a Member of Parliament for thirteen years now and have often seen committees organized in the absence of those members designated to be Chair, Vice-Chair, Joint Chair and so on. I presume that if the member is proposing one of her colleagues, she has already received the consent of both the party and her whip, as well as of her colleague. I don't think there is any need to debate this. We should simply put the question on the motion moved by the honourable member opposite and continue our business.

• 1110

[English]

Ms. Marlene Catterall: I think Mr. Plamondon has made exactly some of the points I would make. I would obviously not be proposing Mr. Malhi's name without the complete consent of the everyone whose consent was needed.

I would like to remind hon. members perhaps of the long tradition of this House, which the Speaker reminds us of regularly, that we accept the words of other members of Parliament. We do not question whether they're telling us the truth or not.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would hope we will go ahead and vote on this.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): That's the last intervention.

Mr. Jim Karygiannis: If you're looking for unanimous consent, you don't have it from me. I was not consulted, so putting somebody's name forward and saying that he's accepting and everybody has been consulted—I'm sorry, but I do not buy it.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): I'm going to put this to the vote.

It is proposed that Mr. Malhi be elected joint chairman of this committee.

Mr. Philip Mayfield: I request a recorded vote.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): We're recording it. You want the name of everybody called.

The Joint Clerk (Ms. Danielle Belisle): I'll go through the names and you can tell me whether it is a yea to have Mr. Malhi as a chair or not.

[Translation]

(Motion agreed to; yeas: 11; nays: 2)

The Joint Clerk (Ms. Danielle Belisle): I declare the motion carried. Mr. Malhi is unfortunately unable to take the chair. I will therefore turn it over to the Senator.

[English]

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): Could we proceed to the election of a vice-chair.

Miss Deborah Grey: I would like to nominate Mr. Mayfield. He is here and he is willing to accept that.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): Thank you.

Is everybody in agreement?

Some hon. members: Agreed.

[Translation]

Senator Eymard Corbin: I have a question with respect to the second item on the agenda. There is provision for the election of a Vice-Chair representing the House of Commons, so why isn't there a Senate Vice-Chair?

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): Although this is my first time attending this Committee, I am told that it has always had a Joint Chair representing the Senate, a Joint Chair representing the House of Commons and a Vice-Chair representing the House of Commons. Committees can obviously change their rules, however. If you wish to move that we elect a Vice-Chair to represent the Senate, you are free to do so.

Senator Eymard Corbin: No, I simply wanted an explanation. I'm satisfied. Thank you.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): Did anyone else raise their hand? Jim.

[English]

Mr. Jim Karygiannis: I move that we accept the proposal by our colleague and do elect a vice-chair from the Senate.

• 1115

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): He did not make a proposal. He made a suggestion.

Mr. Jim Karygiannis: Then I'm making it.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): You're making a proposal?

Mr. Jim Karygiannis: I am making a proposal.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): Do you have someone to name?

Mr. Jim Karygiannis: We can put it to a vote.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): First we must decide whether we accept the proposal to have a vice-chairman from the Senate.

Madam Catterall.

Ms. Marlene Catterall: The composition of the officers of a committee normally reflects the composition of the committee. I think with joint committees like this one the committee has traditionally elected two co-chairs, one from each House of Parliament, and a single vice-chair from the opposition. I think changing its rules is not something a committee should do lightly or without some thought or some input from other committees that might be affected by a decision like this. There are other joint committees that might be implicated if we were to make a change in a rule that I gather has been fairly standard for some time.

Secondly, I believe it's the normal order of procedure of committees that if someone wishes to make a motion, they have to give notice of the motion. It then has to appear on the agenda of a subsequent meeting so that members come to a meeting knowing what is on the agenda rather than having motions just sprung on them at the time of the meeting. I believe that's certainly been the normal procedure in any other committee I have ever served on.

I would suggest it is best to take this as a notice of motion. We could deal with it at our next committee meeting.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): Honourable members of Parliament, you have heard two proposals, one from Mr. Karygiannis, who proposes that we elect a vice-chair from the Senate, and one from Mrs. Catterall, whose reasons you have heard for not doing so.

Mr. Philip Mayfield: I'd like to speak to that, sir. It seems to me, Mr. Chairman, that in the order of events, if one of the co-chairs is not present, the other co-chair—you, sir, the senator—would preside and would act as, I suppose, a vice-chair would, in another arrangement. I don't see the need for electing a fourth person. I think the precedent is there and the priority is established. I see no need for moving beyond that.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): Thank you for your comments.

