Bill C-11 Committee on Feb. 14th, 2012

[The Chair, NDP, Glenn Thibeault]

Okay, we're going to clarify what Mr. Regan was talking about.

Then I'll go to Mr. Nantel, who wants to speak to the amendment.

I would like Mr. Regan to repeat the amendment one more time to ensure that we have clarity and clarification on that amendment.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

You want the wording to be exactly the same. Is that what you're saying?

[The Chair, NDP, Glenn Thibeault]

That would be fantastic, sir.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

I move that the motion be amended by adding after the word “submissions” the following: “and that all briefs submitted by witnesses during the study of Bill C-32 in the last Parliament, and all amendments, be--is it “adopted”?--as part of the record....”

What's the wording on that again?

[The Chair, NDP, Glenn Thibeault]

Is it “taken into consideration”?

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

Have we passed the previous motion?

[The Chair, NDP, Glenn Thibeault]

That was testimony. This is briefs and amendments.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

“All the evidence and documentation” was the way I worded it.

[The Chair, NDP, Glenn Thibeault]

Just give me one second to clarify with the clerk.

[A voice]

It was any amendments that were presented, any amendments put forward.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

I didn't say “addendum” at all. I never used the word “addendum”. I talked about amendments. It's a big difference. I think from what Mr. Lake is saying, his motion already captures the documents, the briefs, the material, so what I'm really looking for is that we say “all amendments presented before the committee”.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

We never got to that point.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

It's “proposed” amendments, then. There must have been some proposed or submitted. Were none submitted by any witnesses?

[The Chair, NDP, Glenn Thibeault]

Mr. Lake, you wanted to....

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

Just to clarify, witnesses may suggest amendments, but they don't propose amendments; we do that. They submit briefs, and the briefs might contain suggested amendments; those would be caught in that documentation.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

I'll withdraw it.

[The Chair, NDP, Glenn Thibeault]

Thank you.

Thanks for throwing me my first curveball as chair. I appreciate that.

You did a double check. I've got some great folks up here.

You've withdrawn that amendment, so we're back at the original. You were next to speak to the amendment, which has been withdrawn, so now I'll go to Mr. Angus.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

It's very important that we bring forward all the evidence that was heard at Bill C-32 so that people did not put their in their time in vain, but I'm concerned about whether that precludes some organizations--I'm not sure it's all of them--that may want to provide testimony or briefs now under Bill C-11 from doing so. Just because we've received past testimony, does that preclude present testimony in present briefs?

We're speaking in this motion about taking all the evidence from the last time and bringing it forward, but is it going to preclude them from giving us new evidence?

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

That's what the addendum is.

[The Chair, NDP, Glenn Thibeault]

It's still Mr. Angus, and then I have Mr. Regan. I can put you on there afterwards, Mr. Dionne Labelle.

Go ahead, Mr. Regan.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I anticipate that the next motion is going to be that we're not going to hear from any of those witnesses the previous committee has already heard from a year ago. This is what Mr. Angus is concerned about, as am I. It seems to me there have been arguments and statements that have come up during the second reading debate this time and in the last couple of weeks that the witnesses ought to have a chance to comment and to reflect on. Additionally, there are members here who weren't part of that Parliament or that committee and did not have a chance to hear from those witnesses. I would find it unreasonable if that were to be what follows from this motion.

[The Chair, NDP, Glenn Thibeault]

Thank you, Mr. Regan.

Before we get to our next speaker, I think because we've had so much discussion, if just for clarity Mr. Lake would indulge me one more time and read the motion so that we can have a clear understanding and so that the members can move forward with the discussion from there.

Thanks.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

Actually, before I read that, why don't I just quickly read the one before it so everybody is clear on that? There was some crossover there. The one that we passed before was “that the evidence and documentation received by the legislative committee on Bill C-32, An Act to amend the Copyright Act, during the third session of the 40th Parliament be taken into consideration by this committee”. That covers what we are going to take into consideration.

This new one is “that for clarity, witnesses who appeared before or made submissions to the special legislative committee on Bill C-32 during the third session of the 40th Parliament may provide, in written form to the committee, addenda to their original submissions”.

[The Chair, NDP, Glenn Thibeault]

Thank you.

Now I have Mr. Dionne Labelle.

[Pierre Dionne Labelle, NDP, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

I would like to move an amendment whereby they would be able to appear before the committee again at our request.