Health Committee on May 27th, 2024

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

Very clearly, the motion of instruction gives you the authority to move through each of the amendments. I don't think it will take very long.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Right.

Shall CPC-13 carry?

[Stephen Ellis, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester, NS]

I request a recorded division, please, Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

We'll have a recorded division on CPC-13.

(Amendment negatived: nays 7; yeas 4 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

Shall CPC-14 carry?

[Stephen Ellis, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester, NS]

I request a recorded division, Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Madam Clerk, we will have a recorded division on CPC-14, please.

(Amendment negatived: nays 6; yeas 5 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

[Stephen Ellis, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester, NS]

Excuse me, Chair. With unanimous consent, I will withdraw CPC-15 and CPC-16.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you. We'll get to it in a minute, but I appreciate that. Hold that thought.

(Clause 4 agreed to on division)

(On clause 5)

Dr. Ellis wishes to withdraw CPC-15 and CPC-16.

Do we have unanimous consent for CPC-15 to be withdrawn?

I see unanimous consent.

(Amendment withdrawn)

Do we have unanimous consent for CPC-16?

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

No, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

CPC-16 is not withdrawn.

Shall CPC-16 carry?

Would we like a show of hands on CPC-16?

All those in favour of CPC-16, please raise your hands.

(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])

Shall CPC-17 carry?

[Stephen Ellis, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester, NS]

I request a recorded division, please, Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

We'll have a recorded division on CPC-17, please, Madam Clerk.

(Amendment negatived: nays 7; yeas 4 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Shall clause 5 carry?

(Clause 5 agreed to on division)

We're on new clause 5.1. That is the subject of CPC-18. Shall CPC-18 carry?

[Stephen Ellis, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester, NS]

I request a recorded division, please.

(Amendment negatived: nays 7; yeas 4)

(On clause 6)

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

That brings us to CPC-19.

Shall CPC-19 carry?

[Laila Goodridge, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Cold Lake, AB]

I request a recorded division.

(Amendment agreed to: yeas 11; nays 0 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

That brings us to CPC-20.

Bill C-64, an act respecting pharmacare, authorizes the Minister of Health to make payments to a province or territory, if an agreement has been entered into with that province or territory, in order to increase any existing public pharmacare coverage. The amendment seeks to broaden those payments to provide Canadians with public pharmacare coverage, which would have the effect of extending payments to a new group of Canadians not already covered by the royal recommendation.

As House of Commons Procedure and Practice, third edition, states on page 772:

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.

In the opinion of the chair, the amendment proposes a new scheme, which would impose a charge on the public treasury. I therefore rule this amendment inadmissible.

That brings us to CPC-21. This is going to sound familiar to you.

Bill C-64, an act respecting pharmacare, authorizes the Minister of Health to make payments to a province or territory if an agreement has been entered into with that province or territory. The amendment provides for payments from the minister to the province or territory, even if no agreement has been entered into.

As House of Commons Procedure and Practice, third edition, states on page 772:

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.

In the opinion of the chair, the amendment seeks to alter the terms and conditions of the royal recommendation and could impose a new charge on the public treasury. Therefore, I rule the amendment inadmissible.

That brings us to CPC-22. Shall CPC-22 carry?

[Stephen Ellis, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester, NS]

I request a recorded division, please.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

We'll have a recorded division on CPC-22, please.

(Amendment negatived: nays 6; yeas 5 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

CPC-22 is defeated.

The next amendment is BQ-1.

Bill C-64, An Act respecting pharmacare, authorizes the Minister of Health to make payments to a province or territory if an agreement has been entered into with that province or territory. The amendment provides for payments from the minister to the province or territory, even if no agreement has been entered into. House of Commons Procedure and Practice, third edition, page 772, states, “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.”

In the opinion of the chair, the amendment seeks to alter the terms and conditions of the royal recommendation and could impose a new charge on the public treasury. Therefore, I rule this amendment inadmissible.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Mr. Chair, I challenge your ruling.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Okay.

Shall the ruling of the chair be sustained?

We'll have a recorded division on that, I presume.

(Ruling of the chair sustained: yeas 6; nays 5)

That brings us to clause 6. Clause 6 has been amended by the unanimous vote on CPC-19.

Shall clause 6 as amended carry?

[Some hon. members]

On division.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

(Clause 6 as amended agreed to on division).

(On clause 7)

Since NDP-1 was moved, CPC-23 cannot be voted on as it is identical to NDP-1.

We are now on NDP-1. Shall NDP-1 carry? Do we have unanimous support for NDP-1?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

That takes us to CPC-24.

Shall CPC-24 carry?