Mr. Ivan Grose (Oshawa, Lib.): On a point of order, Mr. Chairman, it's my understanding—although I arrived late at the meeting—that this is to be chaired by the clerk of the committee, not by a member of the committee.

I voted on the first motion. But then, even if you were acting as temporary clerk, the clerk can only receive motions for the election of the chair. So we're into territory here that I have a problem with.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès):: The clerk presides over the election of the chair only.

Mr. Ivan Grose: Right.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès):: The election of the vice-chair is called by the chairman, which is what has been done.

Every committee, as I understand it, has the right to make its own rules. We have a proposal from Mr. Karygiannis that a new rule be installed by our committee, a new rule of electing a vice-chair from the Senate. This has been opposed by Mrs. Catterall and by you, sir. Those in favour of—

Yes?

Senator Eymard Corbin: I would like to express the view of my colleague, Senator Robichaud. We do not see the necessity for a joint vice-chair. I remind you that my comment was in the nature of a question, an inquiry eliciting information, nothing else.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): That was your comment. Mr. Karygiannis made a motion.

Senator Eymard Corbin: I know, but I want you to understand where we stand in the Senate.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): We'll now vote on Mr. Karygiannis' motion that we elect a vice-chair from the Senate.

(Motion negatived)

[Translation]

Mr. Louis Plamondon: On a point of order, Mr. Chairman.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): Yes, Mr. Plamondon.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: For my own information, could you tell me whether the other motions we will be moving in this Committee must be seconded by another Committee member?

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): No.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: So, a Committee member has only to move the motion?

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): Yes, I'm told there is no need for another Committee member to second the motion.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: Thank you.

• 1120

[English]

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): There are now routine motions on page 2.

Mr. Philip Mayfield: Mr. Chairman, I would move that we undertake to study the main estimates of the parliamentary library.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): You do not want to go through the routine motions first, as is customary?

Mr. Philip Mayfield: I follow your advice, sir.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): I think, unless there is objection from members of the committee, we should proceed with appointment of the subcommittee on agenda and procedure, the steering committee.

I once chaired the subcommittee many years ago and it cured me from wanting to do this. I felt this would be a nice, quiet collection of well-instructed pedants, and we could do this gently over cookies and tea.

A voice: How are we doing so far?

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): So far you've been marvellous.

A voice: No tea?

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): Not yet. I've just been made chair. Next meeting, cookies and tea—I promise. I'll pay for the cookies and the tea out of my own pocket so that we will not be accused of spending too much money.

Now, motion 1, appointments of the subcommittee: “That the Joint Chairs, the Vice-chair and...do compose the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure”.

Do I have nominations?

[Translation]

Yes, Mr. Plamondon.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: And that a member of the Reform Party, a member of the Bloc Québécois, a member of the Conservative Party and a member of the N.D.P. also sit on the sub-committee.

[English]

Two presidents, the vice-president and one of each—

[Translation]

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): Mr. Plamondon, when you say the Conservative Party, do you mean from either of the two Houses?

Mr. Louis Plamondon: Yes, either one.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): Either one. Can we suggest names?

[English]

Apparently we do not have to give the names of those who will be members. What Mr. Plamondon has proposed is that, apart from the chairs and the vice-chair, there would be a member from the Reform Party, from the Bloc, from the NDP and from the Conservative Party.

Is everyone in agreement?

A voice: I don't understand.

A voice: It's fine. That's perfect.

Senator Louis-J. Robichaud (L'Acadie-Acadia, Lib.): I think Mr. Plamondon suggested that a minimum of one person representing each party be represented on the committee.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: On the standing committee.

Senator Louis Robichaud: On the standing committee. A minimum of one, but not necessarily only one per party.

Is that what you meant?

Mr. Louis Plamondon: No.

[Translation]

Senator Louis Robichaud: Is that what you meant?

Mr. Louis Plamondon: We should have the maximum on the Steering Committee—in other words, one per Opposition party and, because the other two or three members represent the governing party, I would have no objection to there being an additional Liberal member on the Steering Committee. I'm sure you understand there can't be an unlimited number of members on the Steering Committee.

Senator Louis Robichaud: Yes, but is your goal to put the government party in a minority position?

• 1125

Mr. Louis Plamondon: No.

Senator Louis Robichaud: But what exactly is the situation?

