Justice Committee on Dec. 10th, 2020

[The Chair, Liberal, Iqra Khalid]

Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the last meeting of the year, maybe, for our justice committee.

I call this meeting to order.

Just before we get into clause-by-clause today.... All of the members have been emailed an operational budget for Bill C-6. I would like to get that approved by your consent so that we can get into clause-by-clause.

Are there any questions or clarifications with regard to the operational budget that was emailed to you?

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

If I may, I have only one question, Madam Chair.

Can you explain to me how this budget differs from the one we previously passed? What is new here? The numbers are not huge, that's not the problem. However, we already had a budget. Is this one over and above?

[The Chair, Liberal, Iqra Khalid]

I will pass the floor to the clerk.

[The Clerk of the Committee, Mr. Marc-Olivier Girard]

Thank you for your question, Mr. Fortin.

I believe we may be mixing this budget up with another one that actually was passed two weeks ago. It was to study Bill C-7, while this one is to study Bill C-6.

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

Okay. Basically, the items in this budget have already been spent. It's for our work so far, isn't it?

[The Clerk]

Yes, you could say that. We've already begun to receive invoices and will continue to pay them in the coming weeks.

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

Okay, I understand. I thought it had already been settled, but I am probably wrong, as you say.

So everything's fine, no problem.

[The Chair, Liberal, Iqra Khalid]

Thank you, Mr. Fortin.

I hope that clarifies it.

I thought I saw a couple of hands up, but I think they've gone down now.

Mr. Moore, is your hand raised for the operational budget for Bill C-6?

[Rob Moore, Conservative, Fundy Royal, NB]

Just on a.... It's been an ongoing issue, Madam Chair. The first five seconds when you're talking, I'm hearing nothing.

I'm on English, and I can hear a translation of everybody who's speaking French, but then when it switches over to you.... It's not like it's a one-second thing. Virtually everything you're saying is.... Unless every time someone stops talking in French we're going to quickly switch over to no interpretation, we're really missing quite a bit.

I know others have raised it, and I've raised it in the past. I would think there has to be a solution. I really only notice it on this committee. On other committees, in the chamber when we're in question period, and in other Zoom meetings that I have, it hasn't been an issue at all. I'm only noticing it on our committee.

[The Chair, Liberal, Iqra Khalid]

Is this better?

[Rob Moore, Conservative, Fundy Royal, NB]

I did hear you say “Is this better?”, so it must be.

[The Chair, Liberal, Iqra Khalid]

I changed my interpretation to the floor, so perhaps I'll try that until we run into any more challenges. Thank you for raising that, and please continue to raise any technical challenges that you have. I appreciate that.

Are we okay with approving this budget?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Iqra Khalid]

Okay, wonderful.

Thank you, everybody, for your co-operation.

I will now go into clause-by-clause for Bill C-6, pursuant to the order of reference made on Wednesday, October 28. I would like to—

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

I have a point of order, Madam Chair, before we get into clause-by-clause consideration of the bill.

May I speak?

[The Chair, Liberal, Iqra Khalid]

Absolutely, Mr. Fortin. As you know, whenever you would like to say something, you can just raise your hand, and I'm more than happy to recognize you.

Go ahead, Monsieur Fortin.

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

I'm sorry, I always forget where you have to click to raise your hand.

Madam Chair, I am a little unhappy with the way we are doing this. I consider this bill to be very important. I feel all members of the committee have worked very hard on this bill over the last few days. Certainly, several of us in my office worked on it, and I'm sure the same is true for the other members. Similarly, I am sure that the people who submitted briefs or came to testify also spent many hours preparing and sending them to us. As we all know, most of these briefs were sent to us yesterday and today. We were still receiving some this morning. My assistant has counted 246 briefs. We have not been able to read all of them. We have read about 50 of them and we are still working on them. Does that mean that, even though we have invited hundreds of people to submit their views on this bill, we will not even hear them all?

