Refine by MP, party, committee, province, or result type.

Results 1-13 of 13
Sorted by relevance | Sort by date: newest first / oldest first

Fisheries committee  Mr. Chair, if you don't mind, I'd like to propose a subamendment to that and I'm sure this will be well received by the committee, “That this act come into force on January 1, 2021.” The reason for that is if this bill comes into effect in the next month or so, the pregnancy period of these cetaceans is, many times, about 18 months.

April 2nd, 2019Committee meeting

Rob Nicholson

Fisheries committee  Again, the differences between the French and English are referring to subsection 10(1.1), All we would be doing is removing that from the English version so that it would be identical to the French version here. I'm not quite sure why that would be controversial for anyone, but there you have it.

April 2nd, 2019Committee meeting

Rob Nicholson

Fisheries committee  I just want to read you one paragraph for the record, and I'd like to hear the opinion of Ms. Klineberg. The letter from Justice Major says: Section 7.1 of Bill S-203 is an enforcement provision under the Act. Given the conflict in the English and French versions of the proposed legislation its passage without a clarification amendment would, in the event of an illegal violation and subsequent prosecution, present a dilemma to the court.

April 2nd, 2019Committee meeting

Rob Nicholson

Fisheries committee  Don't you think, though, it's a bit unusual that in the English version it specifically references a particular section in an act, yet there is no reference in the French? Whether we're drafting things through the Criminal Code or policy and everything else, wouldn't it make sense that, if the English refers to a specific section that has to be adhered to, the French be amended to say the same thing?

April 2nd, 2019Committee meeting

Rob Nicholson

Fisheries committee  Who is that expert?

April 2nd, 2019Committee meeting

Rob Nicholson

Fisheries committee  Well, you heard what Justice Major says, and he—

April 2nd, 2019Committee meeting

Rob Nicholson

Fisheries committee  Well, when you've been on the Supreme Court for quite a time, you do develop some expertise or you bring your expertise to the role here. It seems to me a fairly straightforward thing just to make sure they both coincide with the exact wording. I don't know. (Amendment negatived)

April 2nd, 2019Committee meeting

Rob Nicholson

Fisheries committee  Thank you very much. Colleagues, obviously both language versions have to be completely in line with each other. It's not easy to draw up legislation. As our official from the Department of Justice knows, you have two systems of law, civil law and common law, and you have French and English.

April 2nd, 2019Committee meeting

Rob Nicholson

Fisheries committee  The amendment is that Bill S-203, in clause 4, be amended by replacing, in the French version, line 8 on page 3 with the following: 7.1 Il est interdit, sans licence délivrée en vertu du paragraphe 10(1.1) ou contrairement à celle—

April 2nd, 2019Committee meeting

Rob Nicholson

Fisheries committee  I think that's a pretty reasonable amendment. You want to make sure that anybody who might get charged under this is somebody who really is participating in this for the exact wrong reason. The amendment proposed by my colleague is saying that if somebody has to knowingly get involved with something like this, then somebody who's just being part of an entertainment package, or just wanders into something, shouldn't be convicted of a criminal offence on that.

April 2nd, 2019Committee meeting

Rob Nicholson

Fisheries committee  Can I ask for some clarification on that, Mr. Fraser? You said that there are no pregnant cetaceans at the present time. Is that what the fisheries department said? That's not my understanding. There are a number in captivity that are, in fact, pregnant now, and this is just clarification.

April 2nd, 2019Committee meeting

Rob Nicholson

Fisheries committee  Well, all this is saying is that if they are, in fact, born, they are not caught up in this. I agree with Ms. Klineberg here that this would actually provide some clarification. I don't think this is controversial. (Amendment negatived)

April 2nd, 2019Committee meeting

Rob Nicholson

Fisheries committee  I just want to make it clear that when this bill comes into effect and then there is a birth afterwards, that wouldn't be caught up in this bill. There would be no offence or anything. I think that's all it is. It's just saying that if the cetacean was pregnant at the time it was kept in captivity.

April 2nd, 2019Committee meeting

Rob Nicholson