Evidence of meeting #35 for Natural Resources in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site.) The winning word was proposed.
A recording is available from Parliament.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
Is there any further discussion on government amendment G-5?
(Amendment agreed to)
Shall clause 129 as amended carry?
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
(Clause 129 as amended agreed to on division).
Shall schedule 1 carry?
11:55 a.m.
NDP
11:55 a.m.
NDP
11:55 a.m.
NDP
11:55 a.m.
NDP
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
Now I would need unanimous consent of the committee to go back to amendments G-1 and G-2 for the translation issue.
One more time, is there unanimous consent?
11:55 a.m.
Some hon. members
Agreed.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
Ms. Block, could you make those proposals clear one more time? Then we can go to a vote on that.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
Kelly Block Conservative Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, SK
My concern would be that the amendment that was made is correct in the English version, but not in the French version. It's accurate but it's not as closely accurate as it could be, so we have suggested wording that we would like. I think it would be helpful for the rest of the committee to hear it so that they will know what we are proposing.
The other issue is where it's placed in the bill. In the French version it's in a different spot from where it is in the English, so we want to make sure there is an English clause with a corresponding French clause so that they're in the same place in the bill.
I'm going to ask Mr. Trost to read the statement that we believe more accurately reflects the English version.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
Bradley Trost Conservative Saskatoon—Humboldt, SK
The sentence reads: “activité concrète — y compris les activités concrètes qui lui sont accessoires — qui remplit les conditions [...]”.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
You have heard the proposed amendment to the French translation.
Ms. Moore.
11:55 a.m.
NDP
Christine Moore NDP Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
In the discussion we had, I understood that the French version was okay but the English version did not correspond to the French, so why are we not correcting the English but we are correcting the French? I am confused.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
Kelly Block Conservative Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, SK
It's because the English version is actually what I wanted to say, so I want the French to reflect the English, not the other way around.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
We should talk about where it would be placed then, Ms. Block. The proposal is for G-1, it would be on page 57, to be inserted after line 12.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
Kelly Block Conservative Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, SK
My understanding is that in the French version it would follow right after that first statement and in the English version it would come at the end. I think we want them to be in the same place.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
Kelly Block Conservative Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, SK
I would recommend that the statement be placed at the end, in the French version, as it is in the English.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
Okay, it's the same place in the French as in the English.
Is it agreed that G-1 and G-2 be amended and inserted in the bill as explained?
