Evidence of meeting #120 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 amendments.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Blair McMurren  Director General, Strategic Policy and International Affairs, Department of Canadian Heritage
Philippe Méla  Legislative Clerk
Clerk of the Committee  Ms. Geneviève Desjardins

5:15 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry

Mr. Lawrence.

5:15 p.m.

Conservative

Philip Lawrence Conservative Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON

I'm sorry. In the preamble to Mr. Serré's—

5:15 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry

I think, Mr. Lawrence, that Mrs. Thomas's hand was up before yours.

5:15 p.m.

Conservative

Philip Lawrence Conservative Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON

I thought you were calling the vote. I'm sorry. That's my fault.

In Mr. Serré's preamble, he referenced charter protections. The Liberal government illegally invoked the Emergencies Act in violation of charter rights. Would there be anything in this subamendment that would provide additional protection to those Canadians who had their bank accounts frozen and their rights violated, as found by the court?

5:15 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry

Are you finished, Mr. Lawrence?

5:15 p.m.

Conservative

Philip Lawrence Conservative Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON

Yes.

5:15 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry

Do you require a response to that?

5:15 p.m.

Conservative

Philip Lawrence Conservative Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON

Yes.

5:15 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry

Will the officials from Heritage please respond?

5:15 p.m.

Director General, Strategic Policy and International Affairs, Department of Canadian Heritage

Blair McMurren

We observe that the reference to the charter in the proposed subamendment seems fairly neutral and factual given that the program is oriented around supporting court challenges involving certain sections of the charter. We would see it as consistent with the parameters of the program.

5:20 p.m.

Conservative

Philip Lawrence Conservative Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON

It clarifies, but it doesn't provide any additional protections of charter rights for Canadians. Of course, it will allow for more court challenges, which could then mean people bringing challenges, but the subamendment does not strengthen the charter, really, in any way.

5:20 p.m.

Director General, Strategic Policy and International Affairs, Department of Canadian Heritage

Blair McMurren

I would see it as a fairly factual reference to the program as it is now.

5:20 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry

Mrs. Thomas.

5:20 p.m.

Conservative

Rachael Thomas Conservative Lethbridge, AB

I seek clarification, then. Understanding that other amendments would potentially be lost if G-1 were to be passed, would there be an opportunity to propose amendments from the floor? Assuming that G-1 is accepted—

5:20 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry

If G-1 is adopted, amended or not, then CPC-1, CPC-2, CPC-3, NDP-1, CPC-4 and CPC-5 cannot be moved due to a line conflict, as Mr. Méla said earlier on.

5:20 p.m.

Conservative

Rachael Thomas Conservative Lethbridge, AB

I understand that. My question was whether other amendments could then be put forward from the floor.

5:20 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry

Do you mean amendments to G-1, which is what we're dealing with at the moment?

5:20 p.m.

Conservative

Rachael Thomas Conservative Lethbridge, AB

Those would be subamendments. I'm asking whether amendments to clause 2 could be put forward.

5:20 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry

Of course, yes, you can move subamendments to G-1 if you wish.

I need clarification, Mrs. Thomas. Do you mean further subamendments to G-1?

5:20 p.m.

Conservative

Rachael Thomas Conservative Lethbridge, AB

No, Chair, I don't. I mean if G-1 were to pass with or without the subamendment, would we be given an opportunity to move an additional amendment from the floor with regard to clause 2, with G-1 as part of it?

5:20 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry

Mr. Méla.

5:20 p.m.

Legislative Clerk

Philippe Méla

For clause 2, you could not for the lines that would be amended by G-1, so lines 10 to 16 would be closed for amendments. If you wanted to add amendments after line 16, that would be an option in clause 2.

5:20 p.m.

Conservative

Rachael Thomas Conservative Lethbridge, AB

Thank you.

5:20 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry

Thank you.

Mr. Waugh.

May 21st, 2024 / 5:20 p.m.

Conservative

Kevin Waugh Conservative Saskatoon—Grasswood, SK

I think I know what Mrs. Thomas was getting at if G-1 does pass. We're looking ahead to CPC-1, CPC-2, CPC-3, CPC-4 and CPC-5. I don't want to put words in Mrs. Thomas's mouth, but maybe there was something we wanted out of them. Is now the time to amend G-1 with CPC-1, CPC-2, CPC-3, CPC-4 or CPC-5 if there was a line we wanted? That's if G-1 passes and the rest is thrown out.

I'm just asking for clarification on CPC-1 to CPC-5.