Evidence of meeting #74 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 chairman.
A recording is available from Parliament.
5:25 p.m.
Liberal
Michael Savage Liberal Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS
In my riding, every year I know who applies and who didn't before. That was the—
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB
Okay. But if it's not an issue, then it won't be an issue, but perhaps you can add it.
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Dean Allison
Okay, so do I have Mr. Martin? This is a comment on the amendment? I've still got your name down for the original motion.
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
5:25 p.m.
NDP
Tony Martin NDP Sault Ste. Marie, ON
Yes--to ask, for 20 and 21, that this report come back to this committee by June 1.
5:25 p.m.
Liberal
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
Michael Chong Conservative Wellington—Halton Hills, ON
A point of order, Mr. Chair, through you to the clerk. Amending a motion requires unanimous consent, does it not?
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Dean Allison
All right.
I've now got a subamendment to the amendment to the motion. The subamendment is that it be reported back by June 1. Okay? So I will now....
Hold on one second.
My mistake: this is another amendment. We need to go back to the one that Mr. Savage has made.
Is there any more discussion on this, in terms of that?
5:30 p.m.
Conservative
5:30 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Dean Allison
Yes. The motion is that the Minister of Human Resources and Social Development furnish the committee with the list of non-profit organizations and private companies that received grants, and those that applied and who were denied, under the Canada Summer Jobs program, by riding, and the amount allocated to each riding in Canada for 2007.
Mr. Brown.
5:30 p.m.
Conservative
Patrick Brown Conservative Barrie, ON
Mr. Allison, do we have any expectations—I'm not sure who would—of the timelines on this, how long this would take the public service or the minister's office to prepare?
5:30 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Dean Allison
That's a good question. I have no idea what kind of work would be required.
Ms. Yelich.
5:30 p.m.
Conservative
Lynne Yelich Conservative Blackstrap, SK
We just agreed with the first two, why couldn't we have done as such? Why put a timeline on it all of a sudden? The minister said he would provide it, and I don't think there's any problem with that.
5:30 p.m.
An hon. member
They both agreed.
5:30 p.m.
Conservative
Lynne Yelich Conservative Blackstrap, SK
We agreed to the original motion. I'd like these subamendments written out so I could read them before we vote on them, because I'm not sure why we would have a subamendment and an amendment to the amendment.
5:30 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Dean Allison
We just have two amendments to the motion. That was my mistake. That wasn't a subamendment.
Mr. Brown.
5:30 p.m.
Conservative
Patrick Brown Conservative Barrie, ON
Mr. Allison, what I suggest, to make this a bit cleaner, because we don't have this in writing right now and there's certainly stuff added on to Mr. Lessard's motion.... I have no problem with Mr. Lessard's motion; I would have happily supported it, but I think we're confusing it a bit at the last minute. I think that's unfortunate, because we heard the minister say here today he is very happy to provide that list.
I understand it's also on the web already, so any information is there. But if we're going to create work that's going to take tons of time, with a convoluted amendment that could keep people away from working on things that are important, like child care, like support for seniors, all the great things we heard about today, it would certainly be disappointing.
I suggest we do this properly, that we get these printed out for the next possible time the committee could look at it. Certainly on numerous occasions we make time available in our schedules to deal with this. I think it would be better to recognize that we have votes tonight and adjourn the meeting, because I'm sure we all have many, many things to say.
I'm sure I'd have more things to say, but recognizing that we have votes, instead of talking about this for half an hour or 45 minutes, which it could take--and we hate to miss our votes--why don't we just move to adjourn and deal with this when we have adequate time?
5:30 p.m.
Conservative
