Evidence of meeting #56 for Public Safety and National Security in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site.) The winning word was commission.
A recording is available from Parliament.
NDP
Randall Garrison NDP Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC
It would become part of a government bill, and government bills expend funds, so I don't see how an amendment to a government bill would require a royal recommendation any differently than the entire legislation....
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
I'll refer that to our legislative clerk.
Do you want to speak to that, Clerk, or...?
Basically, the counsel here again is that when you bring forward a bill and it's passed, it receives a royal recommendation. There is a royal recommendation set out for the government bill, but any amendment to that bill that involves the expenditure of money would need another royal recommendation, and consequently that would make the amendment inadmissible.
Do you think that's a sufficient explanation?
Mr. Garrison.
NDP
Randall Garrison NDP Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC
Mr. Chair, if I may, I'll just say that at first glance, and without legal advice, this seems to me to be an overly broad interpretation, but obviously we respect the ruling of the chair.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
Thank you.
If you would move back to clause 78.... I think we've done up to clause 78.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
Oh, I'm sorry.
(Clause 35 as amended agreed to)
(On clause 78—Bill C-38))
Now we'll move to clause 78. Actually, it's clause 78 all the way down to.... Where are we? Are we done?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
Clause 78 has two amendments. After that, we are finished.
Now, I've said at a quarter after the hour...but if we can move through these fairly quickly, we could actually be finished here today. We will go to committee business; I'm committing to that. We have a budget to pass.
We're at government amendment number 21.
Conservative
Candice Bergen Conservative Portage—Lisgar, MB
Both G-21 and G-22 are grammatical amendments. For G-21, the policy of the clause is to have all subsections apply in the event that the former Bill C-38, the Jobs, Growth and Long-term Prosperity Act, receives royal assent. This has to do with clarifying that.
This clause indicates “Subsections (2) to (7) apply”, yet there's no subsection (7). It should be listed as (6) rather than (7), in both languages.
(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Conservative
Candice Bergen Conservative Portage—Lisgar, MB
This is one more attempt at my French. We're going to move this to correct a grammatical error in the French text. The current provision has an improper conjugation of the verb valoir. This amendment corrects the improper conjugation. Maybe someone can enlighten me....
October 31st, 2012 / 5:10 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
That sounds pretty good to me. Thank you for that lesson.
(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
(Clause 78 as amended agreed to)
(Clauses 79 to 87 inclusive agreed to)
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
We now go back to the beginning. Clause 1 is the short title. I haven't heard any amendments on that.
(Clause 1 agreed to)
Shall the preamble carry? I don't believe there were any amendments there.
Conservative