Mr. Louis Plamondon: Appoint another one. Add one Liberal to the Steering Committee; I have no objection to that.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): We already have one member on the Steering Committee.

[English]

The Reform Party already has a member on the steering committee.

[Translation]

Mr. Louis Plamondon: But you should appoint at least one more. Right now the Steering Committee includes one Reform Party member. If you add one member for the Bloc, one for the Conservative Party and one for the N.D.P., that will make four Opposition members. You have two Joint Chairs and one Vice-Chair. So, you should add two Liberal members, in order that you will have a majority on the Steering Committee, which is perfectly normal.

[English]

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): Madam Catterall.

Ms. Marlene Catterall: That's getting a little large for a steering committee, I think. I'm wondering what this committee has traditionally done in terms of its steering committee.

[Translation]

Mr. Louis Plamondon: But things have changed in terms of the parties that are represented.

Ms. Marlene Catterall: Yes, but there have been two or three Opposition parties in the past.

[English]

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): This is the first time we have had five parties. Other committees have followed generally the rule that Mr. Plamondon is wanting us to follow. The names of the people will be chosen in consultation with the whips.

Do you agree, sir?

Mr. Philip Mayfield: No, sir, I do not, and I'll tell you why.

I agree with Mrs. Catterall that this is a steering committee. It has no power. It only makes recommendations to the committee. It becomes very cumbersome, in my experience, to have a steering committee that becomes too large and unwieldy. It's only to provide advice to facilitate the business of the committee. The government side will do what it will, but I do not see the need for enlarging the committee, even to having someone from every party. I'm not sure this is necessary. I would agree to it if that's the will, but to enlarge it further, I see no point in that.

[Translation]

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): Do you wish to make a comment, Senator Robichaud?

Senator Louis Robichaud: I agree with the previous speaker that it makes no sense to have a Steering Committee that has almost as many members as the full Committee. If all parties were to be represented, there would be too many members on the Steering Committee. I don't think that's necessary. The purpose of the sub- committee is to make recommendations to the full Committee. So there is no need to have a large sub-committee. I think three people would be enough for the Steering Committee.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): Could we put the question on the motion that has been made by Mr. Plamondon, whom I would ask to repeat it?

Mr. Louis Plamondon: I move that we follow the same procedure as other joint committees, namely that we establish a Steering Committee composed of the two Joint Chairs, the Vice-Chair, and one member each of the Bloc Québécois, the Conservative Party and the New Democratic Party.

About the only thing this Committee does is prepare the agenda. As far as previous years are concerned, this Committee only met twice last year. So, I don't think this is likely to be a major issue.

[English]

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): Those in agreement with Mr. Plamondon, please raise your hand.

(Motion agreed to—See Minutes of Proceedings)

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): If I may be allowed to comment, I hope this is not going to be a partisan committee. We're dealing with how best to make the library work for all parties in Parliament.

I don't see what we will have to quarrel about, except perhaps you will object to my insisting that the 11th edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica should be on our shelves. It's a shame that it's not. For classical studies, it's the best edition, and I have been asking for it for 14 years now.

• 1130

A voice: It's a start.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): May we pass to quorum, motion 2?

Senator Louis Robichaud: What was the quorum last year?

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): The quorum was fixed at four members, three members being sufficient to receive evidence. Is this agreeable?

Some hon. members: Agreed.

Miss Deborah Grey: Regarding the larger Parliament now and the number of parties there, I wonder if we could change that to seven and four—I think that reflects the numbers—with the official parties being recognized.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): It's up to the committee to decide. I'd like to point out that from my experience it's harder to get seven people to come than it is to get four people to come, especially as you're all terribly busy—even in the Senate, believe it or not.

Miss Deborah Grey: I can appreciate that, but you have a larger body to draw on in terms of one person from this party being designated to be here and one person from that party. I just think to avoid a lot of confrontations—

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): Do you promise me that the person you designate will be here?

Miss Deborah Grey: I can't promise you that, any more than you can promise cookies and tea.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): No, I can promise cookies and tea because I'll pay out of my own pocket.

A voice: We'll hold you to that.

Miss Deborah Grey: I do think that's wise. There are a lot of bodies here today and I'm sure some are missing. Quorum has to be meaningful. If this committee is going to be meaningful, then I think it should reflect what the other committees are doing as well as the new House.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): Could you then voice this as a motion and we'll put it to a vote?

Miss Deborah Grey: I move that we go to seven and four rather than the four and three from the last Parliament.

