Evidence of meeting #46 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 activity.
A recording is available from Parliament.
5:40 p.m.
Liberal
Nathaniel Erskine-Smith Liberal Beaches—East York, ON
I'll just reread it.
Ignore for the moment amendment NDP-5, and just look at subsection 13(1). It says, “Despite any other Act of Parliament but subject to sections 14 and 16, the Committee is entitled to”, and then we would insert “send for persons, papers, and records, and to have access to any information”, and on it would go as it is.
That empowers the committee in the same way Standing Order 108 does for other parliamentary committees, although this is, of course, a committee of parliamentarians. It would provide the powers that the Conservative amendment and the NDP amendment are seeking, but it would make it easier going forward.
5:40 p.m.
Liberal
5:40 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Rob Oliphant
Okay.
Procedurally, I'm going to check with our legislative clerk here, because we have an amendment on the floor.
We could have unanimous consent to withdraw it and have it replaced by this amendment. Am I correct on that?
5:40 p.m.
Conservative
Larry Miller Conservative Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON
I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.
I may be wrong on this, but could this not be considered a friendly amendment?
5:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Rob Oliphant
We don't really have friendly amendments. I know we do in life, but in parliamentary procedure they don't really exist.
We're not amending a subamendment to the amendment, so we would have to have unanimous consent to withdraw that amendment. We then would need unanimous consent to consider it before we considered the Bloc Québécois and the Conservative amendments, which may end up being withdrawn anyway, I suspect. I intuit that may be where we are.
5:45 p.m.
Conservative
5:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Rob Oliphant
Yes, minister.
Let me just test this. Let's first start with knowing what could happen—and I would give you leeway to put it back in, if something went wrong—if we have unanimous consent for amendment NDP-5 to be withdrawn.
5:45 p.m.
Conservative
Larry Miller Conservative Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON
I believe, Mr. Chair, that we should ask for unanimous support for both topics. I don't think we should be asking two individual questions seeking unanimous support. I think the motion should ask whether we have unanimous support to replace Mr. Rankin's with Mr. Erskine-Smith's.
5:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Rob Oliphant
I would probably word it this way. Do we have unanimous support to have NDP-5 withdrawn and to consider an amendment from Mr. Erskine-Smith immediately?
I am seeing a nodding—a nodding off?
I think, then, we now have before us an amendment from Mr. Erskine-Smith, which inserts about 10 words.
We have bells going, so I need unanimous consent to finish this, if you'll give it to me in the next five minutes. Is that okay?
5:45 p.m.
Some hon. members
Agreed.
5:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Rob Oliphant
Good.
We'd like Mr. Erskine-Smith to repeat his insertion, which comes from Standing Order 108.
5:45 p.m.
An hon. member
There is no unanimous consent on that.
5:45 p.m.
Liberal
5:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Rob Oliphant
Okay. That's not really what I asked. Do we have unanimous consent to continue while the bells are ringing?
5:45 p.m.
NDP
Matthew Dubé NDP Beloeil—Chambly, QC
You asked for unanimous consent and you got it, and the motion is deemed adopted. Someone can't come in late like that and say “no” randomly.
5:45 p.m.
NDP
Matthew Dubé NDP Beloeil—Chambly, QC
I know, but didn't you ask to continue for five minutes, and we said “yes”?
5:45 p.m.
Liberal
Marco Mendicino Liberal Eglinton—Lawrence, ON
I'm sorry, Mr. Chair. I'm not trying to stymie debate on this amendment. I just don't think we're going to be able to address it in the next five minutes, and given that the bells are ringing, it just makes sense to use that time to reflect on a substantive amendment, which is a departure from the one put forward by the NDP. That's all.
We can come back and resume the debate.
5:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Rob Oliphant
I don't have unanimous consent to continue. I think what happens is I do not have the unanimous consent to continue while the bells are ringing. That's all I'm going to be able to rule on right now.
However, I do have unanimous consent to withdraw the amendment and then consider first an amendment from Mr. Erskine-Smith. It gives him time to write it out, too, and make sure that the clerks have it.
We are into a vote. We will return following the vote, and I'm going to plod on for a little bit after the vote.
We are suspended.
