Thank you very much. Does anyone else want to intervene on that one?
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
(Clause 65 agreed to)
Next we get to amendment LIB-4, which repeals the definition of an offence in section 183 of the code. With LIB-4, for the first time we're repealing a clause that references sections 210 and 211 of the code, the bawdy house laws.
As a result, in order to deal with amendment LIB-4, we would need to go to the primary amendment, which is LIB-6 on page 103. The same vote on LIB-6 would apply to LIB-4, LIB-5, LIB-8, LIB-10, LIB-16 and LIB-40, which are all referencing sections of the code and which then remove sections 210 and 211.
As a result, we will go to amendment LIB-6, because that is the actual repeal of the bawdy house laws, which is identical to amendment X-49. The committee's X-49 and LIB-6 are identical. We also need to mention that there's a Green Party amendment, PV-7, which is partially identical but not completely, because it repeals only section 210 and not section 211.
Given the more complete nature of sections 210 and 211 and the identical nature of amendments X-49 and LIB-6, I would go to those first. They were received first anyway.
Mr. Boissonnault, and then Mr. Rankin, I'm sure you guys want to speak on that. Mr. Boissonnault, I'll put you first this time.