(Motion agreed to—See Minutes of Proceedings)

Miss Deborah Grey: Some people didn't vote, either way.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): They also have the right not to vote.

Miss Deborah Grey: I suppose they do.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): The next item is questioning witnesses, motion 3.

Ms. Marlene Catterall: I move motion 3:

That during the questioning of witnesses, there be allocated ten minutes for the first questioner (of each party) and that thereafter five minutes be allocated to each subsequent questioner.

That's the normal tradition. Now, if in light of the larger number of parties people feel they want to move that down, feel free. I just wanted to get it on the floor.

[Translation]

Mr. Louis Plamondon: I just want to say that after lengthy discussions in the Joint Committee on Official Languages, all the parties arrived at the following agreement: seven minutes for the Reform Party, seven minutes for the Bloc Québécois, seven minutes for the Liberal Party, five minutes for the N.D.P. and five minutes for the Conservative Party, and then you start again with five minute rounds—in other words, five, five, five, and then five, five, five.

[English]

So the first seven minutes is for the Reform, the second seven minutes for the Bloc, seven minutes to the Liberals,

[Translation]

then five minutes for the N.D.P., five for the Liberals and five for the Conservatives. Actually, it's seven, seven, seven, and five, five, five. I'll write it down for you: seven minutes for the Reform Party, seven minutes for the Bloc Québécois, seven minutes for the Liberal Party, five minutes for the N.D.P., five minutes for the Conservative Party and five minutes for the Liberal Party. That would be for the first round of questioning. But I don't suppose there will be much time left after that.

[English]

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): I would like the clerk of the committee to read this to see if it is understood.

[Translation]

Mr. Louis Plamondon: And then it starts all over again.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): The Committee Clerk will read Mr. Plamondon's motion just to ensure that everyone has the same understanding.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: This proposal is for the first round of questioning.

• 1135

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): Yes, the first round. I would ask that you read the motion in one language, and then the other, if you don't mind.

[English]

The Joint Clerk (Ms. Danielle Belisle): During the questioning of witnesses, in the first round, there would be allocated seven minutes to the Reform, seven minutes to the Bloc, seven minutes to the Liberal Party, five minutes to the NDP, five minutes to the Progressive Conservatives, and five minutes to the Liberals.

[Translation]

That during the first round of questioning of the witnesses, there be allocated seven minutes to the Reform Party, seven minutes to the Bloc Québécois, seven minutes to the Liberal Party, five minutes to the N.D.P., five minutes to the Progressive Conservative Party and five minutes to the Liberal Party.

Senator Eymard Corbin: I have a question.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): Yes.

Senator Eymard Corbin: Does that time allocation include the witness' answer, for instance?

Mr. Louis Plamondon: Yes, yes. It does.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): That is for the entire exchange.

[English]

The seven minutes are for questions and answers, and it's up to the chairs to make sure it doesn't exceed seven minutes.

[Translation]

Senator Eymard Corbin: Personally, I could do without this kind of proposal. We are simply a Committee that makes recommendations and our role is to act as a consultant to the Speakers of the Senate and the House of Commons.

We're not here to talk about ideological problems or major policy issues. Our role is basically to ensure that our colleagues from both Houses of Parliament receive the best possible services. So why do we need such strict rules? I much prefer a discussion that is allowed to continue until it exhausts itself. Very often, when it's all over, you realize that the colleague and witness who spoke have answered the question and concern of several members around the table. However, if that's what you want, I can't say I'm vigorously opposed to it.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: The rules are there for times when good faith is lacking. That's why it's better to have them.

Senator Eymard Corbin: Yes, but...

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): I think we're all acting in good faith when it comes to issues involving the Library of Parliament.

Senator Eymard Corbin: At the same time, it's important to have faith in the ability of the Joint Chairs to conduct the meeting appropriately. There can be circumstances where it is preferable to allow the questions and answers to continue.

If you're intent on your proposal, I would also like to hear you say the Joint Chairs must be able to exercise some discretion if they feel the discussion should be allowed to continue until it reaches its logical conclusion, so to speak.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): Mr. Plamondon.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: I personally know of no committee that operates at the discretion of the Chairman. There are always standards that must be met. In every committee I have sat on over the past thirteen years, there has always been time allocated to each party. If we adopt this rule, it will serve as a guide post if the discussion becomes heated because of the witnesses who happen to be present or the issues being discussed.

