Mr. Chair?
Evidence of meeting #2 for Fisheries and Oceans in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was amendment.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Evidence of meeting #2 for Fisheries and Oceans in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was amendment.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Bloc
Marilène Gill Bloc Manicouagan, QC
I want to ask a question about the procedure. I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.
Conservative
Blaine Calkins Conservative Red Deer—Lacombe, AB
Thank you, Chair.
It's just for clarification. We're dealing with the subamendment by Mr. Battiste to the amendment proposed by Madame Gill. I don't know what the outcome of this is going to be. I just want clarification from you, Chair, because I would like to propose an amendment to that section of the motion as well, and if we go with the—
Bloc
Marilène Gill Bloc Manicouagan, QC
I gather that Mr. Battiste isn't moving a subamendment to my amendment. He's moving an amendment to the main motion. We should first vote on my amendment and then vote on Mr. Battiste's amendment.
October 19th, 2020 / 5:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
I understood, and correct me if I'm wrong, Madam Clerk, that Mr. Battiste originally wanted to do a subamendment to Madame Gill's amendment. He read it out in its entirety, I know, but it was suggested originally that it would be a subamendment to your amendment, Madame Gill.
Is that correct, Madam Clerk?
The Clerk
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I do not have the text of all those amendments and subamendments, but I believe that Mr. Battiste just moved a different version of the amendment from Madame Gill, which is not exactly the same as a subamendment. It is my understanding that it is not exactly a subamendment. It's a bit complicated because Madame Gill is here in the room and you're not. She seems to imply that maybe she would modify it, but I would appreciate it if you can let her speak to this.
Bloc
Marilène Gill Bloc Manicouagan, QC
Mr. Battiste's changes apply to the text of his own motion, not to my amendment. It's that simple. If necessary, I can withdraw my amendment. In any event, I don't mind if my amendment is rejected so that we can get to Mr. Battiste's subamendment. Perhaps this would simplify things. However, as we did when we submitted the English version, he must include in his draft the two additions to the main motion relating to the two first nations and traditional knowledge.
I'm prepared to withdraw my own amendment so that it can be replaced by the amendment that he read to us, provided that the written texts are available for us to vote on afterwards.
The Clerk
Mr. Chair, I'm not sure if you need clarification, but for Ms. Gill to withdraw her amendment—and she is willing to do so—the committee would have to agree to that. If the committee does agree, then Mr. Battiste's amendment, which is not a subamendment, could be voted on.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
Do I have the consent of the committee for Madame Gill to withdraw her amendment?
Liberal
Liberal
Liberal
Conservative
Blaine Calkins Conservative Red Deer—Lacombe, AB
Mr. Chair, if I may have the floor, I would add something to it through a subamendment to Mr. Battiste's amendment.
I propose that we also include local authorities. At some point, after “fisheries associations, scientists”, let's put in “local authorities and interested stakeholders”, if that's amenable to the committee. Also, just prior to the language “fisheries associations”, if we make that “non-indigenous and indigenous fisheries associations”, that would be a little more inclusive as to who might be on the witness list.
I assume this would be amenable to Mr. Battiste.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
I see Mr. Battiste with a thumbs-up for that, Mr. Calkins.
Hearing no further discussion on that, can we vote on the subamendment by Mr. Calkins as stated?
The Clerk
Mr. Chair, before we proceed to a vote, I would ask if Mr. Calkins can repeat the final part of what he just said.
Conservative
Blaine Calkins Conservative Red Deer—Lacombe, AB
I'm looking to add two words: a comma after the word “scientists”, and then putting in two words in English, “local authorities”. Then it would go on to “and interested stakeholder groups”.
Then, prior to the words “fisheries associations” on that list, it would be qualifying it as “non-indigenous and indigenous” fisheries associations.
That subamendment would be an addition to the language that Mr. Battiste put in dealing with the indigenous knowledge holders, etc.
