Evidence of meeting #38 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 point.
A recording is available from Parliament.
11:35 a.m.
Conservative
Bernard Généreux Conservative Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC
Mr. Beaulieu's subamendments say, by adding something, that nothing will be added. So point five seems to have disappeared there too. That means the subamendments only concern points one to four of Mr. Serré's motion.
11:35 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
Yes, Mr. Beaulieu's written document seems to agree with the deletion of point five of Mr. Serré's motion as proposed by Mr. Godin.
Are there any other questions about the subamendments moved by Mr. Beaulieu?
When I was talking about point five earlier, it was my understanding that Mr. Beaulieu's subamendments were along the same lines as Mr. Godin's amendments and that they both wanted point five deleted.
11:35 a.m.
Liberal
11:35 a.m.
Liberal
Patricia Lattanzio Liberal Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC
Mr. Chair, could you issue a formal ruling that any subamendment moved by Mr. Beaulieu to replace point five of Mr. Serré's motion is inadmissible, in accordance with what the clerk told us?
11:35 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
I rule that anything that Mr. Beaulieu might propose to replace point five of Mr. Serré's motion that Mr. Godin's amendment would delete is inadmissible.
11:35 a.m.
Conservative
Bernard Généreux Conservative Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC
Mr. Chair, to make sure we're all on the same page and, above all, to make sure this goes on the record, I would like the clerk to take a moment to verify whether the subamendments moved by Mr. Beaulieu are in fact inadmissible. I want to know whether the clerk can publicly state, during this meeting, that these subamendments are inadmissible. Take all the time you need.
11:35 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
Let's take a moment for reflection and suspend the meeting for a few minutes.
11:45 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
I call this meeting back to order.
Mr. Beaulieu, the very thing I was afraid of has come to pass. This is exactly why I wanted to deal with your subamendments one by one. However, you told us that your document contained one single subamendment.
As I said earlier, everything relating to points one to four is admissible. However, your last section seems to include points concerning the clause-by-clause study, which is inadmissible according to our rules. If you really insist that your document is a single subamendment that can't be split up, I will have to deem the entire document inadmissible.
For the sake of fair play, I suggest that you submit your amendments about points one to four as written and forget about the rest. Otherwise, I'll have to reject the entire document. I'll let you decide how you want to proceed.
11:50 a.m.
Bloc
Mario Beaulieu Bloc La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC
In that case, let's do that.
I'd like some clarification on one thing, though: From our understanding, the clause-by-clause study is almost always done in chronological order, but is there any provision in the act saying the committee isn't allowed to change that?
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
I'm not going to answer that question because it's not what we're talking about right now, but you have the beginnings of an answer in what you just said. We can't do it, but it's because you—
11:50 a.m.
Bloc
Mario Beaulieu Bloc La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC
Then let's stick to the first subamendments, and maybe we can look into this later on.
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
We are currently dealing with subamendments, so we have to focus on that. If I understand you correctly, you agree that we can deal with your proposed subamendments for points one to four. Just answer yes or no.
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
Bernard Généreux Conservative Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC
Mr. Chair, before Mr. Beaulieu answers, I have a question for you.
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
Bernard Généreux Conservative Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC
Is it possible to move an amendment to Mr. Beaulieu's subamendments at this time?
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
No, that's definitely not possible.
Since Mr. Beaulieu was insistent that the entire series of amendments made up his subamendment, I would have to reject the entire document because it contains one part that is inadmissible, but I want to give him a chance.
Mr. Beaulieu, I take it you're willing to drop the last part of your document. We are going to agree that your subamendments are just those amendments relating to the first four points of the original motion and vote on them. Do I have that right?
11:50 a.m.
Bloc
Mario Beaulieu Bloc La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC
Yes.
I just have a question for the clerk, but she can answer it later: Where in the procedure does it say that a committee isn't allowed to change the order in which it does the clause-by-clause study?
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
Is there anything more to discuss about Mr. Beaulieu's subamendments relating to points one to four, on page 1 of the document he sent us?
11:50 a.m.
The Clerk
Can I ask a quick question?
11:50 a.m.
The Clerk
Just to clarify, can we read out the text of the subamendments again to make sure everyone is on the same page?
The subamendments that were suggested at the end of the last meeting are different from the ones we received today. For one thing, I would like to know whether Mr. Beaulieu is dropping his two subamendments about changing the dates to December 6 and 7.
I just want to make sure everyone is clear on what the committee will be voting on.
11:50 a.m.
Bloc
Mario Beaulieu Bloc La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC
How is this version different from my other version? I thought they were the same.