Evidence of meeting #13 for Public Safety and National Security in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was amendment.
A recording is available from Parliament.
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
5:15 p.m.
NDP
Randall Garrison NDP Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC
We've heard again and again how we have to get on with the business of the committee. If we don't move to committee business, we will place ourselves in jeopardy of losing a session of the committee next week.
With respect, I guess we're into a contradiction here if the government is saying that we are going to go ahead with this. Then we will neither conclude this—I can virtually guarantee that—nor will we get to committee business, so I would hope we would have unanimous consent to move to committee business at this point.
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
Rick Norlock Conservative Northumberland—Quinte West, ON
Mr. Chair, if I may, it's obvious that the official opposition doesn't want to go ahead with this. They'd rather talk about something else because they've said from the beginning that they're not prepared, even though the Liberals and the Conservatives were. That being the case, we could perhaps do one more section and then look at future business. That's all I was referring to. I have no illusion that we're going to get through this whole thing today.
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Daryl Kramp
But the chair is looking ahead, and we see that the next amendment is a very simple, small amendment. Hopefully we can just deal with this one very quickly and then go to future business.
You have before you no. 6430380 presented by Mr. Easter on page 4. It reads that clause 4 be amended by replacing line 5 on page 4 with the following:
their statement shall be presented at the hearing
5:20 p.m.
Liberal
Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS
Mr. Chairman, the idea here is to remove the word “may” with respect to a statement being presented and to change it to “shall”. The purpose is to make the acceptance of such statements a more mandatory requirement.
5:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Daryl Kramp
Thank you very much.
Further discussion?
Ms. James and then Mr. Garrison.
5:20 p.m.
Conservative
Roxanne James Conservative Scarborough Centre, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I know Mr. Easter is not here, Mr. Regan, but when I read this amendment, I liked it. I thought it was important that it should be “shall” but then, upon thinking about it a little bit further, the problem that I have is what you've just said: it's mandated.
There may be a situation where it should not be read in. You could have a situation as well where there is a statement that is on record and they choose to read that one into that particular time, whereas the actual victim or the family of the victim may not have wanted it read in at that particular hearing.
I'm not comfortable with the word “shall”, as I said. When I first looked at it I thought I agreed with that one, but then when I gave it a second thought, I'm sorry, but on this side we will not be able to support that amendment at this time.
5:20 p.m.
NDP
Randall Garrison NDP Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
At this time I would say that I completely share the sentiments of the parliamentary secretary on this one. It has a seductive look at the beginning, but when you think through the implications of it, we would also not be able to support this amendment.
5:20 p.m.
Conservative
5:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Daryl Kramp
Any further comment? No. Then we will vote on Mr. Easter's amendment.
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
At this point then we're obviously nearing the end of our string and getting close. We will suspend while we go in camera for future business.
[Proceedings continue in camera]
