Evidence of meeting #2 for Public Safety and National Security in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was amendment.
A video is available from Parliament.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON
Thank you.
Because we've added “and causes of high recidivism” at the end of this paragraph, I'm a little worried now, with your addition, that we're saying “encourage” causes of high recidivism.
I agree with what you're saying, Mr. Lloyd. I'm just a little concerned with the wording that's in there now. I'm wondering if it should say “programs that prevent recruitment and retention and causes of high recidivism” and then insert your part, moving the “diversion” part to the end of the sentence.
12:15 p.m.
Conservative
Dane Lloyd Conservative Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB
Mr. Chair, I'd view that as a friendly amendment. I would support that as a friendly amendment.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Jim Carr
Okay.
Is there any other commentary about this proposed subamendment? Do we have unanimous consent, in that case, for the proposed subamendment?
It looks like we do.
(Subamendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Clerk, am I correct that we now have to go back to the original motion?
12:15 p.m.
The Clerk
It's to the original amendment, sir.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Jim Carr
Yes.
Do we have unanimous consent for the original amendment as put forward by Ms. Damoff?
Hearing no objections—
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
Ron McKinnon Liberal Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC
Mr. Chair, it would be the motion as amended by the various subamendments.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Jim Carr
Right. It's the motion as amended by various subamendments. Is that clear?
Madam Michaud, would you like the floor?
12:15 p.m.
Bloc
Kristina Michaud Bloc Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC
Will there be any further amendments to paragraphs (c) and (d), or shall we vote on the motion as amended?
I would just like this to be clarified, because what is written in the document we received from Ms. Damoff is not the same as what was in the original motion, as far as the dates are concerned. I just want to know if there will be any other amendments.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON
We're only voting on the amendment to the additions to the study. We're not voting on the motion yet. There's still another change that I want to make to the motion.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON
It's only on the expansion of the study. We're voting on the amendment as amended, right?
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Jim Carr
We're voting on the amendment as amended to expand the scope of the study. Is that correct?
12:15 p.m.
The Clerk
Yes, sir.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Jim Carr
Okay.
Do we have unanimous consent for that? We do.
(Amendment as amended agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
That leaves the original amendment, Ms. Damoff. Am I correct?
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON
Okay.
In the last bullet point, paragraph (d), it's not realistic to have the witnesses' testimony and recommendations back to the House by February 18. I think we all know how long it takes for an analyst to write the report.
In fairness to our amazing analysts—Holly, I haven't had a chance to say hello to you yet—I would say, again, keeping in the spirit of the original motion, that we delete the words “report its findings and recommendations to the House”, and that we say, “complete witness testimony no later than February 18, 2022”.
I would just point out that February 25 is not a sitting date, so I've moved it to the last sitting date in February.
Then I would add, “at which point the committee will draft and complete a report to be tabled in the House no later than March 31, 2021”. That gives us adequate time, I believe, to get a report and recommendations written and to review them, but it also recognizes the urgency of this issue and wanting to get a report back to the House in a timely manner. I think giving ourselves the month to report back to the House is reasonable.
As we saw with the systemic racism study, report writing can drag on for weeks and weeks and months and months. Adding the March 31 date puts pressure on each one of us to make sure that we're being efficient when we're meeting to review the report.
Those are the changes I have, Chair.
12:20 p.m.
Liberal
12:20 p.m.
Liberal
Ron McKinnon Liberal Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC
I think it's a typo. The date in that motion is 2021. It should be 2022.
12:20 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Jim Carr
That's the power of retrospect. That's been duly noted. Thank you, Mr. McKinnon.
Are there other comments on Ms. Damoff's suggestions?
Go ahead, Ms. Dancho.