Evidence of meeting #3 for Subcommittee on Private Members' Business in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was take.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Committee Researcher
This would amend the Canada Pension Plan and the Old Age Security Act in order to provide that the payment of benefits, which are made on a monthly basis, could be made on a biweekly basis at the request of the beneficiaries.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Harold Albrecht
I think I said “motion” and I should have said “bill”. It's Bill C-326. If I did say “motion”, my error.
Any discussion on Bill C-326?
Mr. Reid.
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON
I don't mean to be a party-pooper about all these things.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Harold Albrecht
Especially when you made our meeting start late, Mr. Reid....
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON
Yes, I do apologize for that.
I have a concern about this one but maybe it's not a criteria we deal with here. Isn't there a problem of requiring a royal recommendation because this would involve, effectively, a speeding up of expenditures? I assume these would be paid faster rather than slower.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Harold Albrecht
Correct. You'd have interest costs and administrative costs. We understand that. But, Mr. Reid, I want to remind us again that we don't deal with royal recommendation situations here.
I think it's a valid point to raise, but at this point, unless we change the criteria for votability, we have these four, and unless I'm directed otherwise, I need to abide by those.
Committee Researcher
Also, the rule with respect to royal recommendations is that they can be given to a private member's bill up to the adoption of the bill, after reading by the House of Commons.
Conservative
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Harold Albrecht
All right. So there still is time for that to happen if indeed it is necessary.
Does that answer your question?
Conservative
NDP
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON
Yes. You don't mean to, but it happened anyway.
Committee Researcher
This bill would amend the International Boundary Waters Treaty Act and the International River Improvements Act in order to prohibit the bulk removal of transboundary waters.
This bill does not concern questions outside federal jurisdiction. It does not appear to clearly violate the Constitution. There is no similar private member's bill voted on in the current session, and there's no government bill on the same subject currently on the order paper.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Harold Albrecht
Are there any comments or questions?
I think, in fairness, this one could also probably have the same question asked of it in terms of the potential of the need for a royal recommendation.
I see no opposition to allowing it to proceed to votability.
It is so ordered for Bill C-383.
We'll move on to Bill C-279.
Committee Researcher
This bill would amend the Canadian Human Rights Act in order to add, as prohibited grounds of discrimination, gender identity and gender expression.
The bill would also amend the Criminal Code in order to add, as distinguishing characteristics protected under the Criminal Code, gender identity and gender expression.
This bill does not appear to be outside federal jurisdiction. It does not appear to clearly violate the Constitution. There is no similar private member's bill that has been voted on in the current session, and there's no similar government bill on the order paper.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Harold Albrecht
Is there any discussion on this?
All in favour to allow it to proceed?
It is so ordered.
We will now move to Bill C-321.
Committee Researcher
This bill would amend the Canada Post Corporation Act with regard to library materials.
The bill does not concern questions that are outside federal jurisdiction; it does not clearly violate the provisions of the Constitution; it does not concern questions that are substantially the same as ones already voted on in a private member's bill by the House of Commons in the current session of Parliament; it does not concern questions that are currently on the Order Paper as items of government business.
Committee Researcher
This bill would amend the Criminal Code in order to prohibit cyberbullying. Various amendments would be made to the offences already in the Criminal Code, so as to also prohibit intimidation and harassment by means of the Internet.
This bill seems to fall under federal jurisdiction; it does not seem to clearly violate the Constitution, including the Charter; it does not concern questions that are the same as ones already voted on by the House in the current session in a private member's bill; and no government bill on the same topic appears on the Order Paper.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Harold Albrecht
Are there any comments or concerns?
Seeing none, well, that one's proceeding.
We'll go now to motion 315.
Committee Researcher
This motion would instruct the Standing Committee on Finance to undertake a study on income inequality in Canada.
This matter seems to fall under federal jurisdiction; it does not clearly violate the Constitution; no similar motion has already been voted on by the House of Commons in a private member's bill; and there are no government motions on the same subject currently on the Order Paper.