Obviously, if this Committee only meets two or three times, its discussions are more likely to take place in the absence of any, shall we say, controversial witnesses. In that sense, I'm sure we won't have any problems. But I do think it's important to lay the ground rules for our discussions by providing for limited speaking time and especially, ensuring that each of the parties is allocated a certain amount of time.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): Do you want us to tell the Parliamentary Librarian that you don't consider him to be a controversial witness?

Mr. Louis Plamondon: Perhaps not controversial, but certainly interesting.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): The Committee has two options.

Senator Bolduc.

Senator Roch Bolduc (Golfe, PC): Since we're talking about time limitations, Mr. Chairman, I would be interested in knowing whether we're going to be here until 2 P.M., 3 P.M., 5 P.M., or when exactly? I can only stay until 11:30 or 12. I thought we could deal with these issues quickly, but I see that we're making no progress. We've been talking about trivialities for three quarters of an hour. When are we going to address the real issues? I have better things to do than to waste my time on the kind of nonsense you've been discussing for the past half-hour. Surely it's not that complicated! This is not Foreign Affairs, after all. We're talking about the Library of Parliament. Come on! It's not the end of the world!

Mr. Louis Plamondon: That's why I'm suggesting we use the same procedure followed by other Joint Committees.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): At the Official Languages Committee, they decided to try what you have suggested and to make a decision subsequently.

Mr. Lavigne.

• 1140

Mr. Raymond Lavigne (Verdun—Saint-Henri, Lib.): Mr. Chairman, I think the Senator is right. We're only talking here about services provided to M.P.s and Senators, not government policy. As the Senator was saying, this isn't Foreign Affairs. I suggest we put the question on this.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): Mr. Plamondon, would you agree to the idea of our trying out what you have proposed?

Mr. Louis Plamondon: Yes.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): We'll see whether it works or not.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: I simply said that we could proceed along the same lines as the Official Languages Committee, which is a Joint Committee. In the Official Languages Committee, we will be trying out this system for a few months, and if it works, we will continue to use it; otherwise, we will change our rules.

I'm trying to save time here, not waste it.

[English]

Mr. Philip Mayfield: I call for the question.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): So you do not want us to do what they're doing in Official Languages, where they're simply trying—

Mr. Philip Mayfield: I'm only asking for us to vote to decide on it. I think the discussion has gone far enough.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): Those in favour of Mr. Plamondon's motion, please raise your hands.

(Motion agreed to—See Minutes of Proceedings)

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): Could we simply vote yes for motion 4? Is anybody opposed to motion 4?

(Motion agreed to—See Minutes of Proceedings)

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): Is anybody opposed to motion 5?

Mr. Philip Mayfield: I would like to make an amendment, sir, that only substantive motions qualify for the 48 hours' notice rule.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): I'm not quite sure what you mean by “substantive motions”.

Mr. Philip Mayfield: Procedural motions would not qualify. Substantive motions would be motions recommending change of policy.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): And the procedural motions?

Mr. Philip Mayfield: They would be dealt with immediately.

Ms. Marlene Catterall: If I may comment on that, I would disagree most heartily. A committee or any legislative body should be most concerned about its procedures. Members should be able to rely on the procedures. If the procedures are being changed, most decision-making bodies require at least a two-thirds vote to change a matter of procedure, because that is what protects the right of all members of the committee to know and participate in the business. I would most strongly object to having procedural motions dealt with without notice to committee members.

Mr. Philip Mayfield: If I may respond to that, sir, we have already dealt with routine motions here with the understanding that they can be changed if the committee doesn't see they're working. I think the committee members need to be able to lay their concerns before the committee and have them dealt with. I understand that substantive motions do need consideration, but I think the routine business of the committee should be dealt with on a day-by-day basis.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): Point 5 does not preclude what you want. And this is not a question of declaring war or not. You can wait 48 hours to consider a procedural question.

Mr. Philip Mayfield: If that's the case, then why do we worry about having the motion?

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): We have the motion as it stands now, and you—

Mr. Philip Mayfield: But not all committees have this rule.

[Translation]

Mr. Jacques Saada (Brossard—La Prairie, Lib.): Mr. Chairman, without wanting to prolong the debate, it seems to me we're wasting an awful lot of time talking about superficial matters. The object of the 48-hour notice is to ensure that whatever the circumstances, everyone has a chance to think about an issue before being expected to make a decision. If we start to apply one rule for procedural motions and another for substantive motions, we will only complicate matters further. I didn't think the Committee's goal was to systematically complicate every simple matter.

