In light of the arguments we have just heard, it is clear that committee members are against the proposed amendments. However, my previous decision is based on my conviction that amendments should come forward so that members have an opportunity to discuss them. That is exactly what Ms. Mourani felt and what she just explained.
I find it surprising to see that clause-by-clause consideration of bills in committee is a complete farce, where everything becomes a procedural issue. I believe this is within the scope — I'm still looking for the correct expression in French — of the bill. Yes, there are different choices that can be made with respect to a bill, and that's why people propose amendments. However, every time someone is not in favour of the proposed amendment or the Chair is not in favour, he rules it to be out of order. It's a complete farce. Amendments are killed off on the basis of procedure. By the way, why not do things properly, the way they're done elsewhere? When someone moves an amendment related to the subject matter of the bill, well, people discuss it and hear the members' opinions. In this case, you were told…
I fully agree with Mr. McColeman's arguments because, quite frankly, $1 million, and even $100,000, is far too much. Personally, I do not want to see these amendments passed. However, I will challenge the Chair's rulings when I have the sense they will place a gag on committee members who are trying to improve a bill or limit its scope, because it goes too far, or make amendments so that it will have a more positive effect. That is the principle I'm defending in challenging rulings. Obviously, if it were completely off topic and had nothing to do with the parole process, the Chair would be absolutely right to rule that is not within the scope of the bill. However, what he is saying is:
“This is within the scope, but I don't agree with it.”
That's why I voted against the Chair's ruling. I will also be voting against the amendment which, like you and others who spoke before me, I do not agree with.