Evidence of meeting #16 for Justice and Human Rights in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was amendment.

A video is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Joanne Klineberg  Senior Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice

10:30 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Anthony Housefather

We'll figure out the right place to put this afterwards, but it will be later in the section.

So this allows us to move to LIB-6.

Mr. Fraser, I believe you're withdrawing it.

10:30 a.m.

Liberal

Colin Fraser Liberal West Nova, NS

If I'm permitted, I withdraw that amendment. I wanted to make sure before I did that.

10:30 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Anthony Housefather

You're not putting LIB-6 forward, which allows us to move to CPC-20.2.

You can move whatever you want.

10:30 a.m.

An hon. member

[Inaudible--Editor]

10:30 a.m.

Liberal

Colin Fraser Liberal West Nova, NS

I've decided that the vagueness of the wording would add extra complexity and, therefore, I'm not putting LIB-6 forward. That's not to suggest that a future amendment couldn't be made.

10:30 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Anthony Housefather

So we're going to move to CPC-20.2.

Mr. Falk.

10:30 a.m.

Conservative

Ted Falk Conservative Provencher, MB

I'd be happy to elaborate further but I don't think it's a good idea to do that.

10:40 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Anthony Housefather

I'll pretend what you said before you said again.

Then LIB-7, Mr. Fraser, is the same idea. So I assume you're also not moving that one.

Now we move to G-2, which I think Mr. Fraser is going to put forward.

10:40 a.m.

Liberal

Colin Fraser Liberal West Nova, NS

That's correct. What page is that on?

10:40 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Anthony Housefather

It is page 87.

We're at proposed paragraph 241.2(6)(a) in the bill, addressing independence—medical practitioners and nurse practitioners.

10:40 a.m.

Liberal

Colin Fraser Liberal West Nova, NS

This is from the Liberal G-2, but I'll be advancing this motion to modify the wording by replacing line 20 and 21 on page 7 with the following:

(a) are not a mentor to the other practitioner or responsible for supervising their work

10:40 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Anthony Housefather

Thank you very much, Mr. Fraser.

Do you want to speak to it?

10:40 a.m.

Liberal

Colin Fraser Liberal West Nova, NS

Those are my comments.

10:40 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Anthony Housefather

Is there any discussion?

Mr. Rankin.

10:40 a.m.

NDP

Murray Rankin NDP Victoria, BC

I'm sorry if I missed the explanation for the amendment. Could you just repeat it, Mr. Fraser.

10:40 a.m.

Liberal

Colin Fraser Liberal West Nova, NS

We're taking out the business relationship and adding that they “are not a mentor to the other practitioner or responsible for supervising their work”.

10:40 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Anthony Housefather

It was as a result of the fact that we heard testimony that in small communities there are medical practitioners who practise together and it would be difficult to find a referral where they don't have a relationship that has an independence issue, but they have a business relationship.

10:40 a.m.

NDP

Murray Rankin NDP Victoria, BC

Thank you. Understood.

10:40 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Anthony Housefather

Is there any further discussion on this issue?

Mr. Genuis, you wanted to add a small point?

10:40 a.m.

Conservative

Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB

The removal of the reference to “business relationship” is concerning to me because, effectively, the result would be that you have two doctors who jointly operate a clinic who jointly sign off on each of these orders. The independence provisions are designed to prevent that. Two doctors working together in a business relationship who are doing this together creates some real problems that are avoided by the original wording.

10:40 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Anthony Housefather

I know it's not necessarily my role to take, but I believe that proposed paragraph (c) covers that issue.

10:40 a.m.

Conservative

Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB

Can you explain that? I don't quite understand that.

10:40 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Anthony Housefather

Sure. It says, “do not know or believe that they are connected to the other practitioner or to the person making the request in any other way that would affect their objectivity”. So if the business relationship was such that it would affect their objectivity, they couldn't then include....

I know it's not my role to explain the bill. I apologize.

10:40 a.m.

Conservative

Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB

I do not agree with that assessment at all, but okay—

10:40 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Anthony Housefather

We're coming up to 10:45, and I want to get through this one before we break.

Is there any other discussion from members of the committee?

Mr. Fraser, do you want to conclude?