I call this meeting to order.
Welcome to meeting number 125 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Indigenous and Northern Affairs.
As always, I want to start by recognizing that we are meeting on the ancestral and unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe people and by expressing gratitude that we're able to do the important work of this committee on lands they've stewarded since time immemorial.
Pursuant to the order of reference of Wednesday, June 19, 2024, the committee is commencing clause-by-clause consideration of Bill S-16, an act respecting the recognition of the Haida Nation and the Council of the Haida Nation.
We do have officials in attendance today to answer questions from committee members, if there are any.
We have in person Mr. Paul Dyck, the federal negotiations manager. Joining by video conference—very early in the morning, as they're joining from British Columbia—we have Angela Bate, director general; Julia Marcoux, acting senior director, negotiations west; and Bruce Hamilton, general counsel, Department of Justice.
I want to thank all of our witnesses for being here in person and virtually, especially with the early hours.
I would like to provide members of the committee with a few comments on how the committee will proceed with the clause-by-clause consideration of Bill S-16.
As the name indicates, this is an examination of all of the clauses in the order in which they appear in the bill. I will call each clause successively, and each clause is subject to debate and a vote. Although no amendments were submitted in advance to the clerk, members may propose amendments and subamendments from the floor to the clause in question, provided that they are submitted in writing.
If a member wishes to move an amendment or a subamendment, I will recognize the member who is willing to move it, who may explain it. There is no need for a seconder to move an amendment. Once the amendment is moved, you will need unanimous consent to withdraw it.
In addition to having to be properly drafted in a legal sense, amendments must also be procedurally admissible, and the chair may be called upon to rule amendments inadmissible if they go against the principle of the bill or beyond the scope of the bill, both of which were adopted by the House when it agreed to the bill at second reading, or if they offend the financial prerogative of the Crown.
During debate on an amendment, members are permitted to move subamendments. Approval from the mover of the amendment is not required.
Only one subamendment may be considered at a time, and that subamendment cannot be amended. Once a subamendment is moved to an amendment, it is voted on first. Then another subamendment may be moved, or the committee may consider the main amendment and vote on it.
Once every clause has been voted upon, the committee will vote on the title and the bill itself. The committee will have to order the chair to report the bill to the House, and that report contains only the text of any adopted amendments, as well as the indication of any deleted clauses.
Finally, if members have any questions regarding the procedural admissibility of amendments, the legislative clerks to my right are here to assist the committee. However, they are not legal drafters. Should members require assistance with drafting an amendment or a subamendment, they must contact the legislative counsel.
I want to thank members for their attention and I wish everyone a productive clause-by-clause consideration of Bill S-16.
With that, unless there are any questions, why don't we get right into it?
