Canadian Heritage Committee on May 21st, 2024

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

My ask of the legislative clerk is that we be given a heads-up if something is deemed inadmissible.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Mr. Méla.

[Philippe Méla]

An opportunity that all members have is to submit amendments to the clerk before the committee starts—before anything starts, really. Members can also consult us prior to submitting them to the clerk of the committee. We can have a discussion at that point to see if they are procedurally admissible or not. However, it's not something we do proactively, because we assume that members, generally speaking, don't want to know what the answer is.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Why would we not want to know? We would want to be stupid. We would want to come to the table unable to....

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Mrs. Thomas, did you consult the legislative clerk before you brought in this amendment?

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Madam Chair, I created all of my amendments with the assistance that was provided to me based on an email that was sent from the clerk outlining the resources I had at my disposal. I used those resources.

If further resources were available to me, that was not made known. In no way was an email or any other form of communication sent to me or to my office recommending that we double-check the work that was done by legal by running it by the legislative clerk and his office.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

It's traditional, I think, during clause-by-clause, for people to consult with a legislative clerk, so thank you.

Go ahead, Mr. Méla, if you want to say something.

[Philippe Méla]

A memo is sent to all members prior to submitting the amendments indicating the deadlines for amendments, the dates the amendments are to be submitted and when clause-by-clause will be taking place. On that memo, there are two pieces of information that are important for members to know: who the legislative counsel is—basically, the lawyer who's going to draft the amendment according to the law—and who the legislative clerk is. That's to help members know what the procedures are. If they have questions regarding procedure, they can consult us. That's on the memo sent to all members every single time there is a bill in committee.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

If I followed that email and sent my desire to the email address that was provided to me and they sent back the recommended amendment in the final form I have in front of me today, you're saying that in addition to the counsel provided to me, I needed to double-check with you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Mr. Méla.

[Philippe Méla]

Yes, indeed. In 2001, there was a Speaker's ruling. I don't want to go back to what was once the legal.... The legislative clerks and the office of the law clerk were once under the same umbrella. In 2001, it was divided into two separate entities, so nowadays, as the memo provides, one entity is the lawyer's office—the office of the law clerk. It has a specific relationship with members, which has client privilege from the get-go, and nothing is shared with us.

That's why the memo has a second part, which is that if members need procedural advice on the admissibility of amendments, they should contact us once the amendment is provided by the law clerk's office. At that point, we can provide them with procedural admissibility advice.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Then at the point that amendments were submitted to this committee, the legislative clerk was aware of what would be admissible and what would not be admissible, but that information was withheld from us until we came today.

[Marc Serré, Liberal, Nickel Belt, ON]

I have a point of order, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Yes, Mr. Serré.

[Marc Serré, Liberal, Nickel Belt, ON]

Madam Chair, the rules in the debate that's happening between Mrs. Thomas and the legislative clerk are the same rules that have been in place for decades. The clarification that Mrs. Thomas is asking for....

Maybe you should ask your team, because these are the same rules that—

[Philip Lawrence, Conservative, Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON]

Madam Chair, this is not a valid point of order—

[Marc Serré, Liberal, Nickel Belt, ON]

The chair has already ruled.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Mr. Lawrence, I will allow the point of order.

Go ahead, Mr. Serré.

[Marc Serré, Liberal, Nickel Belt, ON]

Madam Chair, just quickly, you've already ruled, and now there's a debate going on with the legislative clerk that is not accurate, because these are the same rules that have applied for every other committee for every other clause-by-clause I've been part of. They have been in place for decades.

I don't understand what's happening here right now, Madam Chair, but you've already ruled. If a member wants to challenge your ruling, there should not be a debate. There should be a vote on that ruling.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

I agree with you, Mr. Serré. I asked the member if she was challenging my ruling and she did not respond.

Are you challenging my ruling, Mrs. Thomas?

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

I was simply seeking clarification.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

I think Mr. Méla gave you clarification. Thank you.

We will move to Ms. Ashton, who had her hand up—

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Madam Chair, I have a point of order.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

—prior to Mrs. Thomas. Now Mrs. Thomas is after Ms. Ashton.

Ms. Ashton, go ahead.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Madam Chair, I have a point of order.