Evidence of meeting #71 for Agriculture and Agri-Food in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was amendment.
A recording is available from Parliament.
3:35 p.m.
Liberal
3:35 p.m.
Conservative
David Anderson Conservative Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK
I would like to make a motion.
My motion is that we go to the APF report, that we go through it and finish it prior to returning to the motion we've been discussing, and that we then take it up with the other two motions we have before us at that time.
3:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Vice-Chair Liberal Paul Steckle
A motion has been put to the floor.
I'd like to say to the committee that in a preceding meeting—I think four meetings ago—we had the majority support of the committee to set an agenda whereby we would deal with two motions. One has been dealt with, and the second one is in process. At such time as that motion has been dealt with, we will be moving to the APF. Unless I see unanimous support, I would suggest we deal with it in that way.
Do I have unanimous support to move to the motion as...?
3:35 p.m.
Conservative
Larry Miller Conservative Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON
Mr. Chairman, I have a point of order. I believe that at the start of any meeting, a motion such as Mr. Anderson has put forth is a fair amendment to the agenda, and I think it's very appropriate. I think you have to have what you would call a regular vote on the issue and not ask about another motion.
3:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Vice-Chair Liberal Paul Steckle
The motion is not debatable, I am told. I was pursuing a set of rules that I think are in order, but I will put the question. It's not debatable.
3:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Vice-Chair Liberal Paul Steckle
It's not debatable.
In that case we will move to the question. Do you want to move directly to the APF studies, or do you want to continue with the motion of Mr. Atamanenko?
That is the question: do you want to continue where we left off at the last meeting, or do you want to go right directly to the APF report?
3:35 p.m.
Liberal
3:35 p.m.
Liberal
Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE
The fact of the matter is that we were working under different rules under the previous clerk.
3:35 p.m.
Conservative
David Anderson Conservative Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK
Will we be discussing this? If we're going to have a discussion about this, then we need to have a discussion.
3:35 p.m.
Liberal
Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE
I want the rules read out here.
I'm demanding the rules be read out, because the previous clerk did not rule that way. We were allowed to debate.
3:35 p.m.
Conservative
David Anderson Conservative Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK
We just did on Thursday. You weren't here, Wayne. He made exactly the same ruling.
3:35 p.m.
Conservative
David Anderson Conservative Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK
You weren't here, we started, and we did exactly this.
3:35 p.m.
Conservative
3:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Vice-Chair Liberal Paul Steckle
Let's hear the clerk's reading of the rules.
Let's listen to the clerk when the clerk gives his verdict.
3:35 p.m.
Chad Mariage Procedural Clerk
On page 450 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice, Mr. Chair, it is stated:As a general rule, every question that is debatable is amendable. Exceptions are the motion to adjourn for the purpose of an emergency debate....
Motions decided without debate or amendment generally include:
- motions that the House do now adjourn;
- motions to proceed to the Orders of the Day;
- motions that the House proceeds to another order of business;
—which is what we've done just now—
- motions that the debate be now adjourned; and
- motions that the question be postponed to a specific day.
3:35 p.m.
Procedural Clerk
The Standing Orders state that the Standing Orders apply, insofar as they are applicable, in committee.
