THE COMMITTEE OF SELECTION
EVIDENCE
[English]
OTTAWA, Tuesday, June 7, 2016
The Committee of Selection, pursuant to rule 12-2(4)(b) of the Rules of the Senate, met this day at 4 p.m. to consider its agenda.
Senator Donald Neil Plett (Chair) in the chair.
The Chair: Honourable senators, we do not have a very long agenda. I'm hoping we can get through it fairly quickly so we can get back into the chamber and do our work there.
After the usual consultations, colleagues, there has been agreement to make the following membership changes. Therefore, I move:
That pursuant to rule 12-2(4)(b) of the Rules of the Senate, your committee recommends a change of membership to the following committees:
Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples: that Honourable Senator Sinclair replaces Honourable Senator Sibbeston and that the Honourable Senator Meredith be added as a member of the committee.
Standing Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry: that the Honourable Senators Gagné and Pratte be added as members of the committee.
Standing Senate Committee on Banking, Trade and Commerce: that the Honourable Senator Cowan be added as a member of the committee.
Standing Senate Committee on Energy, the Environment and Natural Resources: that the Honourable Senator Fraser be added as a member of the committee.
Standing Senate Committee on Fisheries and Oceans: that the Honourable Senators Sinclair and Wallace be added as members of the committee.
Standing Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade: that the Honourable Senator Cools be added as a member of the committee.
Are there any comments before I call for the question?
Senator Fraser: There are a whole lot more.
The Chair: That's for the first group. Yes, there will be more, Senator Fraser.
Senator Fraser: Yes, I do have some questions.
I would really like to see a list of the resulting full membership of committees, if that is available, because it's not very helpful to somebody who doesn't sit on a given committee — Fisheries, for example, on which I have never sat — to be told that so and so is going to be added, in this case two members of the committee. I'd like to be sure that we're not expanding membership beyond the statutory things. That's one question.
The second question is: May I ask why in three cases we refer to a specific senator replacing another senator as distinct from just simply saying that so and so is to be a member of the committee? It seems to me almost insulting to single out particular senators who are going to be replaced.
Senator Munson: Well, if I could answer that to give it some context, the idea of replacing was in the interest of fairness to the new independent senators. Agreements had been made on both the Conservative and Liberal side to have two new independent senators sit on these committees. The individual whips along with their leadership worked with their fellow senators to ask them if they would be gracious enough to be relieved of their duties on various committees to add balance to the Senate. That's basically it.
Senator Fraser: That was not my question.
Senator Munson: What is your question?
Senator Fraser: I know I gave up a seat on a committee that I otherwise loved.
The Chair: The question put was basically that you didn't like the wording on that part of the question.
Senator Fraser: There are three senators singled out here as essentially being turfed off of committees to make room for someone else, and I'm wondering why we are doing it for them and not for anybody else?
The Chair: Clearly because in the other cases there were vacancies and nobody needed to be removed from those committees.
Senator Fraser: The reference to Transport says that notwithstanding the motion adopted by the Senate on December 11, 2015, Senator Bellemare is gone and Senator Tkachuk is in. The other replacement references don't refer to a motion.
The Chair: Senator, could we please stick to the first part?
Senator Fraser: I want to know why the first part where Senator Sinclair is replacing Senator Sibbeston doesn't also refer to a previous motion.
Senator Munson: That's why she's the deputy leader.
The Chair: The Modernization Committee was created by a motion in the chamber and is not under the same rules as the rest of the committees.
Senator Fraser: But the motion in question refers to Transport. There is no mention of a motion for Aboriginal and there is no reference to a motion in connection with rules.
Blair Armitage, Clerk of the Committee: May I just make a modification? The chair wasn't aware that we made a typo in the draft report. Part 2 isn't about Transport. Part 2 is about the Modernization Committee, which was created by motion in the chamber, including the membership, and that's why the distinction from the standing committees.
Senator Fraser: So the fact that this committee's earlier report was also adopted by the Senate is irrelevant?
Mr. Armitage: The Rules of the Senate per 12-2(4)(b) allows this committee from time to time to propose new —
Senator Fraser: Amendments, changes.
Mr. Armitage: That's correct.
