Evidence of meeting #29 for Indigenous and Northern Affairs in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was chair.
A video is available from Parliament.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bob Bratina
The thing I'm struggling with in terms of the chair's responsibilities is whether the absence of this amendment will change in a substantive way, offset the intention, or otherwise change the direction of the bill as is worded in the preamble.
I'd like to hear a comment from someone.
Mr. Anandasangaree, I know we're trying to improve the bill and make the best bill possible, but in terms of our procedures as outlined in the parliamentary guide, how do I accommodate that today?
Liberal
Gary Anandasangaree Liberal Scarborough—Rouge Park, ON
To be clear, Mr. Chair, my understanding of the parliamentary rules, as per chapter 16, is that amendments at this clause-by-clause stage of the bill that clarify the preamble are completely permissible. That is what we're relying on to bring this forward. I recognize the difficulty you're having with this, but it is quite clear in the rules.
I would invite you to rule on it, and then we can proceed. There are no hard feelings. If you're not ruling in favour, then we will call for a vote and we can proceed.
I do recognize the work that everybody has put in. I think at this point we're prepared to move forward.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bob Bratina
I'm going to ask for one final comment from the legislative staff with regard to preambles and the bodies of bills.
Legislative Clerk
If I may, Mr. Chair, you have heard the representation on both sides. You have the authority to say whether it's admissible or not. If some members disagree with your decision, they have the possibility to challenge your decision to achieve what they want. You have the authority to make the ruling one way or the other. You have received information on both sides and you can decide on this.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bob Bratina
That clears up for me a little bit of my concern with regard to precedent and so on.
Madame Gill, I'll ask you to comment, and then we'll go to a vote.
Bloc
Marilène Gill Bloc Manicouagan, QC
Of course, Mr. Chair. I would have liked further discussion of the question.
I agree on the substance, and I wanted to mention it to Ms. Gazan, among others. At the same time, I had trouble believing that there was a double standard and that it was considered acceptable. As Mr. Anandasangaree mentioned twice in reference to chapter 16 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice, there is discussion of clarifications to amend the bill. I therefore consider that for my amendment, it's exactly the same thing. That, in my opinion, would make it a double standard, or at least inconsistent. I wanted to mention this before we vote.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bob Bratina
Thank you, Madame Gill.
In view of the discussions that we had previously, I'm going to rule that the matter, based on the comments that I made, is inadmissible. If someone would like to challenge the chair, then we'll follow through with that procedure.
I will rule on the basis of the previous discussions, on the basis of my previous ruling with regard to admissibility.
Go ahead, Mr. Anandasangaree.
Liberal
Gary Anandasangaree Liberal Scarborough—Rouge Park, ON
You are suggesting that this is not admissible, Mr. Chair. Is that what I'm...?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bob Bratina
In view of the discussions and the understanding that I had earlier, and the ruling that I had made, I want to be consistent, as Madame Gill pointed out, so that would be my ruling.
Liberal
Gary Anandasangaree Liberal Scarborough—Rouge Park, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
With the greatest respect, I would like to challenge that ruling, and I made submissions on this earlier. I believe that this is non-debatable; it goes to a vote.
The Clerk
Yes, Mr. Chair.
The vote is on the motion “Shall the ruling of the chair be sustained?”, meaning “Shall the ruling of the chair be upheld?”
Mr. Chair, the result is yeas, 5; nays, 5.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bob Bratina
I'm going to reconvene. The meeting is back in session.
We had a split. I believe that on a 5-5 tie, anyone wishing to change their vote would require unanimous consent, and I'm not sensing that there would be unanimous consent on that.
I made my decision on principle. If the issue is my vote on this matter, I maintain my position that.... I vote to sustain the position.
Go ahead, Mr. Anandasangaree.
Liberal
Gary Anandasangaree Liberal Scarborough—Rouge Park, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
With the indulgence of the members, since I know this could be frustrating, I would like to introduce another amendment. This will be our last amendment with respect to the clause.
Liberal
Gary Anandasangaree Liberal Scarborough—Rouge Park, ON
This is with respect to the same clause. The amendment will read:
Whereas the protection of Aboriginal and treaty rights — recognized and affirmed by section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982 — is an underlying principle and value of the Constitution of Canada, and the Canadian courts have stated that such rights are not frozen and are capable of evolution and growth;
Legislative Clerk
Mr. Chair, if I may, can Mr. Anandasangaree indicate where exactly in the preamble this would go, and if he has the written version of the amendment, could he send it to us?
Liberal
Gary Anandasangaree Liberal Scarborough—Rouge Park, ON
The written version is on its way. It is with respect to line 19 in the preamble.
Conservative
Jamie Schmale Conservative Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON
Chair, I have a question for the clerk, if it's possible.
Conservative
Jamie Schmale Conservative Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON
Is this wording not relatively the same as the previous motion that was deemed inadmissible?