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.
Bloc
Martin Champoux Bloc Drummond, QC
Perhaps I misunderstood. If amendment PV‑26 is defeated, will amendment BQ‑32 still hold so that we can vote on it subsequently? Perhaps your explanations weren't quite clear.
Bloc
Martin Champoux Bloc Drummond, QC
So if amendment PV‑26 is defeated, amendment BQ‑32 will be voted on. Correct?
Liberal
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
Shall PV-26 carry?
(Amendment negatived: nays 10; yeas 1 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
As a result of that, I also have to negative NDP-13.
Now this may surprise you, Mr. Champoux, but we now vote on BQ-32.
(Amendment negatived: nays 9; yeas 2 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
(Clause 18 agreed to: yeas 9; nays 2)
(Clause 19 agreed to: yeas 7; nays 4)
(On clause 20)
We're going to start with BQ-33, which was put forward by Monsieur Champoux.
(Amendment negatived: nays 9; yeas 2 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
That brings us to BQ-34, which was moved by Mr. Champoux.
(Amendment negatived: nays 9; yeas 2 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
(Clause 20 agreed to: yeas 7, nays 4)
(On clause 21)
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
We're starting with G-15, which was brought forward by Madam Dabrusin.
(Amendment agreed to: yeas 7; nays 4 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
(Clause 21 as amended agreed to: yeas 7; nays 4)
Liberal
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
I'm sorry. They were all yes. I'm so used to someone opposing, I just can't get over the fact that everyone is unanimous. That's no reflection on you. That's just my abilities.
(Clause 22 agreed to)
I was alone at the head of the table for so long.
Conservative
Conservative
Alain Rayes Conservative Richmond—Arthabaska, QC
Mr. Chair, I don't want to contradict you again, but this is not the first time that there is unanimity in the committee, even since the beginning of this clause-by-clause study of the bill. I would just like to reassure everyone of that.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
I just hadn't seen it in a while.
Mr. Rayes, your point is taken.
(On clause 23)
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
If you'll look at your hymn book, you'll see that G-16 is listed, but that was already carried. It was consequential to G-9. Therefore, we're going to just move on from there, because we're [Technical difficulty—Editor] the consequences of the G-9 vote to G-16, so you can take that one out.
That brings us to BQ-35(N). This amends the Broadcasting Act. It provides for a specific regime for the commission to impose a penalty to the corporation, CBC, under the proposed section 34.99. The circumstances cannot be done without holding a public hearing. That's basically what the amendment's saying.
The amendment aims at applying the same unique regime to a person carrying on a broadcasting undertaking, even though it's a different regime, and it does not contemplate a public hearing as proposed in the bill under proposed section 34.92, and I'm afraid that this goes beyond the principle and scope of the bill.
We are applying one to one, and you want to expand it to apply to the other. It's not envisioned within C-10. Therefore, I have to rule that it is, according to page 770 of the House of Commons Procedure and Practice, inadmissible for the purposes of the principle and scope of Bill C-10.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Scott Simms
I'm not sure if “ouch” comprises a challenge or not.
It's just a declaration of your pain. Is that right, Mr. Champoux?
