Evidence of meeting #25 for Official Languages in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was subamendment.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
Just a moment, Mr. Godin.
We have to finish considering another subamendment. We will move on to yours after that, if you have one.
Conservative
Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC
But we hadn't finished with Ms. Ashton's amendment, and we started debating Mr. Beaulieu's subamendment.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
Mr. Beaulieu moved a subamendment to amend Ms. Ashton's amendment.
Conservative
Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC
That's what I want to do too. I'm also moving a subamendment to amend Ms. Ashton's amendment.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
I understood that, but we are going to deal with the first subamendment before dealing with yours.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
Please wait a few minutes.
Mr. Drouin, I think you challenged Mr. Beaulieu over paragraph h).
Mr. Beaulieu, you have the floor on this point.
Mario Beaulieu Bloc La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC
Here's what really bothers me. Paragraph h) reads as follows:
h. as agreed to on Wednesday, June 1, 2022, subject to the approval of the recognized parties' whips, and the availability of meeting slots from the House of Commons, the committee hold as many additional meetings as possible…
I'm ultimately okay with the first part. However, it goes on as follows:
…with the goal of accomplishing a maximum of 15 hours of study prior to the beginning of clause-by-clause consideration of the bill.
It seems to me that suggests that parliamentary debate should be limited to 15 hours.
NDP
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
Ms. Ashton, would you please tell us whether you are actually referring to 15 hours in paragraph h)?
Bloc
Mario Beaulieu Bloc La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC
In her amendment, Ms. Ashton would already delete the last part of the motion.
Conservative
Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC
I want to draw the attention of all the members to the following point. Paragraph h) states, “as agreed to on Wednesday, June 1, 2022”. However, it was never agreed to on June 1, 2022 that we would have a maximum of 15 hours before commencing clause-by-clause consideration.
I think that Ms. Ashton's proposal is very appropriate. We can't accept a motion that contains a falsehood. We don't even have to use Ms. Ashton's amendment since there's an error in its wording.
Liberal
Liberal
Francis Drouin Liberal Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON
Once again, I'd like to clarify a point. The motion refers to 15 hours, but how many hours would you like to have, Mr. Beaulieu?
How many hours would you like the committee to have? I'd simply like to have an idea of the number. We're talking about a number of hours, but the committee doesn't sit in the summer. We'll reconvene in late September, when we'll have four or perhaps eight hours. There's a parliamentary recess during Thanksgiving week, in October.
As I said earlier, that'll take us up to December. I'm just trying to see—
Conservative
Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC
I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.
I believe that all remarks must be addressed to the chair.
NDP
Niki Ashton NDP Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB
I want to make it clear that that the proposal to remove this limit is contained in my amendment. Thank you for the clarification, but we never proposed that. I think there's a desire—although definitely not on our part—to add more hours, but the idea is also not to limit our democratic committee work.
Liberal
NDP
Niki Ashton NDP Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB
We agree with the idea of adding hours, but we don't want the mention of 15 hours of study to limit the committee's democratic work. That's why we're moving an amendment deleting those words.