Evidence of meeting #3 for Subcommittee on Private Members' Business in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was clearly.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Dave MacKenzie
I had previously asked the legal people whether or not it gets us into federal-provincial jurisdiction.
Committee Researcher
Well, it concerns transfer payments, so the federal government has the right to spend some money and impose a condition to receive that money. That's the case with the Federal-Provincial Fiscal Arrangements Act. What the bill basically does is it amends that act that's already on the books.
Liberal
Liberal
Frank Valeriote Liberal Guelph, ON
—anything like that, or even on doing it without consulting the provinces. It's up to the feds to determine whether they feel like it or not, but they do have a right to amend their own legislation.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Dave MacKenzie
I was just looking at whether it was outside of federal jurisdiction to impose that.
Committee Researcher
Since it's a condition to the spending of money, it's not outside the federal jurisdiction.
Committee Researcher
Next, Bill C-584 creates the office of the ombudsman and gives it responsibility for developing guidelines on the best practices for extractive activities of Canadian corporations in developing countries, requires these corporations to report their extractive activities to the office of the ombudsman, and requires the ombudsman to table an annual report on this act before each House of Parliament.
Certain provisions of the bill may concern questions that are outside federal jurisdiction, as they seek to apply to provincially incorporated corporations. However, this could be addressed, if needed, during the committee study of the bill without changing the object of the bill. For that reason, it's not clearly outside federal jurisdiction.
The bill does not clearly violate the Constitution Act. It does not concern a question that is substantially the same as ones already voted on by the House of Commons. It does not concern a question that is currently on the order paper or notice paper.
NDP
Philip Toone NDP Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, QC
Just for clarification, when these bills are drafted, presumably the individual members of Parliament are receiving guidance from House legal counsel.
Dara Lithwick Analyst, Library of Parliament
On drafting, but not necessarily on subject matter expertise. They generally come to the library on the greater international or other concerns....
Philip Toone NDP Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, QC
When they table this, they can accept or reject the recommendations of House legal counsel, and essentially that's what this committee is for. It's a kind of final filter before it goes back to the House.
NDP
Philip Toone NDP Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, QC
Okay. I just wanted clarification on the process.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Dave MacKenzie
This committee doesn't look at anything, in my understanding, about whether or not these items would require a royal recommendation to spend money or....
Committee Researcher
Next, Bill C-590 amends the Criminal Code to establish more severe penalties for an offender operating a motor vehicle with a blood alcohol content greater than 160 milligrams of alcohol per 100 millilitres of blood and imposes minimum penalties on offenders convicted for impaired driving causing bodily harm or death.
The bill does not concern a question that is outside federal jurisdiction. It does not clearly violate the Constitution Act. It does not concern a question that is substantially the same as one already voted on by the House of Commons. It does not concern a question that is currently on the order paper or notice paper.
Committee Researcher
Bill C-583 amends the Criminal Code so that fetal alcohol spectrum disorder is considered as a mitigating factor in sentencing an accused suffering from this disorder.
The bill does not concern a question that is outside federal jurisdiction. It does not clearly violate the Constitution Act. It does not concern a question that is substantially the same as one already voted on by the House of Commons. It does not concern a question that is currently on the order paper or notice paper.
Committee Researcher
Motion M-504 instructs the Standing Committee on the Status of Women to undertake a study on the best practices in education and social programs in Canada that prevent violence against women and report its findings to the House of Commons within one year of the study's initiation.
The motion does not concern a question that is outside federal jurisdiction. It does not clearly violate the Constitution Act. It does not concern a question that is substantially the same as one already voted on by the House of Commons. It does not concern a question that is currently on the order paper or notice paper.