I am so sorry, Martin.
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.
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.
Bloc
Martin Champoux Bloc Drummond, QC
Madam Chair, I don't want to drag out the debate. However, I think that we have a good opportunity to improve and that we should take it.
Mr. Méla explained things nicely. I agree with my colleague, Mr. Serré, that these rules are in place in all the committees. This isn't the first amendment ruled out of order during clause‑by‑clause consideration.
However, it would be useful to know whether the same decision will be made concerning amendment CPC‑2 and the other amendments that depend on the outcome of our vote on amendment G‑1. Personally, I think that we should know whether amendments CPC‑2 and CPC‑3 are in order, because the vote on amendment G‑1 will affect them. If amendment CPC‑2 is ruled out of order, this may change our position on amendment G‑1. We could get a head start and determine which amendments are in order.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
Martin, to repeat, If G-1 is adopted, amended or not, CPC-1, CPC-2, CPC-3, NDP-1, CPC-4 and CPC-5 cannot be moved due to a line conflict.
Bloc
Martin Champoux Bloc Drummond, QC
Fair enough, Madam Chair. However, the vote on amendment G‑1 will affect amendment CPC‑2. You just ruled amendment CPC‑1 out of order. I now want to know whether amendment CPC‑2 is in order, since this would affect my vote on amendment G‑1. If amendment CPC‑2 is out of order, we'll consider things differently.
I want to know whether the other amendments affected by amendment G‑1 are all out of order.
Legislative Clerk
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Mr. Champoux, if amendment G‑1 is passed, amended or not, lines 10 to 16 can't be changed afterwards. Amendments CPC‑2 or CPC‑3 could no longer be moved, because they concern these lines. However, before the vote on amendment G‑1, a subamendment can still be moved to change it.
To answer your specific question about whether amendments CPC‑2 and CPC‑3 are in order, an amendment's admissibility can be determined only once it has been moved. For this reason, your question can't be answered immediately.
Bloc
Conservative
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
Go ahead on a point of order, Mr. Lawrence, but I have Ms. Ashton with a subamendment patiently waiting.
Conservative
Philip Lawrence Conservative Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON
This is a point of order, so that trumps it. That's the way it works.
Conservative
Philip Lawrence Conservative Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON
Mr. Méla, you have provided to me before whether something is admissible or not. That's completely allowable. You can, right now, tell us—in fact, it's your obligation to tell us—whether CPC-2 and CPC-3 are admissible.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
I don't know how else to say it. It will depend on whether G-1 is passed. Now everyone knows that, so it's going to be up to anyone to vote against or for G-1. If they want a subamendment, they can move it now, because we're still dealing with G-1.
Conservative
Philip Lawrence Conservative Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON
This shouldn't be that difficult. We're asking whether CPC-2 and CPC-3 are admissible. Whether G-1 passes or not is incidental.
Are CPC-2 and CPC-3 admissible? It's a simple question.
Conservative
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
According to the orders of this meeting, G-1 is on the table. We have to vote on G-1. If it passes—I'll read it again—CPC-1, CPC-2, CPC-3 and NDP-1 are not going to be admissible because of the line conflict.
We need to get G-1 dealt with. If you want to amend G-1, as Mr. Méla said, please do.
Conservative
Philip Lawrence Conservative Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON
I have a point of order.
We're at cross-purposes. I think there's a misunderstanding. In order to decide whether we want to vote on G-1, we need to know whether CPC-2 and CPC-3 are admissible. That informs our vote. If it were before the meeting, I could call Mr. Méla—correct me if I'm wrong—and ask, “What are your feelings on CPC-2 and CPC-3? Do you believe that's admissible?”
Ultimately, it's your decision, Madam Chair, but he would inform that decision. I am just asking, if G-1 failed for whatever reason, whether CPC-2 and CPC-3 would be admissible.
Liberal
Ron McKinnon Liberal Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC
I just want to clarify for Mr. Lawrence that you can't rule anything inadmissible until it's been moved. The distinction between these other amendments and this one is about whether they can be moved at all. That's due to a line conflict.
Whether they're inadmissible cannot be answered. We know for a fact that if G‑1 passes, there will be a line conflict with these other matters, so they cannot be moved, not because they're inadmissible, but because there's a line conflict.
Conservative
Philip Lawrence Conservative Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON
Madam Chair, since Mr. McKinnon cited me, perhaps you'll allow me the indulgence to respond.
Mr. McKinnon, I understand what you're saying. We will not be able to move CPC-2 or CPC-3 if G-1 passes. However, you're allowed to go to the legislative clerk, as Mr. Méla just said, and even if it's laddered down on the slate.... He can't make a ruling, but he can let me know whether, in his opinion, it would be admissible or inadmissible.
