Justice Committee on Dec. 6th, 2012

[David Anderson, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

It's something that might be worth addressing. Clearly there are two groups of people, and they're not the same group at all times. I don't think he's deliberately trying to exclude anyone, because he has a fairly strong commitment to this bill and the principles behind it, but I just wonder how he sees that

If “gender identity” is going to include everything, then that should be clearly understood, but even in the way we're talking about it here, in the challenges to the definitions or whatever, I'm not sure it's the same as “gender expression”.

It looks as though he has an interest in responding to that now.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dave MacKenzie]

Thank you.

Go ahead, Mr. Garrison.

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

Just briefly, if you had been here for the sections with the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, you would have had a written answer to that question.

Second, it's not about my personal opinions. We negotiated a compromise with those who voted in favour of the bill at second reading, which does not include any of the members who are currently trying to amend the bill; this is a compromise to take out “gender expression” as negotiated with those who supported the bill in principle.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dave MacKenzie]

We're now on NDP-2.

Shall NDP-2 carry?

[Kyle Seeback, Conservative, Brampton West, ON]

Could we have a recorded vote, Chair?

[The Chair, Conservative, Dave MacKenzie]

The clerk will do that.

(Amendment agreed to: yeas 6; nays 5)

As I've already said, CPC-8 and CPC-9 cannot move forward.

Shall clause 1, as amended, carry?

Those in favour?

[An hon. member]

May we have a recorded vote, please?

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC]

I'm sorry, Mr. Chair; what are we voting on?

[The Chair, Conservative, Dave MacKenzie]

We're on clause 1, as amended.

(Clause 1 as amended agreed to: yeas 6; nays 5)

(On clause 2)

We're now on clause 2.

Mr. Garrison, do you wish to introduce an amendment?

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'll be withdrawing NDP-3.

Instead, I'd like to move a motion:

That, pursuant to Standing Order 97.1(1), the committee request an extension of 30 sitting days for the consideration of Bill C-279, An Act to amend the Canadian Human Rights Act and the Criminal Code (gender identity and gender expression) to allow its members to hold deliberations beyond the present deadline of Monday, December 10, 2012, and that the chair present this report to the House.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dave MacKenzie]

Go ahead, Mr. Goguen.

[Robert Goguen, Conservative, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

I think they're out of time for that motion.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dave MacKenzie]

The clerk tells me the last day we can table that would be Monday, December 10. That's the date this was to be reported back.

[Brent Rathgeber, Conservative, Edmonton—St. Albert, AB]

That means it's out of time.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dave MacKenzie]

My understanding is that Monday would be the last day. If this report is not tabled by Monday, it goes to the House unamended, but the request for extension can be presented to the House on Monday.

[Robert Goguen, Conservative, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

I challenge the ruling. I'd like a recorded vote.

[Brent Rathgeber, Conservative, Edmonton—St. Albert, AB]

I don't understand the ruling.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dave MacKenzie]

If he challenges the chair and the ruling....

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

Chair, if I may, on a point of order, there is a motion on the floor, and if he is opposed to the content of the motion, then his solution is to vote against the motion. You have not made a ruling.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dave MacKenzie]

What I ruled was that the amendment could go forward and could be presented to the House.

[Françoise Boivin, NDP, Gatineau, QC]

It was that the motion could go forward.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dave MacKenzie]

I'm sorry; yes. The clerk's advice is that the challenge is that I've said that the motion could be presented to the House.

Let's see if I've understood this correctly this time. The challenge is that I'm accepting the motion here, not the House. The House is up to the Speaker. Okay.

If you're challenging the chair on accepting the motion, the clerk will—

[Brent Rathgeber, Conservative, Edmonton—St. Albert, AB]

Mr. Chair, what have you ruled?

[The Chair, Conservative, Dave MacKenzie]

I've ruled that the motion can go forward. It's done. He's challenged it, and we vote now on whether the ruling of the chair will be sustained. The clerk will take the vote.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC]

Thank you. It's just a question. Can we hear the rationale from the gentleman here?