As with the previous amendment, BQ-9 seek to increase benefits set out in section 17 of the Employment Insurance Act and in the opinion of the chair the amendment would impose an additional charge on the public treasury. Therefore, I would rule the amendment inadmissible.
Before I turn to clause 214, we have been dealing with employment insurance a fair bit in a lot of amendments. In future budgets, if something applies to other areas, I would pass on a message to the Department of Finance. If other committees looked at some sections of such a bill, it might be wise to send them there, instead of asking this committee to deal with employment insurance measures, which are not our point of expertise as a committee. I just say that in fairness. I'm not saying it's an omnibus bill, but I think it's a valid point.
There are no amendments to clauses 214 to 221. Are there any points that anybody wants to raise? Ms. Raitt, Mr. McColeman, Mr. Liepert, Mr. Caron, are there any points you want to raise on clauses 214 to 221 before we call the question?
(Clauses 214 to 221 inclusive agreed to on division)
There is amendment BQ-10 to clause 222. Is anybody here from the BQ? It is deemed moved. Nobody is here to speak on BQ-10 and the consequential amendment BQ-12. They seek to increase the benefits set out in the Employment Insurance Act.
As House of Commons, Procedure and Practice, second edition, states on page 767 and 768:
Since an amendment may not infringe upon the financial initiative of the Crown, it is inadmissible if it imposes a charge on the public treasury, or if it extends the objects or purposes or relaxes the conditions and qualifications specified in the royal recommendation.
I rule that the amendment would impose an additional charge on the public treasury. Therefore, it's inadmissible.
(Clause 222 agreed to on division)
Amendment BQ-11 to clause 223 is deemed moved. It's exactly the same ruling as applied a moment ago to BQ-10, so I would rule it's inadmissible, as well as BQ-13.
(Clauses 223 and 224 agreed to on division)
(On clause 225)
Next is PV-5. Ms. May.