Evidence of meeting #117 for Canadian Heritage in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was point.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
Michael Coteau Liberal Don Valley East, ON
I just want to make sure that's what happened. It's a point of clarification. Is that right?
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Kevin Waugh
We had the vote, Mr. Coteau. We've asked it, somebody said no and now we're moving on.
There are two minutes and 20 seconds left for Mr. Noormohamed.
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Kevin Waugh
Yes, and I'm just telling you what happened here. I asked if there was unanimous consent. It was no, so now we're moving on for two minutes and 20 seconds. Is that fine?
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
Taleeb Noormohamed Liberal Vancouver Granville, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'm sure that the blues and the video, Mr. Coteau, would confirm that Mrs. Thomas, Mr. Lawrence and Mr. Gourde specifically said no. Mr. Gourde held up a sign saying no as well. It's all recorded.
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
Taleeb Noormohamed Liberal Vancouver Granville, BC
You have interrupted me now, so I would like to have five seconds back.
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
Taleeb Noormohamed Liberal Vancouver Granville, BC
I would like what is now my 10 seconds back, Mr. Chair.
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
Taleeb Noormohamed Liberal Vancouver Granville, BC
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
I would like to now go back to Mr. Jensen.
You raised a really important point about the validity.... In your comments you spoke about the the defence of charter rights and the importance of defending charter rights.
Last week, the Leader of the Opposition, in speaking about charter rights, said that he would use the notwithstanding clause to override civil liberties and minority rights.
Can you speak to the concern that your organization would have about that and what Canadians should be worried about in the context of what we're talking about today, when a leader of any political party talks about using the notwithstanding clause to take away—
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
Rachael Thomas Conservative Lethbridge, AB
Mr. Noormohamed just threw out an accusation that actually is not substantiated. He's putting words in the leader's mouth. I would just ask, through you, Mr. Chair, that he stick to the facts.
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Kevin Waugh
Thank you, Mrs. Thomas.
Yes, Mr. Noormohamed, please continue. Stick to the facts of our guests here today and stick to Bill C-316, if you don't mind.
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Kevin Waugh
I also get to rule. When you're kind of crossing the line, which you just did, I also, as the chair, get to rule on this situation.
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
Taleeb Noormohamed Liberal Vancouver Granville, BC
Mr. Chair, I asked a very specific question in respect to the testimony of the witness. Would you like me to repeat the question?
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
Taleeb Noormohamed Liberal Vancouver Granville, BC
The witness, in his testimony, Mr. Chair, spoke to the importance of defending charter rights and of this program's ability to defend charter rights. My question was a very specific one.
When leaders of political parties speak about overriding the constitutional rights that this individual spoke of in his testimony by using the notwithstanding clause, my question to the witness is as follows: What are the consequences and implications of the use of the notwithstanding clause to override those same minority rights?