The House of Commons is slated to return from its annual summer recess on September 15, 2025. Parliamentary committees will also return to their normal operations shortly thereafter – though committees can be recalled on an emergency basis so long as the House is in session. Most committees, when not studying legislation referred to them by the House, will engage in various studies related to the specific mandate of the committee.
As part of this exercise, committees will often invite witnesses to appear and provide their perspective on key issues. However, during politically sensitive or acrimonious hearings, a committee may vote to require witnesses to provide it with any documents the committee deems necessary for a fulsome review of the record pertaining to the study.
A committee's powers in this regard are broad and wide-sweeping. Once such a production order has been made, witnesses are generally obligated to comply.
The Dynamics of Minority Parliament
For this reason, to fully appreciate the business and reputational risks at hand of being called to testify in committee, it is crucial to understand the dynamics of the current Parliament and procedural issues in committees more broadly.
In the current Parliament, neither the Liberals, Conservatives, or Bloc Québécois hold a majority of the votes in the House or in committees. Thus, for any motion to pass, including a production order for documents, the motion must draw support from at least two of the three recognized parties.
Typically, a vote cannot be held on a motion until debate has "collapsed" – that is to say, Members no longer wish to speak on the issue and are willing to have the motion voted on. This rule permits Members to filibuster motions that are perceived as politically unfavourable until the end of a committee meeting, when the issue is adjourned for a later day.
Through the application of this rule, Members cannot introduce a motion to call a vote on an issue. If this were attempted, the Chair of the committee would rule this motion out of order. Unlike other decisions of the Chair, Standing Order 116(2)(a) instructs such a ruling is exempt from a challenge by the committee.
One exception, however, to the general rule of withholding votes until debate has collapsed is if the committee itself has previously adopted a programming motion that calls for a specific amount of time for debate, or for the vote on the motion to be held at a specific time. Alternatively, the committee's schedule can be programmed by a motion passed by the entire House of Commons, as well.
When considered alongside the current political dynamics of the House and its committees, where no party holds a majority, it is possible that language curtailing debate and triggering votes is included in motions that call on the committee to engage in certain studies. The risk of this occurring only increases if there is a perceived potential, amongst Opposition parliamentarians, to uncover politically embarrassing matters for the government.
Notably, in this sense, the incentive to curtail debate in committee is a complete reversal of the incentive to curtail debate in the House, where successive governments in recent years have often utilized time allocation motions to expedite the passage of legislation.
About Our Parliamentary and Legislative Investigations Team
With the largest political law team in Canada, Fasken has the experience to help you understand the risks and opportunities associated with appearances before Parliamentary and legislative committees.
We have the legal knowledge to navigate your obligations, the political acumen to explain how issues will unfold within the high-pressure spotlight of Parliament Hill and legislative assemblies, and the practical knowledge to ensure that you are best prepared to protect your reputation and business.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
