Evidence of meeting #35 for Procedure and House Affairs in the 39th 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.
1:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Goodyear
That's the reason for the addition of the words “piece of identification”, which certainly clarifies that it's one piece of the two that are required.
1:05 p.m.
Liberal
Marcel Proulx Liberal Hull—Aylmer, QC
I'm curious, because when witnesses were here, it was mentioned that they had very limited access to pieces of identification, so if we limit this to mean it is one of the two required, what could the second one be?
1:05 p.m.
A voice
It could be a utility bill.
1:05 p.m.
Conservative
Tom Lukiwski Conservative Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, SK
This would be the proof of identity, and then they have a utility bill or something else that shows an address.
1:05 p.m.
Liberal
Marcel Proulx Liberal Hull—Aylmer, QC
Okay. Regardless of the comment by Mr. McDougall that this is already understood to be part of the bill, I think we'd be safer to have suspenders and belt so that Mr. Kingsley doesn't decide that the pants should be on the ground.
1:05 p.m.
Conservative
1:05 p.m.
Some hon. members
Oh, oh!
1:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Goodyear
Thank you, Madam Redman; I appreciate the protection.
I have one question. I think the answer's fairly clear, but if in fact the Indian card has a photo ID on it--and it is my understanding from the minister that at some point in the near future cards will be issued--the card could end up being the one and only piece of identification required, because it would have photo ID on it. Am I mistaken in that? Could I address the panel to clarify that?
1:05 p.m.
Director of Operations, Legislation and House Planning, Privy Council Office
It would also have to have the address of the person on it.
1:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Goodyear
Correct, and then it could be just one. All right.
Is there any further discussion on that? I'll call the question, then, colleagues, on the subamendment. Shall we try to read it one more time?
We'll read the subamendment and then we'll call the question.
December 12th, 2006 / 1:05 p.m.
Joann Garbig Procedural Clerk
With the subamendment incorporated, then?
1:05 p.m.
Procedural Clerk
It reads: That Bill C-31, in clause 21, be amended by adding after line 24 on page 8 the following:
(2.2) For the purposes of paragraph 2(b), a document issued by the Government of Canada that certifies that a person is registered as an Indian under the Indian Act constitutes an authorized piece of identification.
That's it?
1:05 p.m.
Conservative
1:05 p.m.
Liberal
Marcel Proulx Liberal Hull—Aylmer, QC
What comes through on the interpretation and what's being put in the bill are two different things.
1:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Goodyear
I'm going to accept that. Can we have this read in French?
I'm being told that we're going to have it professionally translated appropriately by a legislative translator afterwards. I'm not 100% comfortable that solves your problem, Mr. Proulx.
1:10 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Goodyear
I'm going to take a moment here to consult and see how we can solve this problem for you.
Colleagues, thank you very much for your indulgence.
I would remind members that ultimately the amendment is carried in one language, but I'm comfortable doing this. We'll ask our assistant to read it in French now.
1:10 p.m.
Procedural Clerk
Thank you.
That Bill C-31, in clause 21, be amended by adding after line 24 on page 8 the following:
(2.2) For the purposes of paragraph 2(b), a document issued by the Government of Canada that certifies that a person is registered as an Indian under the Indian Act constitutes an authorized piece of identification.
1:10 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Goodyear
Everybody is happy. Thank you very much.
Madam Redman, are you comfortable accepting the friendly amendment to your amendment?
