Status of Women Committee on April 3rd, 2008

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

April 10.

[Maria Minna, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

April 10.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Sheila Fraser and Ron Thompson.

[Maria Minna, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

So we can deal with that motion right after that, and maybe the legislation at the same time.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Okay, fair enough.

Madame Demers, we have your motion before us. Could you read your motion for the record, please?

[Nicole Demers, Bloc, Laval, QC]

Certainly, Madam Chair.

That the Standing Committee on the Status of Women informs the Standing Committee on Justice of its formal opposition towards Bill C-484, which questions the rights of women to abortion.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

I had the clerk advise me there was a question--

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

May I ask a question?

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Yes, Mr. Wallace.

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

This is a private member's bill, Madam Chair, and I have mixed feelings on the actual motion. I voted for it to go to committee, but we'll see what comes out of committee, whether I stay in favour or not. I've had a private member's bill myself and was happy that folks supported me at least to get it to committee, and we had a discussion there and it went to Justice.

The words “formal opposition”--is it in order for a private member's bill, for a committee to take a position on it? I'd like the clerk to clarify that for me.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

The clerk did, on page 448 of Marleau and Montpetit. It is a resolution that makes a declaration of opinion or purpose and it's similar to the resolution of the House. So the bottom line is, yes, it is in order. It is her opinion. It is the committee's opinion. It's the declaration of purpose.

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

Then I'd like to move an amendment.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Sure.

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

My amendment is that we strike the words “formal opposition towards” and substitute “major concerns with”.

Madam Chair, the reason I'm doing that is I haven't made up my mind yet on this particular item, and I just happened to be here today for this. I'm not sure how everybody voted around the table on this. I think there's a variety of opinion in the House that may change based on what happens at the justice committee, if and when it comes back. I think it would be more appropriate for this committee to say we have major concerns, because it's a private member's bill and it was a free vote--I know for our side and I'm sure it was for most--particularly when it comes to the right of women to access abortion. The justice committee should definitely be looking at those issues when the bill goes there.

So it's a bit of a difference. It doesn't say the committee is completely opposed, because it's an individual decision, and that's why I think it gives a little more flexibility. If the amendment changed to that, I would support the motion. Otherwise I can't support it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Madame Demers.

[Nicole Demers, Bloc, Laval, QC]

Madam Chair, I e-mailed you the documentation concerning the 37 states that have an act similar to that proposed by Mr. Epp. We have concerns because there are reasons to be concerned. A genuine witch hunt was triggered in the United States after these kinds of laws went into effect.

The women's groups of Quebec and Canada are urgently asking us to oppose this bill. They are very much afraid. A significant mobilization is underway, not only in Quebec, but across Canada as well. The person who sent us this information is American. She is even concerned for Canada because she knows how harmful these laws are for the women of her country.

Madam Chair, I can't support an amendment that would reduce the scope of the motion I have introduced this morning. If my colleague wishes to oppose it, I regret that, but I'm going to request a recorded vote.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

So you do not want to replace the words “formal opposition” with “major concerns”?

[Nicole Demers, Bloc, Laval, QC]

No.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Okay.

Madame Boucher.

[Sylvie Boucher, Conservative, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

I'll try to be quite clear. Everyone here knows that I voted against Mr. Epp's bill. If we had to do it again, I would do the same thing, but, out of respect for those who do not think the way I do, I'm going to vote against this motion. We passed a motion to the effect that each of us would talk to our colleagues in caucus.

We are at the second stage, in the context of another committee, and it is in this committee that any amendments must be made. So I'm going to vote against this motion. It's a free vote; we live in a democracy.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Thank you.

Ms. Davidson.

[Patricia Davidson, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Before I make my comment, Madam Chair, I'd like to ask how long you're allowing this to go. We're past our time. We do have other commitments.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Yes, I know.

I'll take two more interventions and then we'll vote.

[Patricia Davidson, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

I think this is an issue that everybody should be allowed the time to speak to. It's a very controversial issue. It an issue that was a free vote in the House of Commons. It's a private member's bill. As my colleagues said, there are many varied reasons for why people voted the way they did, and I don't think this committee has had the opportunity to debate it and make a committee decision. Again, what will happen here today will be an individual opinion. If we're going to put an individual opinion forth as a committee position, then that is wrong. We need to have time to debate it.

I think this meeting needs to be adjourned. If the motion needs to be carried forth, we need to have the time to debate it so that it is a committee decision.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Ms. Minna.