Evidence of meeting #89 for Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics 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.
5:55 p.m.
Liberal
Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON
I have a question.
I haven't seen it, but are just a few words changed? It would be easier if we just amended it to remove the word, whatever it was, and replaced it with....
5:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Brassard
The clerk is looking at it now.
We're just trying to work this out right now.
6 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Brassard
Mr. Villemure, I'll ask the clerk to read the amended motion. We don't have the English translation, but the interpreters can give us the English translation so that we understand what's on the table.
Madam Clerk, you may now read the amended motion.
6 p.m.
The Clerk
Mr. Villemure is moving that we amend the whole part of Ms. Damoff's amendment that starts with “review the appropriateness of any redactions”.
6 p.m.
The Clerk
Okay.
Mr. Villemure is moving that the part of Ms. Damoff's amendment that begins with “review the appropriateness of any redactions; and where redactions are deemed necessary, an explanation be provided for each redaction, within 24 hours” be replaced with “review the need for redaction; and (c) when deemed necessary”—
6 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Brassard
All right.
To help the interpreters, can you please read the amendment and the proposed change more slowly? Can you read it all out, please?
6 p.m.
The Clerk
Here are the text with the changes and the amendment proposed by Mr. Villemure, which I received in French:
That the Committee, considering that the government's unsatisfactory response to the order adopted on October 18, 2023, and its failure to respond to the order adopted on October 30, 2023, orders the Department of Industry to provide an unredacted version of Raymond Chabot Grant Thornton's “Fact-Finding Exercise Report” for Sustainable Development Technology Canada, in both official languages;
That would be followed by this amendment proposed by Mr. Villemure to Ms. Damoff's amendment:
review the need for redaction; and (c) when deemed necessary ensure that explanations are provided to justify the redaction of each of the redacted portions; and that this is provided to the committee within 24 hours of the adoption of the motion.
6:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Brassard
All right. Thank you, Madam Clerk.
With respect to the amendment proposed by Mr. Villemure, Ms. Damoff has the floor.
6:05 p.m.
Liberal
Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON
I'm going to be quick.
I think the amendments he has put forward are absolutely acceptable and honour the intent of what I was trying to say. He said it far better en français than I did in English .
6:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Brassard
Thank you, Ms. Damoff.
We have the amendment as proposed by Mr. Villemure.
Is there any other discussion on the amendment?
I don't see any, so I'm going to ask whether we have unanimous consent on the amendment.
We don't.
I'm going to ask for a vote, please, on the amendment.
I'm sorry. Ms. Idlout, did you have anything to add?
November 1st, 2023 / 6:05 p.m.
NDP
6:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Brassard
The challenge is that we don't have a copy of it. We read the amendment as proposed through the translators. We can only make a copy in French right now. If you require it in English, we're going to have to translate and likely suspend again. If that's what you want to do, let me know.
All right. We will suspend for a couple of minutes.
6:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Brassard
Okay, we're back. The amended version of the motion has been sent out. Everybody should have it.
Is there any discussion on this?
I don't see any.
On the motion as amended, we don't have agreement, so we're going to have a vote.
Madam Clerk, if you want to—
6:15 p.m.
Liberal
Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON
Mr. Chair, for clarity, are we voting on the subamendment or is it the whole thing as amended? I support it. I just want to get clarity on what we're doing.
6:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Brassard
I think what we're going to do is vote on the amendment and then we're going to vote on the motion as amended.
6:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Brassard
You'll have to move it after we finish with this.
On the amendment of Monsieur Villemure, we will call the vote.
(Amendment agreed to: yeas 7; nays 3 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
The amendment carries.
We're open to discussion on the main motion now. Is there any further discussion on the main motion?
Go ahead, Monsieur Villemure.
6:15 p.m.
Bloc
6:15 p.m.
Conservative
6:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Brassard
Okay. Hold on a moment, please.
The clerk would like to explain some things to all committee members.
6:15 p.m.
The Clerk
I'd like to make something clear before things get too complicated.
Mr. Villemure, you mentioned a subamendment, but that would mean an amendment to Ms. Damoff's amendment. However, we're not there anymore.
It's important to use the right term so as not to get mixed up in the votes. What Mr. Villemure emailed me is not a subamendment, but simply an amendment to the part of Mr. Barrett's motion that begins with the words “if this order is not satisfied”.
