Bill C-11 Committee on Feb. 14th, 2012

[The Chair, NDP, Glenn Thibeault]

I completely agree with what you're saying, Mr. Regan, but in the sense of the amendment, we need to ensure that we're following parliamentary procedure.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

You're not allowed to agree with what he's saying—

[The Chair, NDP, Glenn Thibeault]

Well, I'm agreeing with what he's talking about in terms of.... Bear with me, Mr. Lake.

What we're trying to do is ensure that we're following procedures in this place. What we would need to do is withdraw the amendment and then submit a new amendment with the whole package together, with the date removal and everything else that you've said.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Well, then, you know what? I'll stick with the first amendment that I moved.

[The Chair, NDP, Glenn Thibeault]

Thanks for all of that discussion. I appreciate that.

Now, we are still on the amendment, and I have Mr. Angus speaking on the amendment.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

There's a fundamental problem here. I've heard the Conservatives talk about thousands of jobs disappearing across the country. When I go into Montreal, I see the enormous growth in the video game industry, and when I go to Vancouver or Toronto, I hear people talking to me about tax credits and other incentives. To say that the entire entertainment industry will fall if this bill isn't done by March 29 is part of the false copyright bogeyman that I think has made people really mistrust the issue of copyright. They're saying this is not the reality; the reality is that key elements of this bill are problematic. We've said that again and again and again.

This isn't about creating the picture-perfect bill; this is about fixing a bill that has fundamental problems. There are going to be times in this clause-by-clause study when we're going to come across those problems. To treat the serious problems of the bill the same as we're treating the title of the bill and the lesser amendments... Those lesser amendments are going to move fairly quickly, I think, but there are certain key parts of the bill that we really need to sit down and discuss. That's our job as parliamentarians. We're not holding anything hostage here. We're doing due diligence for all the organizations we met.

If we treat key provisions of the bill just like anything else and shut down debate, then we'll be going back to the various sectors that we promised due diligence to and telling them we're sorry, but we had to blow through it and we did not do our work.

I'm asking members of the committee to show some respect for one another and recognize that we are all here for the right reason, which is to get this copyright bill done and to fix the problems in it so that we can say we did our job as parliamentarians. That's what we want to do, and that's why we do not want to have this time closure invoked against the key amendments to the bill.

[The Chair, NDP, Glenn Thibeault]

Thank you, Mr. Angus.

Go ahead, Mr. Del Mastro.

[Dean Del Mastro, Conservative, Peterborough, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I actually follow the logic proposed by Mr. Lake in this regard in that the time allotted will be equitable to Mr. Regan in this regard. He will have the same amount of time as the other parties would have, which is a special allotment for a single member to have the same amount as a party.

To Mr. Angus's comment, I've been here for just over six years, Mr. Chairman, and what I would point out to Mr. Angus is that as members of Parliament, we can have those very discussions Mr. Angus has proposed outside of committee time. I would encourage Mr. Angus and any members of the committee who want to discuss matters related to this bill to have those discussions. We don't need to have them as part of clause-by-clause consideration; we can have them as members of Parliament any time between now and the final clause-by-clause consideration.

As I said, that's entirely appropriate. In my experience, Parliament does work that way. We do come to agreements as members outside of committee, which we then endorse during committee time. I think that's entirely appropriate.

[The Chair, NDP, Glenn Thibeault]

Thank you, Mr. Del Mastro.

Go ahead, Monsieur Dionne Labelle.

[Pierre Dionne Labelle, NDP, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

When I hear people say they want to be done by March 29th, the other message that comes through, from the government side, is that moving amendments is a waste of time because the bill will be passed without any, regardless. That is what I am hearing. If that is what the government intends to do, then say so clearly. This bill contains inadequate provisions that need to be revisited.

If the government side is so concerned about the urgency of the situation, then it should speed things along and adopt the necessary amendments to make the bill worthy of being passed. It must be recognized that, right off the bat, the bill does not at all meet current copyright needs. If our amendments are good, adopt them. Everything will move much faster. We don't need to tie ourselves to a deadline, we just need to work together.

That is all. Thank you.

[The Chair, NDP, Glenn Thibeault]

Thank you, M. Labelle.

Go ahead, Mr. Cash.

[Andrew Cash, NDP, Davenport, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Del Mastro's comment regarding off-the-record conversations and meetings that would be doing some of the important work of the committee but that no one would actually see raises some serious questions about accountability and transparency. I think the folks on the opposite side constantly talk about their intention of increasing and enhancing transparency and accountability. It doesn't sound like a very accountable or transparent way of doing things.

I do want to say—

[Dean Del Mastro, Conservative, Peterborough, ON]

I have a point of order.

[The Chair, NDP, Glenn Thibeault]

Thank you, Mr. Cash.

Go ahead, Mr. Del Mastro.

[Dean Del Mastro, Conservative, Peterborough, ON]

I'd just like to put on the record to the member's point that in the House of Commons, often the whip or the House leader of any party will stand and say, "Mr. Speaker, there has been discussion among members, and we agree to the following."

It is parliamentary procedure. It's common practice.

[The Chair, NDP, Glenn Thibeault]

I was going to say that's more debate, Mr. Del Mastro, but thank you for trying.

We'll go with Mr. Cash.

[Andrew Cash, NDP, Davenport, ON]

I'd like to thank the veteran member for apprising me of parliamentary procedures, but that's not what we're talking about here; we're talking about transparency and accountability in this committee, and not just in this committee but in other committees.

Further to that, the characterization of anyone on this committee as not wanting to get this bill done, I think, really is disrespectful and is certainly a mischaracterization of the intention of the official opposition.

Finally, I want to see clarification here, because we're debating Mr. Regan's amendment, which Mr. Del Mastro said he would support. I think we should read the motion and get a vote on this.

To be clear, this is not Mr. Regan's additional amendment. This is the initial amendment.

[The Chair, NDP, Glenn Thibeault]

I'll clarify. This is the one amendment. I'll read it as amended by Mr. Regan.

That the committee begin clause-by-clause consideration of the bill no later than Wednesday, March 14, 2012, and that debate be limited to a maximum of five minutes per committee member, per clause, and five minutes per committee member per amendment; and that if clause-by-clause consideration is not completed by 9:00 a.m. on Thursday, March 29, 2012, the chair shall interrupt debate and put the question on all remaining clauses and amendments, as well as all other questions necessary to dispose of this stage of the bill forthwith and successively without further debate and shall report the bill back to the House at the earliest opportunity.

That is the motion as amended by Mr. Regan.

I have two other individuals who are in line to speak, Mr. Lake and Mr. Nantel. Then we can go from there.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

Let's do first things first, actually. I'm going to move a motion that we extend this meeting until the bells ring tonight. We can extend it and then suspend it and reconvene 15 minutes after the votes are completed.

Can I do it that way?

[The Chair, NDP, Glenn Thibeault]

Can you repeat that?

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

Okay. It's to extend the meeting until the bells, which are supposed to ring at 5:45, I believe, and then suspend and reconvene 15 minutes after votes are complete tonight, if necessary.

[The Chair, NDP, Glenn Thibeault]

There is a point of order.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

I'd like to hear how many more motions they're proposing so that I know how much time we're going to need. It's not clear to me.

[The Chair, NDP, Glenn Thibeault]

Okay.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

I believe we have two--this one and another one--but based on the time allocated for this one, it seems there's a never-ending series of amendments coming up. Perhaps we want to consider this now, as opposed to waiting until the very last second. I'm just proposing that if necessary we make sure that we take up this business with urgency and make sure we complete our business tonight.