Public Safety Committee on Nov. 25th, 2025

[The Chair, Liberal, Jean-Yves Duclos]

That's possible. It's up to Mr. Caputo if he wants to explain it further.

[Frank Caputo, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Nicola, BC]

At this time, I've spoken with my counterparts, and the desire is to get through these sections that relate to this committee and then, after that, to examine those sections that relate to questions of immigration. That bill has been studied at immigration. At that point, we would see some of our immigration critics be subbed in, and those subject matter experts can go from there.

[The Chair, Liberal, Jean-Yves Duclos]

Thank you, Mr. Caputo.

Is there any further discussion on this motion?

Mrs. DeBellefeuille, the floor is yours.

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry—Soulanges—Huntingdon, QC]

I understand the reason, Mr. Chair. The people who want to come and speak to the clauses in question aren't necessarily available at the moment. However, I don't think that reason really justifies the committee delaying the study of the bill or setting aside clauses for consideration later. We've all studied the bill. Everyone around the table is a permanent member of the committee. The motion doesn't really make sense to me, so I, for one, will not be supporting it.

As I said before, there's a renewed spirit of collaboration among us. We've agreed to quite a few clauses on division. I also think it would set a poor precedent if we allowed certain clauses to stand because people who wanted to speak in favour of them couldn't get here on time. Personally, I look forward to debating clauses 28 to 75, because there will be interesting positions to defend and good amendments to debate.

In all sincerity, the motion doesn't make sense to me. I think we should keep the momentum going and continue the clause-by-clause study of the bill by looking at clause 28 right now.

[The Chair, Liberal, Jean-Yves Duclos]

Thank you, Mrs. DeBellefeuille.

Ms. Kirkland, the floor is yours.

[Rhonda Kirkland, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

Thank you.

I want to add a couple of comments in response to my colleague Madame DeBellefeuille. I have a lot of respect for her. In my understanding of this, I feel it's not just waiting for certain people to be here. I don't believe that was the intent necessarily; it's mostly to combine the portions of the bill that have more to do with public safety at one time and then continue after that with the portions that have to do with immigration.

If we can agree to that, I think that we can move forward and continue with the public safety portions of the bill and then address immigration after. It might be easier for some of us who are newer members. I'm trying to follow along very quickly; I'm sure that others are as well. It would be helpful for me.

[The Chair, Liberal, Jean-Yves Duclos]

Thank you, Ms. Kirkland.

Is there any further discussion on this motion?

Seeing none, we will go to a vote on this motion, and it will be a recorded vote, if that's what the committee wants.

(Motion agreed to: yeas 8; nays 1)

(Clauses 28 to 75 inclusive allowed to stand)

[The Chair, Liberal, Jean-Yves Duclos]

We will study clauses 28 to 75 after we study the clauses that we will be debating right now, starting with clause 76.

Mr. Caputo, you have the floor.

[Frank Caputo, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Nicola, BC]

Mr. Chair, I would seek to group together clauses 76 to 137. I believe the Liberals may have an amendment on clause 138.

[The Chair, Liberal, Jean-Yves Duclos]

The motion is to group together clauses 76 to 137.

We need the unanimous consent of the committee for this.

Is there unanimous consent to group clauses 76 to 137 for the purpose of voting?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Jean-Yves Duclos]

In that case, is it the pleasure of the committee to adopt clauses 76 to 137?

(Clauses 76 to 137 inclusive agreed to on division)

[The Chair, Liberal, Jean-Yves Duclos]

That brings us to amendment G‑5, which would introduce a new clause 138 into the bill.

Would someone like to move that amendment?

It doesn't look like it.

We will therefore move on to the next clause. Actually, I think we have to wait, since we've come to the schedule of the bill.

Mr. Caputo, did you want to say something?

[Frank Caputo, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Nicola, BC]

Thank you.

I seek unanimous consent to group clause 138 and the remaining clauses to the end of the bill—not clauses 28 through 75—and deal with them.

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[Frank Caputo, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Nicola, BC]

I think there are no other clauses apart from those we have stood down. Is that correct?

[The Chair, Liberal, Jean-Yves Duclos]

There are two clauses we can discuss now and vote on.

We have the schedule to the bill and the title of the bill.

Actually, at this point, we can vote on the schedule, since consideration of the title of the bill has already been postponed to the end of the study.

Shall the schedule carry?

(Schedule agreed to on division)

[The Chair, Liberal, Jean-Yves Duclos]

Given the adoption of the motion to stand—

[Jacques Ramsay, Liberal, La Prairie—Atateken, QC]

Mr. Chair, I would like to request clarification. The schedule covers controlled substances, right?

[The Chair, Liberal, Jean-Yves Duclos]

Is that correct, Madam Clerk?

[Jacques Ramsay, Liberal, La Prairie—Atateken, QC]

I would actually like to know why the schedule was adopted on division.

[The Chair, Liberal, Jean-Yves Duclos]

This is a standard procedure that avoids a recorded vote. That's often how it works.

[Jacques Ramsay, Liberal, La Prairie—Atateken, QC]

I thought maybe our colleagues were obstructing based on the science behind that list.

[The Chair, Liberal, Jean-Yves Duclos]

I'll leave it to the committee to decide that outside of this process.

[Rhonda Kirkland, Conservative, Oshawa, ON]

Mr. Chair, I have a point of order.