I know it's not bad faith on the part of anyone on this committee, but it still shows a lack of respect for those individuals. No one has disrespected the witnesses directly, but if we do a clause-by-clause study of the bill and vote on it this morning before we have even read all the briefs, that will be a form of disrespect. Unless someone has an exceptional gift, which I would love for them to pass on to me, I'm sure none of us has read all of the 246 briefs we received.

That was a long preamble on my part, Madam Chair. In a word, I propose that we give ourselves time to look at all of these briefs. We may find other proposals for amendments, because that's actually what this process is all about. When people write to us and tell us what they think, sometimes we respectfully tell them that we disagree and that we will not be acting on their proposals, but sometimes—

[The Chair, Liberal, Iqra Khalid]

Monsieur Fortin, I'm so sorry. I'm going to interrupt you for a second. There is a technical glitch with the interpretation on the phone lines. We just want to make sure that it is resolved.

Give us a quick second while we look into it.

[Kerry-Lynne Findlay, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock, BC]

I'm told that, on the phone line, on the English channel there is no translation coming through.

[The Chair, Liberal, Iqra Khalid]

I would suggest to those who are on the phone lines to perhaps use ParlVU as an alternative in the meantime while we look into the interpretation.

Mr. Fortin, please continue.

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

I don't know when the technical glitch happened, but I was explaining that we received such a large number of briefs that we have been unable to read them all. The fact that we received so many and that so many people wanted to come and testify is a sign of success, and we should not complain about it. It means that the public is interested in the bill.

Therefore, in our thought process, we must consider what people have told us. We will agree with some and disagree with others. In some cases, the proposals they submitted may prompt us to introduce amendments to the bill. One thing is for sure, out of respect for those who have written to us and come to testify, we should postpone clause-by-clause study of the bill to a meeting after we come back in January. It will give all of us the time over the holiday season to read the briefs, reflect on them and propose amendments if we think it is appropriate.

For example, I personally have not seen much done to clarify the proposed definition in clause 5 of the bill. I'm really concerned about that definition. All of the witnesses we heard from, regardless of their background, agree that the definition is unclear. Obviously, we all need to think about it.

When I had my practice, lawmakers were seen as godlike figures. Here, however, I find we are being a bit sloppy by doing a clause-by-clause study of the bill when we have not yet had time to read the briefs, thoughts and comments that members of the public have sent us.

For all these reasons, I suggest that we postpone the clause-by-clause study to a meeting after work resumes in January.

[The Chair, Liberal, Iqra Khalid]

Thank you, Monsieur Fortin.

I have Mr. Virani next with his hand raised.

Go ahead, sir.

[Arif Virani, Liberal, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

My thanks to Mr. Fortin for his comments. However, let us not forget that we have made arrangements and planned the committee's schedule accordingly, as this is an important study for all Canadians, particularly for the LGBTQ2 community.

We have indeed received many briefs. However, we can start reviewing them today and continue at later stages. Yes, the briefs could have an influence on different points of view during our debates in the House at third reading and when the Senate is considering the bill. Even if we go ahead today with clause-by-clause consideration of the bill, it doesn't mean that the briefs and other documents we have received will not have an impact, because it will still be possible for them to influence the debate throughout the parliamentary process in either the House or the Senate.

[The Chair, Liberal, Iqra Khalid]

Thank you, Mr. Virani.

Mr. Garrison, go ahead.

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

I'd like to point out that there is a procedure for raising amendments at report stage that were unable to be considered at committee. Should there be proposals for amendments in the briefs that came in late, which I know we will all look at in the intervening period, it would be possible for Monsieur Fortin to make those amendments at report stage. I think he would have a very good argument, for the reason was the volume of submissions that came in and the inability to consider them before then.

However, I would say that I would like to proceed today. I think this is an important bill, especially to the sexual orientation and gender identity community in this country. The longer we go on in a minority Parliament, the more we are in danger of bills being lost to an early election. I think we've had a wide range of witnesses before the committee. We have a good selection of amendments in front of us, and I would like to proceed today.