Evidence of meeting #44 for Canadian Heritage in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was clause.
A recording is available from Parliament.
1:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
I'm already overdue on this vote, so I have to have LIB-9.1 voted on right now.
1:30 p.m.
Conservative
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
Mr. Chair, it is a subamendment to this amendment, so you can't have a vote on the amendment when I'm seeking to make a subamendment to that amendment.
1:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
Mr. Genuis, to satisfy your concerns, how about I go to the legislative clerk right now?
1:30 p.m.
Conservative
1:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
I'll be just one second. Can we suspend for just a few minutes, and I'll keep everyone on screen? You can go off screen, but listen for my voice when we come back, because I don't think it will be too long.
Thank you.
1:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
Welcome back, everybody.
Mr. Genuis, thank you for your intervention. As I suspected, yes, but I'll just further explain why it is we're doing this in the case of overturning a challenge on a ruling and not in the case of an subamendment that you're putting forward.
When it comes to the motion itself, the first part talks about the five-hour debate that has expired. That's fine. That's been satisfied. In the second part of the motion that came from the House, we have to go by the strict orders that were given to us, and I bring your attention, if you have it in front of you, to the last part of the sentence, “in turn, every question necessary for the disposal of the said stage of the bill shall be put forthwith and successively, without further debate or further amendment.”
What I did earlier is I ruled, a challenge was made and it was overturned, but these are regarding amendments that already exist. Either they were deemed moved by the Green Party or they were put forward when a challenge was made, but these are all amendments that were previously placed with us. Therefore, that applies, because there is nothing in this motion that considers options of motions that were already handed in to us.
What it does say, quite explicitly, is this at the end, again, “forthwith and successively, without further debate or amendment”, which is what you are proposing, which I have to rule as out of order. In which case, I now have to go—
1:35 p.m.
Conservative
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
Mr. Chair, I challenge the ruling you just made.
1:35 p.m.
Conservative
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
Mr. Chair, you can't refuse a challenge to the chair.
1:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
Hold on one second. I'm just providing clarification, which I think is what you wanted.
1:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
Here's what I'm going to do. Rather than engage in this further, how about I bring someone else in? Mr. Méla, perhaps you would like to shed some light on this.
What he's going to explain to you is the situation. You have a problem, obviously, with the motion that was dealt with in the House.
Mr. Méla, if you please—
1:35 p.m.
Conservative
1:35 p.m.
Conservative
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
My position is that this committee has already defied the House order, because the House order said “without further amendment” and the amendments were not moved at committee. Notice had been given of those amendments, but those amendments had not been moved at committee. My position is that, if the committee is able to defy a House order, then it is able to defy a House order. You can't say that there's a challenge from a Liberal member seeking to overturn a ruling, and allow it, defying the House order, but that's going to be—
1:40 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
I understand what you're saying. I think we get the gist of your argument.
Mr. Méla.
1:40 p.m.
Legislative Clerk
Thank you, Mr. Chair and Mr. Genuis.
I think there are two things to consider. There is the five-hour mark, before and after. What the chair did at the arrival of the five-hour mark was basically to interpret what the motion of the House was saying in terms of how to consider the amendments present in the package, where they were either deemed moved or were just in the package, staying there, and what to do with them.
Since the motion of the House is silent on these amendments, the chair made two rulings. The first one was on the amendments from the Green Party. Those ones are, generally speaking, deemed moved. They were considered by the chair and there was no overturning of that ruling.
Then the chair made a second ruling considering the rest of the amendments. He proposed that they would be not proposed by the committee, and the committee overturned that decision. That's why we are now voting on all the rest of the amendments, plus the Green Party amendments.
Now, to your question on adding subamendments at the present time, that is clearly specified in the motion of the House. In the last part of the paragraph, it says:
...and, in turn, every question necessary for the disposal of the said stage of the bill shall be put forthwith and successively, without further debate or amendment.
There is before the five-hour mark, and after. Clearly, we are past the five-hour mark. Therefore, no other amendment can be proposed—or subamendment, for that matter.
In this case, I would simply suggest that you bring it to the floor of the House, because basically you can't appeal an order of the House.
1:40 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
Mr. Genuis, wait one moment, please.
This is a clarification about the fact that your challenge lies with the House of Commons. It doesn't lie with this particular committee. That's what Mr. Méla is trying to say.
I cannot spend more time on this, as we have to get moving. I have explicit orders from the House to do this.
I'm sorry. I appreciate your argument, and I appreciate—
1:40 p.m.
Conservative
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
The amendments were not moved, though.
1:40 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
First of all, we can't raise our voices. I need to move on. We've just addressed now, three times, the particular problems that you have about this. We have to move on.
Folks, I'm asking the question—
1:40 p.m.
Conservative
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
Mr. Chair, I have a point of order and I would like to be heard on my point of order.
1:40 p.m.
Liberal