No, you didn't.
Evidence of meeting #69 for National Defence in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site.) The winning word was record.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Evidence of meeting #69 for National Defence in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site.) The winning word was record.
A recording is available from Parliament.
7:45 p.m.
Conservative
Chris Alexander Conservative Ajax—Pickering, ON
Yes, we did, about the nature of the charge, the nature of the offence, the two-year penalty.
Mr. Harris is repeating himself explicitly and in flagrant defiance of your ruling and of the rules.
7:45 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Bezan
Okay, Mr. Harris.
There are other speakers who want on the list as well.
7:45 p.m.
An hon. member
You're sure that your amendment may not work, but ours does.
7:45 p.m.
Conservative
7:45 p.m.
NDP
Jack Harris NDP St. John's East, NL
I didn't hear that particular insult, but I think the example that I just gave shows how this could easily be within the same kind of category.
One analogy could be negligent discharge of a firearm. I know of cases where a person received a fine for that. That's something serious enough to cause loss of life, someone negligently discharging a firearm, for example. It happens—
7:45 p.m.
An hon. member
Whatever.
7:45 p.m.
NDP
Jack Harris NDP St. John's East, NL
—and people get fines. So if a fine can be a sentence for discharging a firearm and potentially endangering a life, then, surely something that attracts a maximum of two years for negligence or for causing a fire contrary to regulations could easily be in the same category, which is an additional argument as to why section 113 ought to be included in amendment G-2 under clause 75.
That's all I have to say for now.
7:50 p.m.
Conservative
7:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Bezan
You spoke? Okay.
Seeing no one else, I'll put the question.
(Subamendment negatived)
We're back to government amendment G-2.
Are there other comments on the amendment?
Mr. Harris, please.
7:50 p.m.
NDP
Jack Harris NDP St. John's East, NL
We do have a number of other possible arguments to add additional sections here, but I think—
7:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Bezan
You do have two more amendments after we deal with amendment G-2. There are amendments NDP-20 and NDP-21.
7:50 p.m.
NDP
Jack Harris NDP St. John's East, NL
Yes, we do, and we'll get to them and fully argue them.
Briefly, I just want to say that we brought forth the amendments that we did to amendment G-2.... We're going to support passage of amendment G-2 because it makes a significant improvement to what was here. It's certainly not broad enough. We brought forth the four that we've just finished arguing because I think they do illustrate that amendment G-2 does not go far enough in terms of what it sets out to do.
What it sets out to do is eliminate the criminal record in specific offences based on a threshold. The threshold that's provided there is not adequate. In fact, there is another amendment that we want to move on amendment G-2. I'm going to have to ask someone to find it for me. It's the one that seeks to amend...is it item (iv) of amendment G-2?
7:50 p.m.
Conservative
Chris Alexander Conservative Ajax—Pickering, ON
Mr. Chair, on a point of order, if there's no amendment at the moment, could we proceed with the vote on the motion at hand?
7:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Bezan
And Mr. Harris has the floor as well, and I can't put a question as long as there's anybody on the list for speaking, and Mr. Harris has the floor.
7:50 p.m.
Conservative
7:50 p.m.
NDP
Jack Harris NDP St. John's East, NL
Yes, I'm speaking, and I'm speaking to amendment G-2. I'm proposing a subamendment to amendment G-2—
7:50 p.m.
NDP
Jack Harris NDP St. John's East, NL
It's a subamendment to amendment G-2 that would have the effect of replacing lines 2 to 4 on page 49 and amend that by substituting the following fore the portion “(iii) a fine not exceeding basic pay for one month, or”, by “(iii) a fine, or”. That amendment is being distributed now.
