Evidence of meeting #10 for Procedure and House Affairs in the 39th Parliament, 2nd 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 p.m.
Bloc
Pierre Paquette Bloc Joliette, QC
Yes. It is simply to be consistent with the fact that clause 8 has been rejected. You will see that it is all the references in clause 8 to subsections 176.6(5), 176.2—all the sections referred to in clause 8, which have been deleted.
1 p.m.
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON
It is a long clause, and I wonder if I can be so bold as to inquire from the officials we have here as to whether it's something that can simply be eliminated, or are there consequences we haven't considered?
1 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Goodyear
Okay, we'll ask our experts to look at clause 12 and consider Mr. Paquette's comments.
December 6th, 2007 / 1 p.m.
Counsel, Legislation and House Planning, Privy Council Office
They were all consequential to the pilot project of--
1 p.m.
Counsel, Legislation and House Planning, Privy Council Office
Yes, all consequential to the pilot project that was negatived.
1 p.m.
Some voices
The pilot project...[Inaudible--Editor]
1 p.m.
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON
Well, yes, but that was a BQ amendment.
1 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Lemieux Conservative Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON
I was going to say I think your point is that the pilot project was never part of the legislation in the first place, so this can't relate to the pilot project because there never was a pilot project.
1 p.m.
Conservative
1 p.m.
Bloc
Pierre Paquette Bloc Joliette, QC
We are not talking about our amendment, BQ-8, we are talking about clause 8 of the bill, which has been rejected.
Accordingly, in clause 12, reference is made to elements that were in clause 8. But because clause 8 no longer exists, obviously, clause 12, which refers only to the elements of clause 8 that have disappeared, cannot stand.
1 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Goodyear
Order, please.
I wouldn't mind hearing the discussion, because I have to make a decision here. It's my feeling, though, that we've heard from the experts and they have told us that this clause is not necessary. It's not necessary and it can be deleted.
However, the chair would prefer we vote it down, for the record. But I'm not telling you what to do, so I will ask if there's any debate.
Please, Mr. Reid.
1 p.m.
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON
I think what he's confusing is the reference to the pilot project. This isn't about the pilot project. It's about clause 8.
1 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Goodyear
So we're good and clear now? Thank you very much, colleagues.
I'll call the question anyway.
(Clause 12 negatived)
(On clause 13--Coming into force)
1 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Goodyear
Colleagues, we have a few minutes left. I would like the indulgence of the committee to try to push forward on this. Is that fair?
Clause 13 has one suggested amendment. If I could ask the Bloc, I'm going to guess that it's under Madame Picard.
1 p.m.
Bloc
Pierre Paquette Bloc Joliette, QC
It says:
13. ... other than section 12 ...
That section no longer exists. So we can't refer to a section that no longer exists. The clause should therefore read as follows:
13. This Act comes into force three months after the day on which it is assented to ...
1 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Goodyear
I have some concerns with this clause. This is Bloc-11. I have some concerns I want to make members aware of, and that is there are some parts of Bill C-31 that are not in place; particularly, the bingo cards issues are not up and running. I wanted to mention that to you.
The amendment is on the floor, and now I'll take discussions.
Mr. Reid and then Mr. Paquette.
1 p.m.
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON
While it's true that those clauses aren't in force, because they all refer back to clause 12 of this bill, which just got defeated, the amendment that Mr. Paquette is proposing doesn't have the procedural concern and problems it would have had, had clause 12 remained in place, and therefore I think it deals with the question we had.
1:05 p.m.
Conservative
1:05 p.m.
Bloc
Pierre Paquette Bloc Joliette, QC
Regarding clause 13, it is simply for consistency that we are proposing to remove the words "other than section 12", because that section no longer exists. Those words would be struck out because clause 12 has been deleted. On the other hand, if there are other problems, we will solve them.
1:05 p.m.
Conservative