Evidence of meeting #58 for Foreign Affairs and International 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.
NDP
Heather McPherson NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
I don't think there's anything right now that we can look at.
NDP
Heather McPherson NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB
Our teams can start working together on that, and maybe later on in this meeting, but at this moment I don't think it makes sense, because we don't have anything.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ali Ehsassi
Is there unanimous consent that we skip over clause 2 and move to the next clause?
We have Mr. Bergeron.
Bloc
Stéphane Bergeron Bloc Montarville, QC
Shouldn't we first vote on whether to overturn your ruling, Mr. Chair?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ali Ehsassi
No, I don't believe so. The clerk has advised that Ms. McPherson did not actually challenge.
Liberal
Rob Oliphant Liberal Don Valley West, ON
I think the wording was a challenge, but if she's saying that she's not challenging it yet, then we have a bit of time.
On this—and I raise a point of order in getting advice and counsel from the legislative clerk with respect to standing—we have an order on the agenda with respect to the amendments that are coming in. Do we need to vote on the actual changing of the agenda to allow those to stand and then to move to another one?
Liberal
Conservative
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
Mr. Chair, I will move CPC-2, which is for new clause 2.1.
Liberal
Rob Oliphant Liberal Don Valley West, ON
Mr. Chair, I would think it would be helpful if we moved CPC-2 after we dealt with all of clause 2 so we understand where we're at with respect to that piece of legislation. I know they're not exactly related, but I think it would be helpful if we moved instead to the second part of the bill and went into CPC-3 and that part. I think that's where we start with the sanctions part.
Conservative
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
Clause 2.1 is not related to clause 2 at all. It's just numbered that way because it comes next. It's in relation to the obligations to respond to a committee report. It's not in any way in relation to the subject matter of clause 2.
I don't really care, but for the sake of argument, it makes sense to go to clause 2.1 if we're going to go in order otherwise.
Bloc
Stéphane Bergeron Bloc Montarville, QC
I'm assuming that Mr. Genuis's motion has indeed been moved and can therefore be debated.
Mr. Chair, I see there's an amending subsection—
Liberal
Rob Oliphant Liberal Don Valley West, ON
Forgive me for interrupting, Mr. Bergeron.
On a point of order, I just want to ensure—it was moved, but I want to make sure that the chair has ruled that amendment CPC-2 is in scope.
Liberal
Rob Oliphant Liberal Don Valley West, ON
No, we can't. We can't, because we have to rule first on whether or not it's in scope before we can debate it.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ali Ehsassi
Absolutely, if that's okay, Mr. Bergeron.
Having reviewed amendment CPC-2 on clause 2 of Bill C-281—