The Chair: I think Senator Fraser had one other question.
Senator Fraser: My next question is in fact in reference to part 2, so I'll wait for part 2.
Why we are dividing it into two parts?
The Chair: We divided it actually into four parts.
Senator Tardif: I would support Senator Fraser's comment that it would be very good to get the full list of committee membership. Is that possible?
The Chair: Yes, I'm sure that is possible. It may not be possible to do that in five minutes.
Senator Fraser: So we don't know what we're voting on really.
The Chair: You are voting on the changes that we are asking you to make. You know exactly what you're voting on. You just don't know which colleagues will be sitting beside you.
Senator Tardif: We don't know the committee membership.
The Chair: No, but you do know, senators, that you are voting on these changes. I'm not intending to be argumentative, but we are voting on these changes. You know what you're voting on; you just don't know the makeup of the entire committee. You are correct; if that is important, we need to give that to you. You are absolutely correct, but we don't have that available because some changes will still need to be made. As has been said, some of the changes will be made by the party whips as opposed to this committee.
Senator Fraser: Oh, dear. I'm more confused than I originally was.
The Chair: I heard a lot of that today at our caucus meeting.
Senator Munson: We do have lists and we do know who sits on all of these committees, at least the whips do, and those who sit on the committees know. So it won't take very long, once these senators are placed on the committees, the names, they haven't changed; they are there. I didn't put a list together of all those who are sitting on these committees, but it wouldn't take very long to have all those names. For example, would you like me to read all the names of the committee members for the record here?
Senator Fraser: Maybe we could run off some copies?
Senator Munson: I suppose we could do that.
Mr. Armitage: When preparing for the meeting with the staff of the different offices involved, it was indicated to us that certain vacancies would be created using the traditional substitution forms that you are all familiar with, but there was also consciousness of the fact that committees were going to try to meet tonight and potentially tomorrow. One of the motions I believe that is foreseen today is about the timing of how the report will be presented —
Senator Fraser: You're going to seek leave, are you?
Mr. Armitage: — to minimize the amount of time in which committees are vacant. Whether they seek leave or not I'm not certain, but the idea was that by a certain time before the report is tabled, the necessary vacancies would be achieved through the use of substitution forms.
I hope that helps. That was as it was explained to me.
Senator Fraser: I'm reliably informed that no committees are going to be able to meet tomorrow anyways.
Senator Martin: This reminds me of a classroom where there are different types of learners. Some need to see the entire list and information. Others, like me, look at this and understand what you said in terms of why some of these are worded differently because there are actual replacements, whereas the rest of them are just adding new members because there were vacancies.
I know that these lists do exist. We saw them in our first Selection Committee meeting. I don't know if the priority for us is to add these new members to the committees that have been waiting. When we were scheduled to meet today, I heard comments like, "Finally; that will be nice." So if the priority is to add new members to committees where there were vacancies, then I'm okay with knowing that these lists do exist but are not in front of us. All of the information isn't here to help us cross-reference, so I also understand what other senators have raised.
Senator Fraser: For the record, perhaps I should say wonderful. I should say that I'm not objecting to the new system of opening slots for independent senators.
Senator Martin: No, I realize that, senator.
Senator Fraser: I think that's a tremendous change. How often do I have to say I think the Senate should know what it's voting on?
The Chair: Well, the fact of the matter is, senator, you know exactly what you are voting on because that is in front of you here already. You don't know who your colleagues are going to be on a committee that you're sitting on, possibly, and that has now been provided for you, so hopefully that is acceptable.
Senator Bellemare: We will be able to figure it out, but maybe it would have been useful to have a total or proportion of senators sitting on committees that are Conservative, that are Liberal and that are independent.
We will be able to compute it? Okay.
Senator Munson: You will be able to see it on the sheet that you have in front of you.
Senator Bellemare: Compared to the percentage of the representation —
Senator Munson: We could do one in blue and one in red and one in — what is the other colour? What is the non-aligned colour?
Senator Omidvar: Hot pink.
The Chair: Senator Bellemare, you should now be able to figure that out.
Senator Bellemare: That's right.
The Chair: Are there any other questions?
