Canadian Heritage Committee on Oct. 23rd, 2018

[Pierre Breton, Liberal, Shefford, QC]

We have some very interesting witnesses, that's for sure. We must be able to talk to them, ask them questions and receive answers. We can do this by email, through our clerk. It is always preferable to welcome witnesses and be able to discuss with them in person or by videoconference, I agree. Under the current circumstances, however, we have an agenda and I propose that we follow it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dabrusin]

Okay.

Why don't I put this to a vote to see how we should proceed? I believe the proposal from Monsieur Nantel that we'll be voting on is that we continue with oral questions for the witnesses we have before us.

(Motion negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])

Seeing that the motion failed, what I will propose is that everyone who has questions they would like to submit in writing to our witnesses can provide that to us.

As well, as I mentioned to both sets of witnesses, given that you have some positions that you might want to comment upon regarding each other's testimony today, if you would like, you can also provide written submissions to us.

We're going to suspend briefly while we allow people to leave, and then we will start with our review of the private members' bills.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dabrusin]

We are going to start back.

The first private member's bill we have before us today is Bill C-376, An Act to designate the month of April as Sikh Heritage Month. We have not received any amendments for this bill. I will proceed straight to clause-by-clause consideration as no one has proposed any amendments.

Pursuant to Standing Order 75(1), consideration of clause 1, the short title, and of the preamble is postponed.

I will go to clause 2.

[Randy Boissonnault]

Madam Chair, can I make an amendment now on clause 2?

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dabrusin]

Is that an amendment to clause 2 of the Sikh heritage month bill?

[Randy Boissonnault]

My apologies, colleagues. I'll go to the right bill.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dabrusin]

Thank you.

(Clause 2 agreed to)

Shall the preamble carry?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dabrusin]

Shall the short title carry?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dabrusin]

Shall the title carry?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dabrusin]

Shall the bill carry?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dabrusin]

Shall the chair report the bill to the House?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dabrusin]

That disposes of that bill.

I thank Mr. Dhaliwal for coming today.

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Surrey—Newton, BC]

I also thank you, Chair and committee members, and the parliamentary secretary, for all the support that I got. I'm looking forward to working with you all again.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dabrusin]

Thank you.

Pursuant to the order of reference of Wednesday, June 6, 2018, we'll now go to Bill C-391, An Act respecting a national strategy for the repatriation of Aboriginal cultural property.

We do have amendments to this bill. We'll be going to clause-by-clause consideration.

Pursuant to Standing Order 75(1), consideration of clause 1, the short title, is postponed.

(On clause 2)

[Steven Blaney]

Madam Chair, I have a question.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dabrusin]

Could we wait one second? I have to review it.

The legislative clerk will be distributing amendments packages. We'll just take one second as we review that.

Everyone has a package. We will start with—

Yes, Mr. Blaney, go ahead.

[Steven Blaney]

Madam Chair, in the documents that were sent to us, I noted that we had received comments from the Canadian Museum of History. It is a fairly extensive document, almost seven pages long. It reviews all the aspects of the bill, and the recommendations seem constructive to me.

Were those considerations taken into account before the amendments proposed today were drafted?

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dabrusin]

Does anyone want to comment on that?

Monsieur Nantel, go ahead.

[Pierre Nantel, NDP, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

I'm thinking about how I'm going to comment on this to take as much time as I can. But I don't want to play the game. I appreciate Mr. Blaney's intention, and I think it's very collaborative of him to name the rush that's going on on the government side here. We know all the procedures to put wooden sticks in your wheels; we could do it. I don't see why you're rushing so much, why you guys get so nervous about it. All I know is that I went public saying that I think Romeo.... Of course, we've consulted him on all these issues and the amendments we've given are inspired by all this. I would not improvise something on such a delicate topic.

Clearly, you guys are rushing to get this stuff out. I don't see why. I think this is such an important thing. Everything that touches first nations reconciliation is super delicate. I think it's the wrong thing to do. I don't want to capitalize on the fact that Romeo is on antibiotics, on Tylenol or just sick; I don't know. I couldn't speak to him. I'll leave it up to you, and of course you'll go, because you have orders. If Mr. Blaney wants to uncover all the rocks, I appreciate that, but they have majority and they'll vote us down if they want to go further, and to go further than one o'clock.

Thank you, Mr. Blaney, and let them have their way.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dabrusin]

Mr. Blaney, go ahead.