Abrogation. Thank you. I appreciate the help.
I imagine that would leave you feeling pretty angry with the world and your government and your justice system.
Given that my motion, Chair, speaks to travel, I thought what I might do is enlighten the committee on exactly how my motion can work, give an example of why it's relevant, and why it's not in any way out of order or to be considered anything other than a legitimate means of looking at this bill.
The government introduced Bill C-15. I'm raising this, Chair, because I am showing that my motion is reasonable, and I am showing that within this year, in the last couple of months, this Parliament has already approved exactly what I'm asking for in my motion. The relevancy is clear.
There is government bill C-15, An Act to replace the Northwest Territories Act to implement certain provisions of the Northwest Territories Lands and Resources Devolution Agreement and to repeal or make amendments to the Territorial Lands Act, the Northwest Territories Waters Act, the Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act, other Acts and certain orders and regulations. The short title of that bill is the Northwest Territories Devolution Act.
On December 3, 2013, the Minister of Aboriginal and Northern Affairs introduced Bill C-15, An Act to replace the Northwest Territories Act to implement certain provisions of the Northwest Territories Lands and Resources Devolution Agreement and to repeal or make amendments to the Territorial Lands Act, the Northwest Territories Waters Act, the Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act, other Acts and certain orders and regulations in the House of Commons, and it was given first reading.
What's interesting is that at various times the government has said about our motion that committees don't travel on bills, that committees travel on studies. For the most part, that is accurate—for the most part. Committees of the House of Commons don't travel as much as I was accustomed to do at Queen's Park, where committees, at least in my day—