Senator Tardif: Chair, all of the committees do not seem to be on this list.
The Chair: Committees that are being modified are on the list.
Senator Tardif: Well, Official Languages does not seem to be on the list.
Senator Munson: Shaila will go downstairs and get the photocopies because the photocopies are missing on this list. We apologize; we should have had the list. You're right about having the list of all the committee members, so Shaila will get the list to make sure that we have them all before this meeting is done.
Senator Fraser: I'm sorry to make your life difficult, chair; I really am.
Senator Omidvar: Perhaps, chair, you would entertain a question that is more informational than substantive.
The Chair: Certainly.
Senator Omidvar: I notice that the Selection Committee is not on this list, and I notice that the two independent nominees on Selection have been scratched out. Can you tell me what the makeup of the Selection Committee is and why independents are not included on this list?
The Chair: Well, the makeup is pretty much what you have in the room I believe, with the exception of Senator Hubley. She is not here. I think she's the only one missing. And this is not one of the constituted committees that was decided we would make the changes to, so that will have to be for another day.
Senator McCoy: If I may piggy-back on your question, neither was the Modernization Committee one of the announced changes that you were going to make; it also is not a standing committee. How do you rationalize that one, Senator Plett?
The Chair: I rationalize it by saying that that was a decision made by the leadership and I'm implementing it as Chair of the Selection Committee.
Senator McCoy: So you do take orders in your caucus, then.
Senator Marshall: I thought we were going to change the standing committees plus the special committees.
Senator McCoy: No, not according to the letter that Cowan and Carignan wrote way back when, back in April. They specifically referred to standing committees.
Senator Marshall: And not special committees?
Senator McCoy: Not special committees.
Senator Marshall: Okay. That's changed.
Senator McCoy: So there are a couple of things that your leader said they were going to do and they have not done. Number one, they haven't given up seats and directed you to give up seats. A Liberal would step away from the committee and a Conservative would step away from the committee and welcome an independent senator onto that committee. Indeed, that's not happening in each case. In some cases there are vacancies and those are also being filled. In other cases, for example on Aboriginal Affairs, now that Sibbeston is an independent, you're saying we're going to replace an independent with an independent. And, secondly, you're adding the Modernization Committee to this list.
As you well know, we have written all of you a letter and you have all received the letter and independent senators do not believe that you are actually upholding the principles of proportionality, fairness and equality with these appointments. But we are keen to get to work in a formal manner on these things, so we are reserving our right to take this issue up again after we come back from the summer break.
That is on the record, as I trust you all know.
The Chair: That, Senator McCoy, I think is on the record a number of times, so I don't think you will let anybody forget that.
Senator McCoy: Well, I know one just has to keep repeating these things until they become a habit, and then you're going to say, "Aha, proportionality! McCoy, you deserve another seat on this committee."
You are actually over the limit on most of these at the moment, but we'll get there step by step.
Senator Bellemare: Can I ask a question on number two?
The Chair: Go ahead and ask the question. I think we can discuss it while we're waiting.
Senator Bellemare: I don't understand this replacement of Senator Tkachuk replacing me. We don't know which committee, but I suppose it's the Modernization Committee that you're talking about.
The Chair: That's correct.
Senator Bellemare: Because I was been appointed to that committee for the session, and it was not on the list that we received when we were to give out two seats and to choose that. That's a special committee and that was not on the list. I don't know why I would be replaced if I didn’t resign or if I don't go, because I've been appointed to that committee for the entire session. As far as I know, Senator Tkachuk is already a member of that committee as I saw it on the website. So what this is about I don't know.
The Chair: Well, clearly we aren't at that point yet. That's an issue that will have to be voted on, but the Selection Committee does have the power to put people onto that particular committee and move them off of that particular committee.
Senator Bellemare: Even to put the same person on a committee twice?
The Chair: I don't understand.
Senator Wells: Senator Tkachuk was substituting for someone. That's why his name appeared on a committee list.
Senator Bellemare: Okay, thank you.
The Chair: Does anyone else not have a complete list? We're waiting for more copies. Apparently the photocopier is a little slow.
