Evidence of meeting #74 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 point.
A video is available from Parliament.
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Doug Shipley
Yes. We have a little huddle going on beside us. We'll figure this out.
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Doug Shipley
Mr. Genuis, would you be able to provide that to me and the clerk in writing?
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
I would absolutely. I have the text right here. I could read it again, but I can certainly email it to you as well.
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
Jennifer O'Connell Liberal Pickering—Uxbridge, ON
I have a point of order.
There are two issues here. I'd like you to confer with the clerk as to whether this motion is in order.
The first is that we voted on the issue at hand. The second is that I would argue that the motion is out of order because it refers to reporting back to the House, although the motion itself is not on a study or a meeting on the subject matter as was the last motion moved. Therefore, the subject matter we are currently on is Bill C-20. You would need to report back only on a study.
I would argue that his motion is out of order on two fronts.
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
On the same point of order, Chair, I can maybe provide some clarification on the precedent here.
There are many committees that, in the context of their studies of legislation, also provide substantive comments on issues related to the legislation. I've been on at least two committees that have done this. Sometimes, for instance, an issue is raised in the context of the study of a particular bill that is ultimately deemed out of order as an amendment to the bill because it goes beyond the scope, but the committee still wishes to report to the House on what it has learned in the context of the study and to maybe make recommendations for broader consideration. Also, you have committees reporting to the House requesting an expansion of scope related to a bill.
It's actually extremely common for committees to report to the House under the rubric of the study of a particular piece of legislation independent of the actual report on the legislation itself. I can think of examples from status of women, from citizenship and immigration and from justice where this happened.
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Doug Shipley
Mr. Genuis, we'll get more examples from you. Let's get the copy of your amendment first, and I'll confer with the clerk.
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
Just to respond to that, Chair, I sent it to your personal account as well as the committee's account, so it should be there.
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
Jennifer O'Connell Liberal Pickering—Uxbridge, ON
Thanks.
On that point of order, if Mr. Genuis is arguing that his motion is part of Bill C-20, I would argue then that it's also out of order because the context of his motion is outside of the scope. It's actually on a motion as amended that is still before the committee, so he's off-topic on numerous fronts.
The irony is that the Conservatives suggested this issue was not just a way to filibuster on dealing with government legislation. I think they've made it very clear to Canadians that they are willing to use the rights of victims to filibuster government legislation. I think they've proven the point.
Mr. Chair, my point of order is that the motion is out of order.
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Doug Shipley
Thank you, Ms. O'Connell. I'll take that into account.
I'll just confer with the clerk once we get a copy of that from Mr. Genuis. We're just getting it translated.
We'll have a five-minute recess while we get that translated.
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Doug Shipley
Everyone, I'd like to call the meeting back to order, please.
Thank you for everybody's indulgence. It's been a little bit of a trying hour. Let's try to make the second hour not quite as trying. We're all trying.
Through many discussions, it's been decided that perhaps we should, for today, move on—and I will make a ruling on Mr. Genuis's motion on Bill C-20. Do we have unanimous consent?
Ms. Ferreri, go ahead.
5:30 p.m.
Conservative
Michelle Ferreri Conservative Peterborough—Kawartha, ON
I'm new to this committee. I don't normally sit on this committee. This is a very interesting committee to sit on for the first time. I just want to acknowledge the witnesses who have sat very patiently. Thank you.
I think I can find a compromise. I think that actually everybody in the room, based on what I've witnessed, wants exactly the same thing. I think everybody wants to move forward immediately with Bill C-20. Is that right? Let's get that done. We have these lovely people who have been extremely patient—you can come and teach my children how to be that patient—and they want to get on with it.
The reason I came—and I think and hope there is an appetite, especially in my female colleague across the way—is that we have to investigate the Paul Bernardo transfer. That's why we're here, on the rights of victims. If we could have—
5:30 p.m.
Liberal
5:30 p.m.
Conservative
Michelle Ferreri Conservative Peterborough—Kawartha, ON
I'm still on my point of order.
If we could have—
5:30 p.m.
Liberal
5:30 p.m.
Conservative
5:30 p.m.
Conservative
Michelle Ferreri Conservative Peterborough—Kawartha, ON
Yes, of course.
I'm saying, one hundred per cent, let's move forward with Bill C-20 and get that done, but we cannot defend Paul Bernardo in the House of Commons.
I'm putting forward that we would have unanimous consent to move forward with Bill C-20 right now, but that we should remove what was put forward, that the minister not come, and that we have unanimous consent on the subamendment that was put on the floor originally by my colleague Mr. Lloyd to ensure that the rights of victims are met. I believe that, among my colleagues from the Bloc, the NDP and the Liberals, they didn't want the Minister of Public Safety, so let's just ensure that the rights of victims are here and we're not protecting the child killer and rapist Paul Bernardo.
5:30 p.m.
Liberal
Jennifer O'Connell Liberal Pickering—Uxbridge, ON
I don't know what that was, Mr. Chair. Was there a motion somewhere in there? If so, could she repeat the actual text of her motion so that we can determine whether or not it's in order?
5:30 p.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Doug Shipley
Could you repeat the part just at the end there, where you did say the motion you were looking for, Ms. Ferreri?
5:30 p.m.
Conservative
Michelle Ferreri Conservative Peterborough—Kawartha, ON
I can send it to the committee. Revised, it would be that the committee hold a three-hour meeting with the following witnesses: the commissioner of Correctional Service Canada, Anne Kelly; the deputy minister, Shawn Tupper; the federal victims ombudsman; and representatives of the victims' families to discuss the transfer of Paul Bernardo from a maximum-security facility to a medium-security facility.
We could pass that with unanimous consent and go right to Bill C-20 and get on with this.