Evidence of meeting #3 for Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities in the 43rd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was ministers.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC
So we withdraw the first amendment and take the second one.
Liberal
February 27th, 2020 / 4:50 p.m.
Conservative
Bloc
Louise Chabot Bloc Thérèse-De Blainville, QC
The first part is no longer needed. The new format for the meeting includes the Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Disability Inclusion, and the Minister of Labour, with their mandate letters and the estimates. If we add the main estimates, will two hours be enough?
Bloc
Louise Chabot Bloc Thérèse-De Blainville, QC
We are adding the budget and taking out the first part.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sean Casey
The clerk has suggested to me a way out of this—namely, that a further amendment be moved that deletes all of the words after “that” and adopts Mr. Housefather's wording, followed by Mr. Vaughan's wording.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sean Casey
That's not what the clerk suggested. That's what I thought I heard.
Mr. Albas.
Conservative
Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC
Rather than eating ourselves up here, can we not just vote on Mr. Vaughan's amendment and clear that, so that we're there? Then, if someone else wants to move further, that will make it easier.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sean Casey
Yes. Okay.
We have an amendment to the motion, proposed by Mr. Vaughan, which is in order. That amendment is to delete the words “for one hour per minister to explain their mandate letters” and to replace them with these: “and the Minister of Family, Children and Social Development appear with the Minister of Seniors on main estimates and mandate letters for two hours, and that the Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and the Inclusion of Persons with Disabilities....”
“Inclusion of Persons with Disabilities” is not the right term.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sean Casey
Okay...“and Disability Inclusion appear with the Minister of Labour at a different meeting on main estimates and mandate letters for two hours.” That is the amendment to the motion.
Is there further debate on the amendment?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sean Casey
We'll vote on the amendment.
(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Yes, Mr. Albas.
Conservative
Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC
Mr. Chair, I would like to make an amendment and call it the “Housefather clause”.
Conservative
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sean Casey
Excellent timing and intervention.
Go ahead, Mr. Housefather. Help us through the wording of the Housefather clause.
Liberal
Anthony Housefather Liberal Mount Royal, QC
Mr. Chair, we've adopted something that I think should just be adopted at this point. I don't think we need to do anything more.
Conservative
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sean Casey
The clerk has suggested an elegant way out of this. Given what Mr. Housefather just said and what the clerk has whispered in my ear, I suggest that we now proceed to debate and vote on the main motion, and that your chair would accept a motion to instruct us to make whatever grammatical or non-substantive changes to the motion are necessary to clarify its intent. Then I think we'll get there.
Is there any debate on the main motion as amended?
(Motion as amended agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Mr. Albas.
Conservative
Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC
Mr. Chair, if you find this in order, I will make the motion that in regard to the previous motion, you and the clerk be allowed to make any clerical or grammatical changes that do not materially affect the motion itself.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sean Casey
Thank you, Mr. Albas.
Is there any discussion on that?
(Motion agreed to)
Thanks for getting us through that.
Is there any further business?
Mr. Vaughan.
