Evidence of meeting #44 for Indigenous and Northern Affairs in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was amendment.
A video is available from Parliament.
12:25 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Marc Garneau
Sure:
In the case of a bill that has been referred to a committee after second reading, a substantive amendment to the preamble is admissible only if it is rendered necessary by amendments made to the bill.
If we had put stuff in the bill, then we could backfit. That's why we look at the preamble at the end.
Go ahead, Mr. Battiste.
12:25 p.m.
Liberal
Jaime Battiste Liberal Sydney—Victoria, NS
I'm apologizing ahead of time, Mr. Chair, for having to do this, but we don't necessarily agree with the learned advice you have received on this and we're challenging that ruling.
12:25 p.m.
Voices
Oh, oh!
12:25 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Marc Garneau
You've challenged me before, by the way.
What do you propose? Do you want to vote on the changed one?
12:25 p.m.
The Clerk of the Committee Ms. Vanessa Davies
Mr. Chair, the vote is on whether the chair's decision will be sustained.
12:25 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Marc Garneau
Okay.
Is the chair's ruling on inadmissibility sustained? Let's record it.
12:25 p.m.
The Clerk
If you want to support the chair, you vote “yea”. If you don't, you vote “nay”.
12:25 p.m.
Liberal
Jaime Battiste Liberal Sydney—Victoria, NS
What we're trying to get at with this challenge is that this clause that we've all agreed to is admissible.
12:25 p.m.
The Clerk
That's right.
12:25 p.m.
Liberal
Jaime Battiste Liberal Sydney—Victoria, NS
That's what we're challenging. We would like to see it admissible as a grammatical change.
December 5th, 2022 / 12:25 p.m.
The Clerk
That would be a secondary vote. Right now, you're challenging the chair's decision.
In a challenge to the chair, if you would like the chair's decision to be sustained, you vote “yea”, and if you would not, you vote “nay”.
(Ruling of the chair overturned: nays 11; yeas 0)
12:25 p.m.
Some hon. members
Oh, oh!
12:25 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Marc Garneau
With that, is there now a motion to propose with respect to this issue?
12:30 p.m.
Liberal
Jaime Battiste Liberal Sydney—Victoria, NS
We would like to move that the line we deem a grammatical change be admissible.
12:30 p.m.
Liberal
12:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Marc Garneau
Thank you for your patience.
On the business of the change you're proposing.... If, of course, you vote to do it, it will be done. However, I should tell you it is highly likely—in fact, it's inevitable—that it will have to go back to the Senate, whether you call it “grammatical” or not. That's the advice I'm being told. It is what it is, of course, but if you want it that way, I don't know if you'll make the January 4 deadline. That's beyond my pay grade.
You can vote on it. If it doesn't get back to the Senate in time, that's just the way it is.
First of all, let's take the vote, unless you're proposing....
12:35 p.m.
NDP
Lori Idlout NDP Nunavut, NU
I feel as if I need to clarify.
As much as I struggle with what's going on—seeing the way the bill is written right now, and generalizing all indigenous women who use ribbon skirts—it's such a small bill and it's so important to this family. I don't know whether we need to waste so much time on this.
I don't know what the process is after it leaves here if we do make those changes, and how long it would take the Senate to have their debate. It doesn't seem as if it's that necessary to use up all this time on something that, on January 4.... We could always later clarify through other means.
I like the senator's suggestion about.... What was it? Was it an observance, or something? Can you clarify that?
12:35 p.m.
Liberal
12:35 p.m.
NDP
Lori Idlout NDP Nunavut, NU
Could we hear from the clerk about this observation, and how it works? That way, if it is an observation, perhaps it doesn't need to be an amendment that wastes more debate time.
12:35 p.m.
The Clerk
The clause-by-clause process is a separate process from the observation process. Once the clause-by-clause process is done, we adopt the bill with or without amendments, and then, if it's the will of the committee, the committee could introduce another report subsequent to the bill being adopted in which there would be an observation that could contain the wording of the amendment. My understanding through our discussions earlier is that the Senate did the same on this bill, and the House committee would be able to do the same on their end as well.
12:35 p.m.
Conservative
Bob Zimmer Conservative Prince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies, BC
Respecting Ms. Idlout and her intent to recognize Inuit and Innu women and indigenous women as well, respecting everybody, I think I would support her direction and come together as a committee to hopefully get some unanimous support for it.
Thanks.
12:35 p.m.
Bloc
Marilène Gill Bloc Manicouagan, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
In the Bloc Québécois, we feel the same. I support Ms. Idlout's amendment and the other amendment clarifying that ribbon skirts are not significant to all indigenous women.
Of course, we don't want to delay the process to the point that we won't be able to mark the day on January 4. If Ms. Idlout agrees, we could submit a report and do it that way, since it's about being inclusive, not excluding anyone and respecting every culture and the differences.
That said, I will go with whatever the committee decides. Thank you.