Evidence of meeting #27 for Justice and Human Rights in the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was ruling.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal James Maloney
Okay. I have to go into volume versus numbers again, so we'll have to do a vote.
(Amendment negatived: nays 7; yeas 4 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Now we go to G-6.
Liberal
Patricia Lattanzio Liberal Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC
Mr. Chair, because we adopted NDP-6, does that mean mine drops?
Liberal
Liberal
Anthony Housefather Liberal Mount Royal, QC
Mr. Chair, I'll move G-6.
G-6 puts in a different place in the bill the same issue that we dealt with before—that an animal known to the intimate partner could be the subject of coercive control, rather than just something they own or they have control over. For example, if I threatened to harm your mother's dog, it could be as damaging to you as if I were to harm your dog.
It's the same thing we just adopted. It's just in a different place.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal James Maloney
Shall G-6 carry?
(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Next is G-7. If G-7 is adopted, NDP-6.1 cannot be moved due to a line conflict.
Mr. Housefather.
Liberal
Anthony Housefather Liberal Mount Royal, QC
This would add a new element to the coercive control offence. It would treat damaging or threatening or attempting to damage a victim's property or the property of anyone known to them as conduct that could threaten safety. There's a list of conduct included. We would just be adding it to that.
Conservative
Larry Brock Conservative Brantford—Brant South—Six Nations, ON
First, I support Mr. Housefather. I want to make that abundantly clear. It's very odd that you have any member of the Liberal Party championing property rights, so this is an exception to that general rule.
I want to make a general comment. This is something that I looked at. When I got this bundle of amendments on Friday and I totalled the number of amendments brought by each party, I was shocked that the number of Liberal amendments was literally double the number of opposition amendments. It really speaks to how rushed, in my view, Bill C-16 was if the government has to amend a bill they have been championing for literally the last year.
This is an example of the failures by the justice minister, who took his marching orders from Prime Minister Carney to deliver substantive reforms on justice issues. Clearly, after hearing from a number of witnesses who should have been consulted, in my view, long before—
Liberal
Conservative
Liberal
Conservative
Larry Brock Conservative Brantford—Brant South—Six Nations, ON
Oh, it's relevant. I'm getting to that. I'm not quite finished yet, but that was a good attempt, Ms. Khalid.
Conservative
Larry Brock Conservative Brantford—Brant South—Six Nations, ON
Attempts to rectify what should have been done up front are exactly what the Liberal government is trying to do now.
I want to put that out there, because it's rather ironic that we'd ever get to a situation such as this with the federal government in clause-by-clause consideration across the number of standing committees we have here. Nevertheless, we are supportive of this particular amendment because we also champion property rights.
Liberal
Conservative
Liberal
Anthony Housefather Liberal Mount Royal, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I just want to say a couple of things in response to that. I restrained myself before, but I will briefly respond.
First of all, the Prime Minister himself, in the House today, talked about property rights and how important they were. Secondly, it shows that Liberal members of the committee listened to witnesses and that within our party we're allowed to make modifications to a bill. It actually shows the opposite of what Mr. Brock is suggesting.
I would also note, given the number of amendments, that a significant number of these amendments are consequential, one to the other. Just because you have multiple amendments, that doesn't mean you have a million different concepts. If you make a change to one clause, in some cases you have to make it to five or six other clauses. Some of the Liberal amendments are consequential, one to the other.
I don't think either of his points were correct, but I do appreciate very much that he's supporting the amendment I put forward.
Conservative
Larry Brock Conservative Brantford—Brant South—Six Nations, ON
That's what I said at the outset. I support you.