Mr. Armitage: The version that you have had distributed to you and that is being improved upon is as was foreseen. If everything that were proposed today were adopted, this is how the committees would look after substitutions had been effected by the whips and the motions being proposed today would be put into effect.
Senator Fraser: If I may express my gratitude, I actually find this list very helpful, so thank you very much.
Senator Omidvar: It's really hard to read. That's all I would say.
The Chair: Are your lists also not complete?
Senator Bellemare: It's not complete.
Senator Munson: We have those nice lists in our office. I have been working from them. I have them downstairs. Maybe tomorrow, or whatever, we can have the nice list where it says Liberal and Conservation and each name on each committee. We could do something like that. We could do that.
When it is in the Senate Hansard, you'll be able to see everybody's name and where they work and what party they represent; whether it's non-aligned. In terms of fairness, we'll have to see what happens to the next 17 independent senators and where they will go. Who knows if they'll be non-aligned? Maybe they'll join a party. Who knows?
Senator McCoy: That's true.
While we're at it, one of the things we're trying to share with everyone, my francophone colleagues have advised me that they prefer the term "unaffiliated." I see that actually you have used that terminology on your larger document. You've said "non-affiliated" and I appreciate that. The francophones tell me that this word "non-aligned" or "aligned" in their language, their first language, their preferred language of French, refers more to cars and straightening wheels. They think they're racy enough without that and don't need a mechanic to assist them, but "unaffiliated" or "non-affiliated" or "affiliated" would be their chosen designation in that regard. I want to congratulate you for picking that up.
The Chair: Senators Bellemare and Omidvar, if I were to allow you to use my list, would that be sufficient so that we can get the meeting moving?
Senator Omidvar: I'm not holding up the meeting.
The Chair: Well, I asked if everyone had the copies and Senator Bellemare said she didn't. I'll bring them over.
With that being done, maybe we can continue. Are there any other questions in regard to that first section?
If not, is it agreed that these recommendations are accepted?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Thank you.
Senator Fraser: Up to Fisheries, right?
The Chair: Up to Foreign Affairs.
Senator Munson: Honourable senators, after the usual consultations, there has been agreement to make the following membership changes. Therefore, I move:
That pursuant to rule 12-2(4)(b) of the Rules of the Senate, your committee recommends a change of membership to the following committees:
Standing Senate Committee on Human Rights: that the Honourable Senators Gagné and Omidvar be added as members of the committee.
Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration: that the Honourable Senator Wallace be added as a member of the committee.
Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs: that the Honourable Senator Sinclair be added as a member of the committee.
Standing Senate Committee on National Finance: that the Honourable Senators Cools and Pratte be added as members of the committee.
Standing Senate Committee on National Security and Defence: that the Honourable Senators Meredith and McCoy be added as members of the committee.
The Chair: Any questions? If not, is it agreed to accept that motion?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Agreed, thank you.
Senator Wells.
Senator Wells: After the usual consultations, there has been agreement to make the following membership changes. Therefore, I move:
That pursuant to rule 12-2(4)(b) of the Rules of the Senate, your committee recommends a change of the membership to the following committees:
Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages: that the Honourable Senator Gagné be added as a member of the committee.
Standing Committee on Rules, Procedures and the Rights of Parliament: that the Honourable Senator Wallace replaces the Honourable Senator Cools as a member of the committee, and the Honourable Senator Lankin be added as a member of the committee.
Standing Joint Committee for the Scrutiny of Regulations: that Honourable Senator Omidvar be added as a member of the committee.
Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology: that the Honourable Senator Petitclerc be added as a member of the committee.
Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications: that the Honourable Senator McCoy be added as a member of the committee.
The Chair: Thank you. Any questions?
Senator McCoy: Yes, I do have a question. Our request was in the light of there being only one independent senator attend Scrutiny of Regulations that I be replaced by Senator Omidvar. Truly, I cannot go to Scrutiny of Regulations because I'm on a committee that conflicts in time, which is the Energy and Environment Committee. As you know, energy and the environment are the two issues that I have followed in my entire time at the Senate. They are reflective of both my professional interests and expertise but also my province and region. This was what we had put forward so that I would not be in that conflict position and that you would actually have a senator who could work on it. So could I encourage you to replace me with Senator Omidvar rather than simply add Senator Omidvar, as you have indicated on here? This is the Joint Committee for the Scrutiny of Regulations.
