This is a situation we haven't come up against and seen since I've taken over the chair. I've turned to our clerks and have been given some direction. The book says it very clearly and tells me what to as the chair. Just for reference, it indicates:
...in casting a vote on a clause of a bill, the Chair would vote in the affirmative and on an amendment or subamendment, the Chair would vote in the negative in order to maintain the status quo and to keep the question open to further amendment....
That's the direction from the book on an amendment to vote in the negative. Therefore, I cast my vote in the negative.
(Amendment negatived: nays 6; yeas 5 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
At this point in time, would the committee be willing to...? How much discussion do we think we need on CPC-8 and CPC-9? On CPC-10, there is a bit of an issue related to CPC-8 and CPC-9. There's an issue with CPC-10 we can deal with that could create some inconsistencies in terminology, but the main discussion right now would be on CPC-8 and CPC-9.
I'm turning to the committee about timing. Do we have agreement to try to get through this discussion, or do we think we're going to need a lot more time to have the discussion on CPC-8 and CPC-9?
Mr. Battiste, I'll go to you first.