Finance Committee on Nov. 7th, 2006

[The Chair, Conservative, Brian Pallister]

Order, please.

Welcome, Mr. Martin. Thank you for being here. I understand that you have some associates who will be joining us shortly, but we'll commence pursuant to the order of reference of Tuesday, October 24, 2006, Bill C-25, An Act to amend to Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act and the Income Tax Act and to make a consequential amendment to another Act.

My colleagues will proceed. I will ask you whether various clauses that have no amendments attached to them shall carry, but I will stop the proceedings at the point of amendment. We also have an understanding with Mr. McCallum, who is currently drafting an amendment, that we will revert back to the appropriate clause. Even though it may have carried, we will revert back to it if that is indeed where it is determined that that amendment should be placed.

With that understanding, shall clause 1 carry?

Yes, Mr. McCallum?

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Unionville, ON]

Chair, I've just found out where it goes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Brian Pallister]

And it goes where?

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Unionville, ON]

It goes on line 3 on page 30.

[The Chair, Conservative, Brian Pallister]

Okay, it's for clause 38. We'll get to that one.

(Clauses 1 and 2 agreed to on division)

(On clause 3)

Clause 3 has an amendment submitted by Mr. Pacetti; however, such an amendment is inadmissible, being beyond the scope of the bill. I can read the ruling if Mr. Pacetti would wish. Otherwise, we'll proceed.

[Massimo Pacetti, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

Yes, please.

[The Chair, Conservative, Brian Pallister]

Clause 3 proposes, among other things, to make an amendment to proposed paragraph 5(l) of the application section of the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act to include departments or agents of Her Majesty that sell prescribed precious metals. This amendment proposes to also include in this section persons in the business of money lending, including “payday lenders”, persons or entities in the business of selling new and used motorized vehicles, as well as persons in the business of buying and selling precious metals, stones, and jewellery. This broadens the scope of the application of the bill.

According to page 654 of Marleau and Montpetit, “An amendment to a bill that was referred to a committee after second reading is out of order if it is beyond the scope and principle of the bill.” In my view, this amendment goes beyond the scope of Bill C-25 and is therefore inadmissible.

[Massimo Pacetti, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

Can we just get some clearance, Mr. Chairman?

[The Chair, Conservative, Brian Pallister]

Yes, Mr. Pacetti.

[Massimo Pacetti, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

Are all my proposed amendments, L-1, L-2, and L-3, inadmissible? Because we spoke regarding....

[The Chair, Conservative, Brian Pallister]

No, Mr. Pacetti, only this one is inadmissible.

[Massimo Pacetti, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

Only this one is?

[The Chair, Conservative, Brian Pallister]

Only this one is.

[Massimo Pacetti, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

But there are three points: there's L-1, L-2.... Can I amend my amendment?

[The Chair, Conservative, Brian Pallister]

No, because your amendment is inadmissible, so amending it would be of little good to you.

[Massimo Pacetti, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

Can I just go with L-3? Can I delete L-1 and L-2? We did speak about “persons and entities engaged in the business of buying and selling precious metals, stones and jewellery”.

[The Chair, Conservative, Brian Pallister]

Let me just quote from the bill. The bill deals with “departments and agents of Her Majesty...that sell...precious metals”, and your attempt is to broaden it to include other persons clearly outside of that mandate, so the amendment is out of order because it is outside the scope of the bill.

[Massimo Pacetti, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm not convinced, but I will have to respect your decision on that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Brian Pallister]

Thank you, sir.

(Clauses 3 to 5 inclusive agreed to on division)

(On clause 6)

[The Chair, Conservative, Brian Pallister]

Clause 6 has amendments, and each of our members has these in front of them.

Amendment G-1 is a government amendment. I need a mover for this amendment.

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

I so move.

[The Chair, Conservative, Brian Pallister]

The amendment is that Bill C-25, in clause 6, be amended by replacing lines 21 and 22 on page 3 with the following:

under section 8 of the Regulations Implementing the United Nations Resolutions on the Suppression of Terrorism shall also make a

(Amendment agreed to on division)

(Clause 6 as amended agreed to on division)

(Clause 7 agreed to on division)

(On clause 8)

[The Chair, Conservative, Brian Pallister]

We now have a series of amendments, and in this particular instance we have a line conflict, with two amendments dealing with the same lines in the bill: Liberal amendment L-2 and government amendment G-2. If G-2 is adopted, L-2 cannot be proceeded with. In the interests of fairness, what I propose to do is to allow discussion on both amendments simultaneously, because to allow discussion on G-2 would preclude a discussion on L-2. You have those amendments in front of you now.

Monsieur Paquette, Monsieur St-Cyr.

[Massimo Pacetti, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

I'm sorry, Mr. Chairman, but where are we?

[The Chair, Conservative, Brian Pallister]

Amendments G-2 and L-2 deal with the same lines in the bill. Under our rules we can only amend the lines once. If we proceed with a discussion on G-2, that will preclude a discussion on Liberal amendment 2; therefore, I am inviting discussion on the two amendments simultaneously.

I'll invite the government person to speak to G-2, if they wish.

But first, welcome to our guests who have arrived.