Evidence of meeting #27 for Bill C-2 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was amendment.
4:20 p.m.
Liberal
Brian Murphy Liberal Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB
Is there a provision that satisfies the original NDP proposition that makes sure that all ministerial appointments are reported to the House through the Speaker?
4:20 p.m.
Acting Assistant Secretary to the Cabinet, As an Individual
Standing Order 110 provides for the tabling of all Governor in Council appointment orders in council with the House of Commons.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON
I won't go on at great length. I just want to say that I believe this process that Mr. Martin is proposing strikes the right line. It puts in law a series of processes through which Governor in Council appointments must go before they are adopted, and that is exactly what we need. In the last Parliament, for example, we had a series of guidelines that were put into place temporarily, and then they weren't ultimately followed. Mr. Martin is right in identifying the Gordon Feeney appointment as being one such example.
The reason I'm making this point, the reason I'm being very specific, is that if you do not codify it in law, it ultimately does not need to be followed. If you call it a guideline, or a code, or something else, it doesn't need to be followed.
That, I believe, is the genius of this particular amendment, that it takes a very strict process, with which I gather there is widespread agreement from at least three of the four parties here, and puts it in statutory law, making it an obligation to be followed in the future.
I would just like to commend Mr. Martin for this. On the issue of patronage and appointments, this is the culmination of years of work by this particular member. Mr. Martin has been working on this for many years, and it's with some satisfaction that I see that he is likely to have a fairly major, substantive victory by amending a law that will hopefully be enacted in the very near future.
So I would commend him as a fellow member of Parliament for his good work and for this amendment, which we are proud to support.
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
Marlene Jennings Liberal Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC
I first have a question, and then I wish to propose a friendly subamendment.
We've talked a lot about what is status quo, and I just want to understand. Right now, status quo would be Bill C-2, which is before us--the sections that have been amended, amended; and the sections that we have not dealt with, as they have been presented in Bill C-2. Am I correct in believing that?
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Tilson
I don't know where you're going. I have a feeling I know where you're going; don't go there.
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
Marlene Jennings Liberal Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC
No, I'm asking a simple question to understand. Is status quo right now Bill C-2 as it is right now? That's all I'm asking.
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Tilson
You will have to be a little bit clearer as to why you're asking the question. Normally the terminology that we're using is used when we're talking about a vote, but we're not there yet. We're debating amendment NDP-22A, so if you're creating a hypothetical situation as to what's going to happen--
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Tilson
You asked me a question. I'm trying to answer it.
If you're going down as to what a vote is going to be and what's status quo and what isn't, we're not there yet, and I'm not going to comment on that. If you're asking a question about the bill or the amendment, the appropriate person to ask is not the chair. It is one of the experts.
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
Marlene Jennings Liberal Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC
I'm not asking anything to do with any amendment. I'll give an example so that it might clear up.
On clause 235 on page 165--at this moment in time, is that the status quo? That's all I want to know.
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Tilson
I don't know where you're going with it. We haven't got there yet.
What is before this committee right now is amendment NDP-22A, and that's all we're going to talk about. We're not talking about some sections down in the future, or how the chair's going to vote in the event of a tie, or how anybody's going to vote.
Well, I suppose you can talk about how you're going to vote, but you can't go down that path.
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
Marlene Jennings Liberal Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC
Chair, I never talked about any vote, I never talked about any amendment, and I never talked about how the chair might, in a hypothetical situation, vote. Please--
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Tilson
You talked about a clause that we haven't reached, Ms. Jennings, and I'd like you to stay with amendment NDP-22A.
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
Marlene Jennings Liberal Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC
Please, I will put forward my friendly amendment.
My sub-amendment is to subsection 1.1(1). I would like to change the word “may”, of the sentence that reads:1.1(1) The Governor in Council may establish a Public Appointments Commission [...]
and replace it with “shall”.
I also want to move a second sub-amendment—
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
Marlene Jennings Liberal Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC
Do I have to move my second sub-amendment separately, or can I move them both at the same time?
4:30 p.m.
Liberal
Marlene Jennings Liberal Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC
The second change that I would like to propose is to subsection 1.1(4). My amendment would be that, at the fourth line, we replace the period after the word “official” with a comma, and then add some additional wording. I suggest that we add a comma followed by “and the government shall take into consideration any such information.”
4:30 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Tilson
I think I have it, but could you repeat it, please?
Ms. Jennings, I think we have it, but I'd like you to repeat the second part of your subamendment.
4:30 p.m.
Liberal
Marlene Jennings Liberal Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC
A comma followed by “and the government shall take into consideration any such information.”