We should have had you move the amendment, and then he would have had the discussion.
But you have moved this amendment, have you, Mr. MacKenzie?
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.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
We should have had you move the amendment, and then he would have had the discussion.
But you have moved this amendment, have you, Mr. MacKenzie?
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
Dave MacKenzie Conservative Oxford, ON
I would like to ask the officials how that changes the original document, if instead of just leaving it as provided with adequate “administrative support”, it is changed to say adequate “resources and administrative support”.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
Have you had time to look at this? Are you prepared to comment?
Mr. Dunbar, your microphone is on.
4:50 p.m.
General Counsel, Canada Border Services Agency
First of all, I'm sorting out which particularities we're talking about. We're going to talk first of all about “ensure that special advocates are provided with adequate administrative support and resources”.
The comment I would make simply is that it was the intention to do exactly this without the legislative authority, to provide adequate resources. It's not necessary just to say such in legislation, but we are in the hands of the committee if--
4:50 p.m.
Liberal
4:50 p.m.
Bloc
Serge Ménard Bloc Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC
Mr. Chair, I have a subamendment. I am sure that there will be agreement.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
Just a minute. G-2 is before the committee.
Monsieur Ménard.
4:50 p.m.
Bloc
Serge Ménard Bloc Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC
I believe that Mr. Dosanjh supports the subamendment. In his proposed amendment, he refers to the "défenseur". So the word "défenseur" would have to be replaced by "avocat spécial".
That is the subamendment I am proposing.
4:50 p.m.
Bloc
Serge Ménard Bloc Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC
We went a little too fast. You are starting at line 21, but the word "défenseur" also appears in line 20.
If I can get unanimous agreement, we could maybe amend line 20, because the amendments have to be submitted one by one.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
Yes, point made. We will note that always. The vote at the beginning...it was understood that that will be made every time.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
4:55 p.m.
NDP
Penny Priddy NDP Surrey North, BC
I did miss part of the conversation; for that, I apologize. How did people describe “adequate”, or did you have a whole conversation about this and if I had listened I'd know?
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
Ujjal Dosanjh Liberal Vancouver South, BC
Mr. Chair, may I respond to my colleague?
I think it would be too difficult and inappropriate to be more prescriptive than simply saying “adequate”. I don't think we should be going into thousands of millions.
4:55 p.m.
NDP
Penny Priddy NDP Surrey North, BC
I didn't, either. It's that I'm always leery of the word “adequate”: it sometimes fails to be so.
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Garry Breitkreuz
Are we ready to vote? No, I see we're not ready to vote.
Ms. Barnes.
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
Sue Barnes Liberal London West, ON
Mr. Chair, we're voting on the subamendment of adding “and resources”, though, is that right?
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
Sue Barnes Liberal London West, ON
You have to do the subamendment before you can do the whole thing.