Evidence of meeting #50 for Environment and Sustainable Development in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was amendment.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
I call the meeting to order.
On Monday, we left off at G-14.2. We're open for debate.
Mr. Weiler.
Liberal
Patrick Weiler Liberal West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Since the last meeting we had, there's been a lot of communication about some of the confusion that might be created by the amendment as it is written. Again, we're talking about the necessity to do a public consultation when we're talking about new living organisms.
There's been some concern brought forward that the amendment as it's written right now will exempt farmed animals, because those would not be animals that are “native to Canada”. I just want to put that out there, and if somebody would propose a subamendment, that might be able to address that concern that people raised.
Liberal
Joanne Thompson Liberal St. John's East, NL
I propose a subamendment to G-14.2.
Motion number G-14.2 proposes to amend clause 39.1 of Bill S-5 by replacing line 35 on page 31 to line 15 on page 32. It will be amended by deleting the words “that in its unmodified form is native to Canada” from the motion.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
Is there any debate on it? No?
The subamendment passes, and we go to the amendment now.
Bloc
Monique Pauzé Bloc Repentigny, QC
I apologize, Mr. Chair. I thought we were voting on amendment G‑14.2, but we were voting on the subamendment. I agree with deleting the words “that in its unmodified form is native to Canada”, and I therefore support the subamendment.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
All right. If we have unanimous consent, you can change your vote.
Do we have unanimous consent?
Bloc
Monique Pauzé Bloc Repentigny, QC
Thank you, esteemed colleagues.
(Subamendment agreed to: yeas 11; nays 0)
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
We will now go to amendment G‑14.2 as amended.
Do any members of the committee wish to speak or shall we vote on it?
Ms. Pauzé, you have the floor.
Bloc
Monique Pauzé Bloc Repentigny, QC
I'd simply like to explain why we don't support this amendment.
We wanted to keep what the Senate had proposed in Bill S‑5, the concept of meaningful participation and the opportunity for public comments. Amendment G‑14.2 really seems to sweep all of that away. So those are our reasons for voting against the amendment.
Liberal
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
We will now continue on to amendment BQ‑12.
Ms. Pauzé, you have the floor.
Bloc
Monique Pauzé Bloc Repentigny, QC
With respect to amendment BQ‑12, we had agreed to introduce only item (b) and what comes after that. We would like to specify what type of participation—
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
I'm sorry to interrupt you. I should have notified the committee that if G‑14.2 passed, amendment BQ‑12 couldn't be moved due to a line conflict.
Bloc
Monique Pauzé Bloc Repentigny, QC
No, Mr. Chair. On Monday, I asked the question and the clerks confirmed that, if G‑14.2 passed, I wouldn't be able to move item (a) in amendment BQ‑12, but I would still be able to move item (b).
Bloc
Monique Pauzé Bloc Repentigny, QC
The amendment aims to specify what form of participation there needs to be.
We made a few changes. I know that we were just sent the new text by email. Here it is: “For the purposes of subsections (1.1) and (1.2), in order to develop and shed light on the ministers' assessment, the opportunities of the public include opportunities to”—
Actually, I just remembered that I can't amend my own amendment. Therefore, I think the NDP should move a subamendment. If you will allow it, we will take two minutes to see exactly what we received.
Liberal
NDP
Lindsay Mathyssen NDP London—Fanshawe, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I ask for your indulgence a bit here. I believe the NDP has a subamendment to BQ-12 that everybody should have received.
Under (1.3) we want to remove the words “subsections (1.1) and (1.2),” add “informing the ministers' assessment, the ministers shall provide the public with opportunities”, remove “of the public”, keep “to participate in the assessment”, and change “include” to “including”.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
Do we have this in front of us in both languages?
Okay. Is there any debate on Ms. Mathyssen's subamendment?
Hearing none, we'll go to a vote.
(Subamendment negatived: nays 9; yeas 2 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
We'll go to the amendment.
Ms. Pauzé, you already moved your amendment, didn't you?