Evidence of meeting #122 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 chair.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Conservative
Conservative
NDP
Niki Ashton NDP Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB
Yes, exactly.
We have some thoughts on how things could be done more effectively. Our concern is with pushing Bill C-354 until the very end. I understand it has to be back in the House by the end of September. I think it might be more prudent to switch out even one of the online harms sessions to move Bill C-354 up, and then we could do online harms later.
I know we don't always sit until the very end of the House sitting, so in the hope of finishing Bill C-354 before we leave and in time for September, I'm wondering if folks might consider that.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Kevin Waugh
Yes. Bill C-354 has to be done by Friday, September 27.
Is there any discussion on this? I see none.
Do I call for a vote? What is the procedure with this?
Conservative
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Kevin Waugh
I guess, Ms. Ashton, you'll be moving an amendment to what has been brought out as a schedule.
Liberal
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Kevin Waugh
Yes, okay. We can do that.
We'll vote on Ms. Ashton's comments on Bill C-354, especially for June 20. We may not be here, and we need to get this....
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Kevin Waugh
Are you moving it, Ms. Ashton, or is it just for discussion?
NDP
Niki Ashton NDP Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB
Whatever's more effective. I'll move it.
I don't know, folks. It's based on the premise of us possibly not sitting on the 20th. Why would we leave clause-by-clause until the very last meeting when we may not sit? It has to be in right when we get back. That is a bit of a concern for me. I'm fine to move it.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Kevin Waugh
We would need clarification on where you would want Bill C-354 to move to, if not June 20.
NDP
Niki Ashton NDP Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB
I'm suggesting bumping it up, so one of the online harms meetings could move to the 20th, in case we're still sitting, or into the fall.
I understand we wouldn't have the witnesses right away for June 11, so we could leave online harms there. We could do safe sport, or whatever, but if folks want to move with online harms, that's fine. However, we could move Bill C-354 to June 13 and make June 18 clause-by-clause, and then June 20 would be online harms or whatever.
Conservative
Rachael Thomas Conservative Lethbridge, AB
I'm sorry. With all due respect, an amendment doesn't end with “or whatever”. If Ms. Ashton wants to move an amendment, she has the ability to do that. However, if she's just wishing to have a loosey-goosey conversation, that's something you do off-line.
I don't hear an amendment, therefore I don't see a need for a vote, except for the motion as moved by Mr. Noormohamed.
NDP
Niki Ashton NDP Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB
I guess, regarding “loosey-goosey”, we could take out the “whatever”. I just think it's not very prudent for parliamentarians to commit to a June 20 clause-by-clause when it's likely we're not going to be sitting. If we're going to be loosey-goosey, that's the way to do it.
My proposal is that we move Bill C-354 to take over the two previous meetings, ending clause-by-clause on June 18. June 20 could be for online harms.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Kevin Waugh
I think Mr. Méla wants to know about the deadline for amendments on June 13 for Bill C-354.
We're running over time here, so we have to—
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Kevin Waugh
Okay.
What is the will of the committee in front of me, because of time constraints?
