Evidence of meeting #10 for Public Safety and National Security in the 39th Parliament, 2nd session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was amendment.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Bloc
Serge Ménard Bloc Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC
That is not what you were being asked. The question was how to proceed.
Liberal
Sue Barnes Liberal London West, ON
I want to hear from our legislative clerk on how I propose to do it, to be facilitating, whether that is available to us.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
She was suggesting that, as we go through it, we flag it in every instance.
Liberal
Sue Barnes Liberal London West, ON
No, that's not what I was proposing. I was saying that we do the amendment, and then once we've done it on the first occasion, it will have consequential—
Conservative
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
Right, but when I read out my little script here, I will say, “Does clause 2, as amended, carry?” I will say “as amended” in each one, and you will have to assume that I am referring to and including that as well.
Liberal
Sue Barnes Liberal London West, ON
Can I hear from the legislative clerk? I don't think that's right.
Procedural Clerk
Perhaps it would be of assistance to the committee if each of these instances were to be flagged as we progress through the bill, so that everyone would know where the change was to be made. In that way, if I were to miss one....
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
I think what Ms. Barnes is suggesting is that we pass the amendment and we will trust you to find all the places in the bill that—
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
You don't.
You see, this is why it was suggested that this is a very highly unusual one, because it doesn't have the list of changes.
Liberal
Sue Barnes Liberal London West, ON
Mr. Chair, I think if we do it in the first instance in the bill, then if you want to flag it as amended, there will be consequential ones, once you've changed it once. Then we will finally get to the title, and that also will be a consequential amendment and it will get changed there too.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
Are you all ready to vote on that? Are there any more comments on it?
There is one instance in clause 1, in lines 11 and 12 of the French text, so that change would have to be made there.
Conservative
Conservative
Liberal
Sue Barnes Liberal London West, ON
I think the line isn't 11, though. It's line 13 for the French version.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
Okay, sorry.
Is there any more discussion on clause 1? We've passed the amendment.
Bloc
Serge Ménard Bloc Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC
The purpose of the amendment is to amend the bill by replacing the word “défenseur“ with the words "avocat spécial".
(Clause 1 as amended agreed to)
(Clauses 2 and 3 agreed to)
(On clause 4)
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
Now we have some amendments that have been submitted for clause 4. BQ-2 is on the second page of your package. Not all the amendments are in the package, but this one is in the package.
Monsieur Ménard, would you like to propose your amendment, and then we'll open it up for discussion.
Bloc
Serge Ménard Bloc Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC
I move that Bill C-3, in Clause 4, be amended by replacing lines 32 to 34 with the following:
78. If the judge is not satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that the person who is named in the certificate is inadmissible on grounds of security, violating human or international rights, serious criminality or organized criminality, the judge shall quash the certificate.
