Evidence of meeting #70 for Health in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was amendments.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bill Casey
Just going back to my question, are we sitting from 9:00 a.m. until 2:00 p.m., straight through, and then going to question period?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bill Casey
But we are going to attend question period. Then we come back after question period and sit until 6:00 p.m.
That means food, then, isn't that right?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bill Casey
All right. I think we have that clarified. I appreciate everybody's input.
Liberal
John Oliver Liberal Oakville, ON
I'm assuming there's flexibility for the chair to give us proper bio breaks, lunch breaks, and such as we proceed during the day.
Liberal
Conservative
Marilyn Gladu Conservative Sarnia—Lambton, ON
We have to do the subamendment for the October 3 amendment.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bill Casey
All in favour of the October 3 amendment, Mr. Davies' amendment, please signify.
Liberal
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bill Casey
I'm sorry. We have agreed on October 2, but later, after question period.
I didn't mean October 3. I meant adjusting so that October 2 is just a part day, not a whole day.
All in favour of that motion, please signify.
Conservative
Marilyn Gladu Conservative Sarnia—Lambton, ON
The protocol is that when he has made an amendment to say “October 3”, we have to vote on that first. When we turn that down, we can vote on the amended motion that Mr. Oliver has, which says we're going to start right after QP on October 2.
Liberal
NDP
Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC
Mr. Chair, I'll withdraw my amendment. I can tell I don't have the support of the majority, so I'll withdraw the proposed change of date to October 3.
(Amendment withdrawn)
Liberal
John Oliver Liberal Oakville, ON
I have a second motion on Bill C-45.
When we heard from the witnesses, many issues came up that were not necessarily part of Bill C-45, but very impassioned discussion and concerns were raised around them. I was going to move that we request that the analysts draft a short letter, no longer than five pages, to be sent to the Minister of Health.
The letter would summarize the most credible evidence and best advice the committee had received regarding several discrete issues that we believe are important. On the list I had of discrete issues was the need for public health education and an awareness campaign; establishing metrics and baseline measurements to evaluate the success of Bill C-45; collaborative and respectful outreach and support to first nations, Inuit, and Métis communities to ensure appropriate implementation; legalizing alternatives, especially edibles; pardons for those who were charged or convicted of crimes now legalized by Bill C-45; and concerns regarding management of international treaties.
I would move that, but I would be open to adding to that list of issues or shrinking it.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bill Casey
When would we have a crack at the draft letter, at what stage? Would that be in clause-by-clause?
Liberal
John Oliver Liberal Oakville, ON
At some point, we would need to take the time to review the letter.
NDP
Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC
I think it's a good idea, and certainly some of those issues are appropriate to direct the analysts to write on, but some of them are not because they're actually the subject of the bill. You're previewing an outcome prior to the clause-by-clause and amendments.
For instance, on edibles, it's no surprise that I'll be moving amendments on that. I don't think the Liberals want to look as though they're instructing the analysts to write a letter to the minister to study the introduction of edibles into the bill before we've had a chance to do clause-by-clause and entertain the amendments that I'm going to be moving on it, and the same thing for pardons.
On education, on metrics, on outreach to indigenous groups, and on international treaties, I believe those subjects are appropriate right now for the analysts to work on. On public education, metrics, and outreach to first nations, Inuit, and Métis, and then the last one, the management of international treaties, none of those are actually touched by the bill, so I think it's appropriate to start working.
However, we can't anticipate where this committee is not going to pass an amendment. If we actually feel strongly that edibles should be included in the bill, instead of writing the minister, maybe we'll do our job and amend the bill next week or the week after.
NDP
Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC
No, I think it's bad form to instruct the analysts to start writing a letter to the minister on subjects that we have the opportunity to amend at this committee.