Health Committee on Feb. 9th, 2017

[Miriam Brouillet]

Thank you for your question.

I think, as I mentioned before, that the power that is conferred to the minister under subsection 56.1(1) is a broad power, and she's required to make her decision in light of the medical purpose. If there is a medical purpose, she has the power to use this exemption power.

Further, the minister is required to balance two elements, public health and public safety, in light of the different factors that the Supreme Court laid out. Once she is convinced that there is a medical purpose and that those two elements are balanced, the minister may grant an exemption from provisions of the CDSA. Therefore, that power to act rapidly exists currently under the provision as presented in Bill C-37.

[John Oliver, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

That's my understanding as well. We don't need this amendment, because the minister already has those authorities and powers.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bill Casey]

Seeing no more speakers, Mr. Davies, I believe you have about three seconds. You don't even have that, but go ahead.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

I have a quick question. I'm curious where the source of.... I think it's the second or third time you've referred to the requirement to balance public safety. Is that in the legislation? Where do you get the public safety requirement from, or is that just your general description word?

[Miriam Brouillet]

Thank you for your—

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

I have a point of order.

You've been very generous. I think you've given Mr. Davies twice the amount of time that was allocated and agreed to. The NDP were very clear that they did support closure on this matter in the House. They supported the motion that was brought forth by Mr. Oliver to limit debate. For him to continue is, I think, just being unreasonable to the rest of the people around the table.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bill Casey]

Motion sustained.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Can I just speak out briefly, Mr. Chair?

I must say that at the beginning of this meeting when we said that we would extend our time limit on clause 42, I assumed that included clause 42.1, particularly because the binder we were given talked about clauses 42, then 43 and 44.

The only amendments I have are on clauses 42 and 42.1. I did not understand that.... Nobody said—

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

I have a point of order—

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

I have the floor right now, please.

Nobody said you can have more time on clause 42 but not on clause 42.1. I assumed that the purpose of that was so we would have time to discuss our amendments.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bill Casey]

It doesn't matter: either way, you're over. You're over 10 minutes. We're going to close the debate.

Seeing no more debate and no more questions, shall amendment NDP-3 carry?

(Amendment negatived)

I see no amendments to clauses 43 to 73, so shall clauses 43 to 73 inclusive carry?

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Could I just have a moment, please?

[The Chair, Liberal, Bill Casey]

Yes.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Can I just take two minutes? I have two other amendments and I'm not sure where they go. We were asked to fit them in, so before we jump to that, I want to make sure that I'm not missing....

Mr. Chairman, I have good news and bad news. The good news is that I have only one more amendment, and it's a very short one. I'll just describe it briefly.

It's to repeal section 36 of the Narcotic Control Regulations. As you may have heard, there are stakeholders who suggest that over-the-counter medication that has codeine in it should be behind the counter, codeine being an opioid. That's what this amendment would do.

I was going to move that from the floor. What I was told at the beginning of the meeting was that I'd have to find the right place in the bill to put it. I thought it could be anywhere, tacked on the end, but I'm now advised that clause 40 would be the appropriate place in the bill for such an amendment, if we did it. In order to move the amendment, I would have to ask for unanimous consent to reopen clause 40 to be able to consider that amendment. It's just a technicality as to where the amendment would have to go.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bill Casey]

Does Mr. Davies have unanimous consent to reopen clause 40?

[An hon. member]

No.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bill Casey]

There is no unanimous consent. Sorry, Mr. Davies.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

That's okay. In that case, I will move that the amendment be considered as a clause at the end of the bill.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bill Casey]

Okay.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Perhaps I could ask the legislative clerks or counsel to determine if there's another place in the bill. I'm sure there's not just one place in the bill that it could be. I'd ask them to look and see if there's another part of the bill where it could validly be placed without jeopardizing the legislative statutes of Canada.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bill Casey]

We'll have to suspend for a few minutes while counsel digs.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bill Casey]

Mr. Davies, legal counsel and the legislative clerks have gone through this, and I'm advised that the only place that this fits in the bill is clause 40.

I have a quote here: “An amendment is out of order if it is moved at the wrong place in the bill.”

Therefore, it would be out of order to put it somewhere else. I'm sorry. We're not trying to stop it, but that's the way it is.

(Clauses 43 to 73 inclusive agreed to)

(Schedules 1 and 2 agreed to)

(Preamble agreed to)

(Title agreed to)

(Bill as amended agreed to)

Shall I report the bill, as amended, to the House?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bill Casey]

Shall the committee order a reprint of the bill?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.