Evidence of meeting #55 for Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was chair.
A recording is available from Parliament.
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Dean Allison
Sorry, but we have a point of order, sir.
Mr. Lessard, followed by Madame Lavallée.
5:05 p.m.
Bloc
Yves Lessard Bloc Chambly—Borduas, QC
I'd like to have some clarification, Mr. Chair.
Earlier, when I wanted to introduce my motion, you said that we hadn't disposed of clause 1, and we still haven't disposed of it. I don't even know what happened to clause 1. Did it carry? Did we vote on clause 1?
Once we know what happened to clause 1, we can introduce our motion. It seems to me that's what you said earlier.
What happened to clause 1, Mr. Chair?
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Dean Allison
Thank you, Mr. Lessard.
What we have before us, as I know you're aware, is clause 1 as it was written in the original bill. There were two new clauses proposed by the Liberals. The first clause we just dealt with. What would happen next is that there would be a new motion put forward for clause 2, still dealing with the new amendment or the new clause 2—this is getting confusing—on the first clause.
Because we were in between motions, a new motion can be introduced. Pages 1 and 2 were the Liberal clause 1 and pages 3 and 4 are the new clause 2 for clause 1.
If you'd like to continue, I have Mr. Lessard, I have Madame Lavallée, and then I have Ms. Davies.
5:05 p.m.
Bloc
Yves Lessard Bloc Chambly—Borduas, QC
I don't want to put you in a difficult position, Mr. Chair; I simply want to understand.
If there is no amendment to clause 1... We're still talking about the bill, of course. But I believe that, in order to dispose of clause 1, we have to examine clause 2. Is that correct?
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Dean Allison
No, we're still dealing with a new motion for clause 1. Clause 1 was withdrawn and there was an additional new amendment that the Liberals put forward. That motion has not been read in, but it is in the order of the bill in terms of how we move forward.
5:05 p.m.
Bloc
Yves Lessard Bloc Chambly—Borduas, QC
That means that my colleague Mr. Lake will have to debate the Liberal amendment to clause 1. Do we understand each other?
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Dean Allison
Thank you, Mr. Lessard.
I'm informed that the second motion may not be moved until “some immediate proceeding or item of business has been considered”. We did consider the first clause. Once the first clause was considered and withdrawn, then before the motion for the second clause, a new motion can be introduced. That's where we are right now.
Monsieur Lessard, then Madame Lavallée, and then Ms. Davies.
5:10 p.m.
Bloc
Yves Lessard Bloc Chambly—Borduas, QC
If I understand correctly, there isn't a new amendment to clause 1. Is that correct?
If there isn't a new amendment to clause 1, do we consider it carried as is, or does there have to be a vote?
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Dean Allison
No, there is an additional new amendment to clause 1. It's on pages 3 and 4 of your committee-stage report.
5:10 p.m.
Bloc
Yves Lessard Bloc Chambly—Borduas, QC
Does the new amendment apply to clause 1? What is it? That's the one we have to talk about. If I understand correctly, this new clause comes from the Liberal Party. If it comes from the Liberal Party, what is it? It can't be a new amendment from Mr. Lake.
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Dean Allison
We have a new motion on the floor from Mr. Lake, in between motions on the new clause 1 and the new clause 2 from the Liberals. Because the second clause has not been moved, that can happen. We still are on clause 1 and we are able to still debate this.
Madame Lavallée, then Madame Davies.
5:10 p.m.
Bloc
Carole Lavallée Bloc Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC
I understand nothing here, Mr. Chair. And yet I usually understand quickly.
You say that clause 1 hasn't carried yet and that Mr. Lake is introducing a new motion on clause 1. Is that in fact what you're telling me?
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Dean Allison
No, he has not moved a new motion on clause 1. He has moved a new motion.
5:10 p.m.
Bloc
Carole Lavallée Bloc Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC
A new motion concerning the agenda? You can't accept that new motion, Mr. Chair. That can't be. We haven't completed consideration of clause 1.
If you decide to let him speak to his motion, we'll challenge your decision. We won't have any choice.
It's Valentine's Day. I like you a lot, and I was even getting ready to kiss you before leaving...
5:10 p.m.
NDP
Libby Davies NDP Vancouver East, BC
I don't know if anybody else feels like we're in the twilight zone or something.
Mr. Chairman, I do feel you're contradicting yourself in terms of what you said earlier. When we first started on this point, Mr. Lake tried to introduce his motion. Mr. Lessard then tried to introduce his motion to continue the business. My recollection is that you clearly said that could not be done until clause 1 was completed, and then you would entertain another motion. You did not say that in the middle of the debate on clause 1, when we had disposed of one amendment and were about to begin another amendment, that you could then introduce a completely different motion. You said that at the conclusion of clause 1 and before we got to clause 2, another motion would be permissible.
I do believe you've contradicted yourself, because we're still in the middle of clause 1. We haven't yet voted on it. Based on what you said earlier to us, I do believe that only when we have voted on it can you then entertain whoever gets to the mike first—either Mr. Lake or Monsieur Lessard—with some other kind of motion.
But we're still on clause 1. You should not be allowing some motion that interrupts the flow of us continuing with clause 1. I feel you've contradicted yourself.
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Dean Allison
I apologize if I have contradicted myself, but I am just going by Marleau and Montpetit. It indicates that if there is a motion that is defeated, then it can proceed after some immediate proceeding or item of business has been considered.
Once again, one of the things we considered was the new clause 1, so I may stand corrected in terms of what was said.
Mr. Savage.
February 14th, 2007 / 5:15 p.m.
Liberal
Michael Savage Liberal Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS
Thank you, Chair.
Notwithstanding the enormous progress that we've made so far in the meeting, what is the issue? I would certainly suggest that we should finish clause 1 before we go to Mr. Lake's amendment. I have no idea what legal weight that carries, but in the interest of finishing this any time in the near future, it seems to me that we should deal with clause 1 and then go to Mr. Lake's amendment.
5:15 p.m.
Bloc
Carole Lavallée Bloc Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC
Pardon me, Mr. Chair. According to Standing Order 62 of the House of Commons, before moving on to Mr. Lake's motion, we'll have to consider the motion by Mr. Lessard, who raised his hand first.