Senator Wells: I think it would be in the chair's purview to accept that as a motion.
Senator McCoy: I cannot move it because I am not a member of your committee, but you could move it, Senator Wells, or you could move an amended version of your motion.
The Chair: Can I ask, Senator McCoy, if this were to be accepted, are you saying that both you and Senator Omidvar would be on that committee?
Senator McCoy: If you accept the motion that is on the table in front of you now, that's true, because I was put on Scrutiny of Regulations.
The Chair: Why would you not just resign from the committee?
Senator McCoy: Because I cannot resign from that committee. According to my best legal advice, I cannot resign from a committee. I'm stuck on a committee for a session. When put on a committee, I have no option to get off a committee. That's something I'm sure that Rules Committee is going to be looking at this summer.
Senator Wells: Chair, I'd like to make a motion that we remove Senator McCoy from the —
Senator Martin: Replace Senator McCoy with Senator Omidvar.
The Chair: I don't think we need to do that. I think we as a Selection Committee can remove Senator McCoy from that committee.
Senator McCoy: That's fine. You can remove me and add her.
The Chair: Senators, I'll simply ask for agreement on Senator Wells' motion, and then we will entertain a motion to remove Senator McCoy, if you still want to make that, Senator Wells.
Senator Fraser: May I make a comment before we vote?
The Chair: Yes, please.
Senator Fraser: The difficulty with simply removing Senator McCoy, even at her own request, is that then the Scrutiny Committee will only have one independent senator. The undertaking was two, everywhere.
Senator McCoy: In that case, you need to add another one to the Library of Parliament. There is only one there.
The Chair: Where we only got one name, senator — and there were a few places from the independents where we only got one name — there is a vacancy, just like there is where we couldn't fill it all up with Liberals or Conservatives.
That, in itself, wouldn't necessarily be a problem. At some point, if they have another name, this committee could meet and put another independent on there if they come up with one.
Senator Fraser: It would take a meeting of this committee, though?
The Chair: Yes, it would take a meeting of this committee.
Senator Fraser: I just wanted to be clear on the record that this is at the request of the independent senator involved. Nobody is steamrolling anybody.
The Chair: And if Senator Wells wants to add that to his motion, he'd be welcome to.
But, first, I will ask for agreement to accept Senator Wells' motion.
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Thank you.
Now Senator Wells will make a motion.
Senator Wells: I would like to move that Senator McCoy be removed from the Standing Joint Committee for the Scrutiny of Regulations.
The Chair: Is that agreed to?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Thank you.
Is that acceptable?
Senator McCoy: It's acceptable to me.
The Chair: Thank you.
Senator McCoy: There's something interesting about those joint committees. I looked at the rule, and you can put as many senators on that joint committee as the Selection Committee wishes. There's no limitation on the number of senators you can appoint to that.
The Chair: Senator Wells?
Senator Wells: Thank you, chair.
Notwithstanding the motion adopted by the Senate on December 11, 2015, and pursuant to rule 12-2(4)(b) of the Rules of the Senate, I move:
That the Honourable Senator Tkachuk replaces the Honourable Senator Bellemare as a member of the Special Senate Committee on Senate Modernization.
The Chair: Any discussion?
Senator Bellemare: I think this resolution is out of order because I'm supposed to be appointed until the end of the session.
[Translation]
I have not resigned and I do not wish to be replaced. I have been sitting on that committee since that time. I do not see why I would be replaced by Senator Tkachuk.
[English]
The Chair: The powers of the Committee of Selection, as per rule 12-2(4):
The Committee of Selection is empowered to inquire into and report on any other matter referred to it by the Senate, and also has the power:
(a) to publish from day to day such papers and evidence as may be ordered by it; and
(b) to propose to the Senate from time to time changes in the membership of a committee.
I'll rule that out of order.
[Translation]
Senator Bellemare: Has the committee ever made such a decision without providing valid reasons?
[English]
What is the reason for that?
The Chair: Senator, the reason is that we agreed there would be two independent senators on every committee, including this one. There are now three.
