Thank you, Ms. Idlout.
I have some thoughts on this that I would like to share. This is a ruling from the chair.
Subclause 7(1) of the bill provides that, if there are inconsistencies or conflicts between the treaty and an act of Parliament, the provisions of the treaty will prevail insofar as those inconsistencies or conflicts are concerned. The amendment adds that, in the event of inconsistencies or conflicts with an indigenous right or title, the right or title will also prevail.
As House of Commons Procedure and Practice, third edition, states on page 770, “An amendment to a bill that was referred to a committee after second reading is out of order if it is beyond the scope and principle of the bill.”
In the opinion of the chair, the aforementioned element is a new concept that is beyond the scope of the bill. Therefore, I rule this amendment inadmissible.
Shall clause 7 carry?