Evidence of meeting #141 for Public Safety and National Security in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was chair.
A recording is available from Parliament.
5:45 p.m.
NDP
Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB
Thank you very much.
The purpose of this amendment is to indicate that prisoners should not be denied the minimum time outside of the cell due to lack of staffing. It is to ensure that staffing is available to make sure that prisoners are able to get the minimum required time.
5:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
I apologize, Mr. Blaikie. I didn't read the clerk's notes to me, which say that if Lib-4.2 is adopted, NDP-12 cannot be moved.
I apologize for that. That was a 30-second waste of time.
We have NDP-13.
Go ahead, Mr. Blaikie.
5:50 p.m.
NDP
Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB
All right. Presumably this one is not now out of order due to previous amendments.
This one would add record-keeping requirements for the opportunities offered to a prisoner and for the reasons provided by the prisoner for refusal.
5:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
All those in favour of NDP-13, please indicate.
(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
We have PV-20, deemed moved by Ms. May. Is there debate on PV-20?
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
We also have PV-21, again deemed moved. Is there any debate?
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
We are now on to CPC-2.32, also known as reference number 10221253, standing in the name of Mr. Motz.
5:50 p.m.
Conservative
Glen Motz Conservative Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I move that Bill C-83, in clause 10, be amended by adding after line 15 on page 6 the following:
37.11 A staff member may recommend to a registered health care professional employed or engaged by the Service that the professional assess the mental health of an inmate, if the inmate
(a) refuses to interact with others for a prescribed period;
(b) exhibits a tendency to self-harm;
(c) is showing signs of an adverse drug reaction; or
(d) is showing signs of emotional distress or exhibiting behaviour that suggests that the inmate is in urgent need of mental health care.
This came about through discussions with the correctional officers and through debate here at committee. Correctional officers are not medical staff, but they seem to be relied upon to provide medical assistance on numerous occasions. The service needs a mechanism to refer individuals who need help to those who can help.
It should be clear in law that this is a power and ability to refer this issue to someone equipped and trained to deal with it. It should be clear that correctional officers who are not medical staff are not going to be relied upon to deal with these issues that are beyond their expertise.
5:50 p.m.
Liberal
Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON
I want to commend Mr. Motz on his amendment and on working with witnesses to come up with it.
I want to ask the lawyers at the end of the table if they have any suggestions to improve upon the wording.
November 29th, 2018 / 5:50 p.m.
Juline Fresco Counsel, Legal Services, Department of Justice
Thank you.
Could we just have one minute to look at it?
5:50 p.m.
Counsel, Legal Services, Department of Justice
I just have one suggestion. In the first line, it could be “a staff member or a person engaged by the service”. That's just to specify that there are those who are not employed, but rather engaged by the federal service.
5:50 p.m.
Liberal
Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON
It could be an elder who had come in and might be engaged by the service.
5:50 p.m.
Liberal
Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON
Mr. Chair, I would like to move a subamendment to the member's motion, to add the words, “or a person engaged by the service” after “a staff member”. The rest of it would remain the same.
5:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
Is there any debate on the subamendment?
Seeing none, I will ask those in favour of the subamendment to so indicate.
(Subamendment agreed to)
Is there any debate on the amendment as amended?
(Amendment as amended agreed to)
5:50 p.m.
Some hon. members
Oh, oh!
5:50 p.m.
Conservative
5:50 p.m.
Liberal
Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON
I know you do, but that one was a particularly good one.
5:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
Okay. It might be closer to Christmas than we think it is.
PV-22 is deemed moved.
Is there any debate?
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
PV-23 is also deemed moved.
Is there debate?
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Next is LIB-4.3, moved by Monsieur Picard.
5:55 p.m.
Liberal
Michel Picard Liberal Montarville, QC
It's consequential to the amendment made in clause 7.
(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
5:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
We are now on to PV-24, but it is inadmissible. PV-25 cannot be moved if LIB-5.1 is adopted.
Hang on.
Neither PV-24 nor PV-25 can be moved at this point, because we adopted LIB-4.3.
We are now on to LIB-5.
LIB-5 is Ms. Dabrusin's. Mr. Spengemann is moving it for her.