Senator Bellemare: That's not a reason.
Senator Fraser: Yes, it is.
The Chair: That's not a reason? It may not be a good one, but it's a reason.
Senator Bellemare: It's not a good one.
The Chair: That's fair enough.
Senator Bellemare: No, no, I'm sorry — for a moment.
The Senate Committee on Senate Modernization was not in the agreement, because it was not on the list of the committees that we received. It was not there, and so you cannot bring it there at the last moment like that. The agreement did not include that committee.
Senator McCoy: It's also true that in your letter to us in April — Senators Munson and Plett wrote to us — you had attached a list of the Senate committees that you were addressing at that time, and they were all standing committees. They were the standing committees like Aboriginal Peoples, Internal Economy, Transport — I won't read out the entire list here — and the joint committees. There were 18 of them.
You indicated at that time that was, as you had been asked in your letter — you referred to the letter of Senators Cowan and Carignan, and you said, "Pursuant to instructions from our leaders, we are addressing these committees." And this is the list that you attached. You did not indicate that the Modernization Committee was a part of that.
The Chair: Part of this letter that Senators Carignan and Cowan sent was that each of the Conservative and Liberal caucuses will make available a slot on each committee to be filled by a non-aligned senator to be chosen by the non-aligned senators themselves. They asked that we canvass all of the non-aligned senators and appoint the senators selected to each of the standing and special committees of the Senate.
That is what has happened. In order to fulfill that entire mandate, this needs to be done.
Senator Bellemare: But that was not the list. The Modernization Committee was not on the list, and I feel like I have a breach of privilege in that ruling. I think that's not the proper way to function.
Senator Fraser: In order to comply with the agreement to give up two seats on every committee so that independents could be accommodated and so that every committee would have two independent members — you are not the only one to have lost a committee seat, Senator Bellemare. Some of us — la mort dans l'âme — gave up seats to accommodate independent senators. That phrase refers to the fact that we love the committees, even if we support the agreement that was reached for two seats per committee.
If the non-aligned senators did not reach an agreement among themselves as to who should be on the Modernization Committee, that is, may I suggest, their problem. If they did reach agreement and the list before us reflects that agreement, then I propose we adopt the proposal as written. Otherwise perhaps we might wish to conclude this meeting now and give them a day or two to decide which of the three they want, because we did that with all the other committees. We let them choose, did we not?
The Chair: We did, and in my opinion, they did choose when they sent us the two names that we are now suggesting stay on there.
Senator Fraser: They did do that?
The Chair: They did do that; they gave us two names for this committee. And they made the assumption, I'm assuming, that Senator Bellemare not be that person, or that she would stay on or whatever assumption they made — I don't know. But we put the two names on that they gave us.
We really need to conclude, colleagues. If there's something very pressing, I will listen to that, but if it's just simply rehashing it, we all want to get back in the chamber and do our work there.
Senator McCoy: I want to point out that this will increase the Conservative membership on a 15-member committee to 9. They should have 7 on that committee. The Liberals will have 4. The independents should, in fact, have 4 as well.
So I look at the Liberals, and I assume at this committee you are not going to vote in favour of this because, of course, it wouldn't quite match your principles.
Senator Munson: Let's be fair about this a wee bit on the other side of the scale. As Senator Fraser has said, there are many members who wanted to stay on these committees. There were arguments in our caucus, for example, from myself and from Senator Tardif regarding the committees that had nine and that we would be losing two people on those committees. For example, in my capacity as Chair of the Human Rights Committee, I ended up with one colleague from our side, but we were convinced it had to be fair all across the board, whether it was 9, 12 or 15.
You talk about 20 new senators coming. We're talking about an evolution or a revolution, no matter what you call it, and it's all happening. In the sense of fairness, it will all happen. This has been, I think, a reasonably good start. I would have loved to have kept an extra person on Human Rights. Senator Tardif would have loved to have had an extra person on Official Languages. We don't have that. As chair, you look around the room and say, "This is what it is."
So I think we've all been trying to operate in good faith because it's an area that none of us have been to before, and this is what it is. When we took a look at these, we never knew that Senator Mitchell was leaving, and we didn't know that Senator Campbell was leaving, and we didn't know that Senator Sibbeston was leaving and so on. We would have loved to have had them, but everything was continuing to move on this file.
