Evidence of meeting #18 for Industry and Technology in the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was productivity.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Bloc
Gabriel Ste-Marie Bloc Joliette—Manawan, QC
Once you get the wording of the Liberal amendment, will you be able to tell us if you are ruling it in order or if you think it's straying too far from the original motion?
Bloc
Gabriel Ste-Marie Bloc Joliette—Manawan, QC
Once we have the wording of the amendment proposed by the Liberal Party, will you be able to tell us whether, as chair, you are ruling it in order given that it substantially changes the motion as already amended?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ben Carr
To date, I have never been asked to make such a ruling. Is that what you're asking me to do?
Bloc
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ben Carr
So far, it is in order.
Colleagues, just to be really clear, I have Madam Dancho on the motion, followed by Mr. Bardeesy, Madam O'Rourke, Mr. Falk and Mr. Guglielmin.
I'm going to suspend briefly for the purpose of allowing the language to be—
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ben Carr
I see your hand up, as well, Mr. Ste‑Marie. Thank you.
Okay, I'm going to suspend briefly, colleagues.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ben Carr
Colleagues, we are resuming debate.
Everyone should have been provided with a paper copy.
Mr. Ste‑Marie, unfortunately, it is difficult to send you a paper copy because you are in your riding, but you have access to an electronic copy.
Ms. Borrelli, the same goes for you.
Colleagues, the floor belonged to Madame Dancho.
The floor is yours.
Conservative
Raquel Dancho Conservative Kildonan—St. Paul, MB
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I appreciate this opportunity. It is the first opportunity the Conservatives have had to speak to the Liberal amendment from last Wednesday, and I have a number of concerns.
We'll start with the positive. One thing I appreciate is that they brought in steel, aluminum and softwood lumber. As you know, Conservatives have been trying to secure debates in the House of Commons on these things. We successfully secured a take-note debate on softwood lumber. We would love a concurrence debate on that, which, as you know, is more formal. It involves voting and parties taking a position.
We tried to secure an emergency debate on steel and aluminum back on June 4 of this year and on autos on October 20 of this year. Those were both denied, unfortunately, by the Speaker. We really believe that these industries require a fulsome debate in the House of Commons and that members of Parliament from all of those regions should get to weigh in on the impacts the trade war is having, on the critical nature of it and on the need to get good deals on behalf of Canadians.
You would have seen, Mr. Chair, from the original form of our motion, that had it passed, it would have gone to the House and would have likely triggered a concurrence debate—a formal debate where positions need to be taken and a vote needs to be had. Three hours of debate would have been undertaken.
While we appreciate steel, aluminum and softwood lumber being added in, we have very much asked for and would ask for debates on those things, and we would support any motion put forward by the Liberals or ourselves to trigger any debates on that. Because the Liberal amendment fundamentally alters the purpose of our motion, which was to have a concurrence debate in the House, we feel as Conservatives that it is very much out of order and inadmissible.
I'd ask that you make a ruling on that, Mr. Chair.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ben Carr
Thank you, Madame Dancho. I've heard your request. Just provide me with one moment to confer on something with the clerk.
I don't see, in my estimation, that striking out the report to the House fundamentally changes the spirit of the motion. It's my ruling that it's admissible.
Conservative
Raquel Dancho Conservative Kildonan—St. Paul, MB
Mr. Chair, I appreciate that. Respectfully, though, I'll have to formally challenge your ruling on that. Thank you.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ben Carr
Colleagues, for those of you who might be new to this particular process, this is a dilatory motion. In other words, there's no debate; we move immediately.
The question is whether or not the chair's ruling is sustained. Just for clarity, sustained is in the positive, meaning that if you vote yes, you are supporting the chair's ruling, and if you vote no, you're voting to overturn the chair's ruling. That's just so you are aware.
This one's a bit more formal, so I am going to turn to the clerk to call the roll.
(Ruling of the chair overturned: nays 5; yeas 4)
Colleagues, that's democracy in action. The chair's decision has been overturned. Therefore, the debate on the amendment as presented will not continue.
Madam Dancho, the floor is yours.
Conservative
Raquel Dancho Conservative Kildonan—St. Paul, MB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
To clarify what happens next, we resume debate on the motion as amended by the Bloc. Is that correct? I just want to clarify where we're at.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ben Carr
Yes, that is correct, Madam Dancho. We are now resuming debate on the motion as it was amended by the Bloc amendment last week.
Liberal
Karim Bardeesy Liberal Taiaiako'n—Parkdale—High Park, ON
Chair, I'm sorry. I don't know if this is a point of order, but could we get that motion distributed?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ben Carr
That motion has been distributed, Mr. Bardeesy. Everybody should have it from last week. I'm happy to give members an opportunity to review it, if necessary.
I'll give you a minute.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ben Carr
Colleagues, I think everybody has it.
Madam Dancho, was that everything? Okay.
Mr. Bardeesy, are you satisfied?
Liberal
December 1st, 2025 / 12:15 p.m.
Liberal