[English]

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): Those in favour of point 5, please raise your hands.

(Motion agreed to—See Minutes of Proceedings)

Mr. Philip Mayfield: I'd like my name recorded in opposition.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): It shall be done, sir.

Mr. Philip Mayfield: Thank you.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): Next is point 6.

(Motion agreed to—See Minutes of Proceedings)

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): Point number 7.

• 1145

[Translation]

Mr. Louis Plamondon: I have a question, Mr. Chairman.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): Yes.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: Could the Clerk confirm that 360 copies were requested last year?

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): Yes.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: I just want to express the wish, as I did at the Official Languages Committee, that the Senate follow the lead of the House of Commons and set up an e-mail system, which would save money. We cannot confine ourselves to e-mail here because the Senate rules require that the Minutes of Proceedings be printed.

I don't know whether that can be included in the notes, but I do hope the Senate will decide to use e-mail, like the House of Commons does, which would allow us to avoid having to print 360 copies.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): The Senate will continue to print Minutes of Proceedings, because that is what it has decided to do.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: Well, I am just expressing my wish that you overturn that decision.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): I will pass that on to the Speaker of the Senate.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: Thank you.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): Who knows, you may be appointed to the Senate one day.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: If I am, I will make the suggestion again.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): I won't be there to greet you.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: And that's not all I'll be suggesting.

[English]

Miss Deborah Grey: Can you give me some idea of where these 360 copies go? To whom are they disseminated?

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): If I might make a comment, President Truman once said that when he gave an order he didn't know what happened to it. He had been in the White House for seven years, and he didn't know. I think this is probably one of those cases.

Miss Deborah Grey: Yes. That's why I'm asking the question.

The Joint Clerk (Ms. Catherine Piccinin): The number comes from figures that were given to us last year. This number includes copies that must go to the depository library services program; to the Canada Communication Group; to fill a number of Senate subscriptions; and the extra amount kept at the distribution centre for people who would like copies, those from the public or from within the parliamentary precincts.

So 360 is the number that was arrived at. This also includes a reduction of over 37%, which was done two years ago when the Senate decided to decrease the number of issues it produced.

Miss Deborah Grey: As long as somebody somewhere is reading these, and if 169 of them aren't left over, sitting in this depository.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): It says we can adjust this number up or down.

Is everybody in favour of motion 7?

(Motion agreed to—See Minutes of Proceedings)

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): Does everyone agree to motion 8?

(Motion agreed to—See Minutes of Proceedings)

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): Do I have agreement now for motion 9, adoption of the first report?

(Motion agreed to—See Minutes of Proceedings)

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): The first report is attached.

Mr. Philip Mayfield: May I proceed with my routine motion, motion 10?

I move that the committee receive and study the main estimates of the parliamentary library.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): Any opposition?

Ms. Marlene Catterall: No opposition, Mr. Chair, but is this duplication? Doesn't procedure and House affairs already receive and consider the main estimates of the parliamentary library? Aren't they automatically referred, by rules of the House, to procedure and House affairs, along with all the other House of Commons estimates, at least? I don't want to see committees duplicating.

That doesn't prevent this committee from deciding that it wants to look at those estimates and provide its comments to procedure and House affairs, but I wouldn't want to see it having to happen when those estimates are already dealt with by another committee that some of us, in fact, are even members of.

Duplication and overlap, Mr. Speaker; let's get rid of it.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): We will receive the estimates, it says here.

Ms. Marlene Catterall: So it's already there?

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): Yes.

Miss Deborah Grey: With regard to Marlene's comments, I'm just wondering, if we wanted to ask questions in this committee vis-à-vis the estimates, who is the cabinet minister we would bring in? I think we should have the right and the obligation. Who is the cabinet minister who oversees this spending?

Ms. Marlene Catterall: The Speaker of the House of Commons and the Speaker of the Senate, in this case, where the library is a joint service.

Mr. Philip Mayfield: Is your answer, then, that it is the speaker...?

Ms. Marlene Catterall: Both speakers.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe D. Gigantès): So they'll delegate the librarian to us, the two speakers, I am sure.

Senator Eymard Corbin: Yes, but ultimately it's the president of the Treasury Board who has to approve the estimates.

• 1150

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): Does anyone else have anything to move?

Senator Louis Robichaud: I move we adjourn.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): Does everybody agree?

Some hon. members: Agreed.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Philippe Gigantès): The meeting is adjourned.