I've said my piece. I don't think we're here to score different points on anything. I think we're here to try to be fair and to move on, and that we can have new members on these committees who will now have the right to vote and not just ask questions.
Senator McCoy: If I may, just to correct the record, Senator Fraser asked if we had put those names forward. The final list that we put forward on May 5, which is the first time we responded to you, does not include anything on here about the Modernization Committee.
The list that we put forward to you again this last week to facilitate this meeting does not include anything about the Modernization Committee.
The Chair: We certainly also know, Senator McCoy, that none of us came up with the two names that we put on there, that they were on the list that you sent to me. They were, Senator McCoy, or they wouldn't have gone on there.
Senator Bellemare?
Senator McCoy: You can't tell me I'm a liar.
The Chair: No, I'll bring you the list.
Senator Bellemare: I didn't know that I would be replaced in this committee today, and I guess everyone knew in advance —
Senator Tardif: No.
Senator Bellemare: — that there would be replacements and so forth.
Senator Tardif: No.
Senator Bellemare: If I had not been here, I would have found out about it by a letter. I think that is not an honourable way to proceed, if I may say so.
The Chair: In fairness, Senator Bellemare, I could not, as Chair of the Selection Committee, send you a letter telling you that you would have been removed when I didn't know what the vote at this committee would be. I think you would have been very angry if I had been that presumptuous to presume what the vote here would be. It would have been entirely out of order for me to send you that letter ahead of time.
Senator McCoy: You're here as an ex officio member, are you?
Senator Bellemare: Yes.
The Chair: As an official member of the Modernization Committee?
Senator McCoy: No, an ex officio member of this committee.
The Chair: Of this committee?
Senator Bellemare: Yes.
The Chair: I think if that is the case, then notice has to be served if she plans on voting so that other ex officio members can be here as well.
Colleagues, I think we are going in circles here. Unless there is new information, I think we will call the question.
Senator Wells, did you have something?
Senator Wells: I put the motion and there was a point of order on it, and I think you have to rule on the point of order before we can go forward.
The Chair: I did that quite a while ago.
Senator Fraser: May I ask a question, chair? It's a short question.
The Chair: Yes.
Senator Fraser: I am assuming that Senator Bellemare was initially named to the Modernization Committee to fill one of the Conservative slots.
The Chair: That's correct.
Senator Fraser: Is it not then accurate that Conservative slots are filled by whoever the Conservative whip and leadership decide they should be filled by?
The Chair: That would be my understanding. However, apparently, contrary to some of the other committees where a whip can remove a committee member, that isn't the case for Modernization. It has to be the Selection Committee. But you are quite correct: Senator Tkachuk is being put in there because it is a Conservative spot that Senator Bellemare is holding. That's why Senator Tkachuk is being moved in there. You're correct with that.
That being said, colleagues, I think I will call the question. There has been a motion. The motion basically says that the Honourable Senator Tkachuk replaces the Honourable Senator Bellemare as a member of the Special Committee on Modernization.
Is it agreed that we accept that motion?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Thank you.
Senator Bellemare: On division.
Senator Fraser: On division.
Senator Bellemare: No, leave it that way.
Senator Fraser: I'm saying "on division" because Senator Plett has suggested that Senator Bellemare really ought not to be voting, but I think she has the right to have an "on division" registered.
The Chair: Yes, absolutely.
Is it agreed that the report of the Committee of Selection be adopted subject to the necessary membership changes made by 2 p.m. on Wednesday, June 8, 2016?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Thank you.
Senator Fraser: By 2 p.m.?
The Chair: By 2 p.m. on Wednesday.
Senator Fraser: But we're only going to sit at 2:00.
Mr. Armitage: This is referring to the necessary vacancies being created by the whips.
Senator Fraser: I'm sorry.
Mr. Armitage: That's okay.
The Chair: So that was agreed to.
Is it agreed that the chair present this report to the Senate at the next available opportunity once the necessary membership changes have been made by the whips?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Agreed.
Thank you very much for your patience, and I think that is all the business.
(The committee adjourned.)