Evidence of meeting #34 for Canadian Heritage in the 44th 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.
12:05 p.m.
Bloc
12:05 p.m.
Bloc
Martin Champoux Bloc Drummond, QC
We're debating my amendment. So, yes, it's a debate, because I'm defending my amendment, which I think is perfectly legitimate.
12:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
Thank you very much.
I would like to suspend for a few minutes, please, to speak with the legislative clerk. Thank you.
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
Shall we go back to the proceedings? Thank you.
Now, Mr. Champoux, having listened to what Mr. Ripley had to say, I would like to suggest that your amendment is out of order because it's beyond the scope and principle of the bill, as Mr. Ripley explained.
12:10 p.m.
Bloc
Martin Champoux Bloc Drummond, QC
I didn't hear Mr. Ripley say that it was beyond the scope of the bill, Madam Chair. I'd like to hear from the legislative clerk on that.
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
I have just given you the opinion of the legislative clerk on that, but he can give it himself if he wishes.
Go ahead, Mr. Méla.
12:10 p.m.
Legislative Clerk
Yes, Madam Chair. Thank you.
Thank you for your question, Mr. Champoux.
When you proposed your amendment, you said that it would broaden the scope of the word “decision”. In the context of the bill, the word “decision” refers to certain decisions. Your amendment would greatly broaden the definition of “decision”, as Mr. Ripley indicated. That's why this amendment is beyond the scope of the bill.
12:10 p.m.
Bloc
Martin Champoux Bloc Drummond, QC
What is the current definition of the word “decision” in the Broadcasting Act, to say that my amendment broadens the definition, Mr. Méla?
12:10 p.m.
Legislative Clerk
There isn't one, but under the bill, the decisions that are made are the ones indicated in the bill. If we say, for example, that the CRTC makes a decision on orders, it's a decision on orders.
Of course, there is no definition of what that decision is. However, by broadening the definition of the word “decision” to include “any measure of any kind taken by the Commission”, we are saying that it can be anything and everything. It could be that decision, but it could also be a number of other decisions that are not mentioned in the bill. That's why your amendment was ruled out of order.
Since the chair has ruled the amendment out of order, I can't debate it with you, and the committee can't debate it unless we appeal the ruling.
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
Thank you.
Obviously this amendment is not admissible, Mr. Champoux. Do you accept that ruling?
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
June 14th, 2022 / 12:15 p.m.
The Clerk
I will call the vote, and the question is, shall the decision of the chair be sustained? If you agree with the chair's decision, you vote yes. If you disagree, you vote no.
(Ruling of the chair overturned: nays 6; yeas 5)
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
Obviously the chair's ruling has been denied.
We will go to Mr. Champoux's amendment, which will now be debated.
Mr. Champoux has spoken and we've heard from the department. Does anyone else have their hand up?
Mr. Nater.
12:15 p.m.
Conservative
John Nater Conservative Perth—Wellington, ON
Thank you, Madam Chair. I am seeking some clarity from the staff at Canadian Heritage.
We have three amendments. Two are the same, and then the Green Party one is slightly different.
I would like to hear from you the impact or what the actual difference would be in terms of using the term “measure” versus “determination”.
Obviously the current motion before us has “measure”. One of the amendments has “determination”. I am seeking clarity with respect to what impact, if any, it would have to go with one or the other definition.
12:15 p.m.
Associate Assistant Deputy Minister, Department of Canadian Heritage
The issue at play, as I understand it based on Monsieur Champoux's reasoning, is that the CRTC, as it manages its business, makes a variety of different decisions and determinations in the course of those proceedings.
As Monsieur Champoux highlighted, regardless of whether it's any form of determination or any form of measure, both are suggesting quite a large definition with respect to how that should be understood, which then implicates principles of administrative law in that certain decisions by the CRTC could be challenged under administrative law principles.
There's a risk here that the CRTC, in the course of managing its business, would be subject to a very high degree of potential review by courts. From my perspective, “measure” speaks to a specific tangible instrument, whether that be a regulation or an order, whereas “determination”, from where I sit, appears to be broader in scope.
I think one of the challenges, though, with this amendment is that we haven't done analysis of everywhere in the act where the term “decision” is used, so it's difficult for us to pronounce definitively on it.
As debate was proceeding, we were doing a little bit of analysis, and we think it would have most implication with respect to those provisions that require consultation with certain communities. Therefore, again, depending on whether it's “determination” or “measure”, any determination that the CRTC makes in that respect could engage principles of administrative law and would provide an opportunity for stakeholders then to potentially seek review of those decisions by the courts.