This week, I changed much of the tech behind this site. If you see anything that looks like a bug, please let me know!

Evidence of meeting #52 for Justice and Human Rights in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was information.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Joe Buckle  Director General, Forensic Science and Identification Services, Royal Canadian Mounted Police
Anne-Elizabeth Charland  Officer in Charge, Management Services, Royal Canadian Mounted Police
David Bird  Senior Legal Counsel, Royal Canadian Mounted Police
J. Bowen  Acting Director, Biology Project, Royal Canadian Mounted Police

10:55 a.m.

NDP

Joe Comartin NDP Windsor—Tecumseh, ON

I do not have a copy of that, so I'd appreciate it if somebody would send one.

10:55 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Art Hanger

We'll make sure you get one.

Now to the motion, Monsieur Ménard.

10:55 a.m.

Bloc

Réal Ménard Bloc Hochelaga, QC

Mr. Chairman, I would tend to ask the previous question, considering that at the last meeting, we all gave our views on the matter. If the colleagues wish to vote now, we are prepared to do so and to support Ms. Jennings' amendment, in the spirit of cooperation. I am therefore asking the previous question, if that is in order.

10:55 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Art Hanger

There's still room for debate, Mr. Ménard.

Mr. Moore.

10:55 a.m.

Conservative

Rob Moore Conservative Fundy Royal, NB

I have a couple of points, Mr. Chair.

One, during the course of the witness testimony, there was some discussion--off the record, I would call it--flying back and forth suggesting that we on this side would support Ms. Jennings' motion. That is certainly not the case, considering the preamble. If it was a sincere effort to have our support so that we could have the unanimous vote of committee....

Among other things, I was very clear last week that the government would not support a motion or an amendment to a motion that has such torqued language in the preamble. If anyone doesn't believe that, then they can just reference the discussion we had at the last committee: “Whereas this modified review procedure bears flagrant signs of partisanship and ideological influence”. Does that sound like something we would support? If there's a sincere effort to have us support it, we're not even getting past first base when that's the kind of preamble we have.

I'll give time to Mr. Petit, as I know he has brought some ideas forward.

I think this study is too narrow. We've had judicial appointments from the very beginning of time as a country, and why are we looking at judicial appointments from the last year? I can't help but think that this is a partisan attack, or almost mischief, on the part of others. There's this issue of judicial appointments, and there have been judicial advisory committees since 1988. Judicial appointments have been made by ministers of justice forever, yet we're so concerned about the judicial appointments process. But let's just look at the last year. Let's just look, since there was a change in government. Let's not look to the year before last. Let's not look to 1993 and forward, the last 13 years, when we had a different government. Mr. Ménard's motion is, let's just look at what's happened since we formed government. To me, that's insincere. If we want an honest look at judicial appointments, or if we want an honest look at the judicial advisory process, then we have to look past the last year.

That would be my position. It may not matter; you may have the numbers, but the government is not going to support a motion that has such a torqued preamble.

We discussed last time about two sessions rather than three. I made those presentations to Mr. Ménard and Ms. Jennings and others.

Also, on the issue of interfering with committee work, Ms. Jennings' motion does make it clear that we would proceed with regularly scheduled committee work, and we all agree we should get on with Bill C-22. This, I trust, would not interfere with that, but still it's too problematic for my support.

11 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Art Hanger

Mr. Petit has some input here, but we have now run out of time on the clock.

11 a.m.

Some hon. members

Call the question.

11 a.m.

Bloc

Réal Ménard Bloc Hochelaga, QC

Do you wish to continue debating the matter?

11 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Art Hanger

There'd have to be unanimous agreement to call the question.

11 a.m.

Bloc

Réal Ménard Bloc Hochelaga, QC

If my colleagues wish to continue debating, we can do so at the next meeting. I do not want to take away anyone's right to speak.

11 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Art Hanger

There's going to be--

11 a.m.

Conservative

Daniel Petit Conservative Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC

It is 11 o'clock and I would ask that we adjourn. The last time that we wanted to discuss this, it was automatic. We are gathering our things together. I am entitled to request the adjournment.

February 27th, 2007 / 11 a.m.

Conservative

An hon. member Conservative Jim Abbott

Mr. Speaker, we need to vote.

11 a.m.

Conservative

Daniel Petit Conservative Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC

All right. So, vote.

11 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Art Hanger

There is no debate now.

We'll have a vote on whether to adjourn.

11 a.m.

Liberal

Marlene Jennings Liberal Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC

Can we have a recorded vote, please?

11 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Art Hanger

Okay, a recorded vote it shall be.

(Motion negatived: nays 7; yeas 4)

11 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Art Hanger

You leave the chair no choice. We have to vacate this room. We will have to take up the discussion and debate at another time during this day, as soon as we can find a room. We will have to find another room.

Let's find another room; it doesn't matter where it is.

11:25 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Art Hanger

I call the meeting to order.

11:25 a.m.

Liberal

Brian Murphy Liberal Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB

Until what time did you adjourn the meeting?

11:25 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Art Hanger

We did not adjourn; we suspended.

11:25 a.m.

Liberal

Brian Murphy Liberal Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB

What time was the resumption of the suspension? Was notice given of the suspension? What kind of notice did you give the members?

11:25 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Art Hanger

All members were present at the committee when we suspended.

11:25 a.m.

Liberal

Brian Murphy Liberal Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB

Did you suspend on the record?

11:25 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Art Hanger

It's all on the record. It should be on the record.