Evidence of meeting #42 for Transport, Infrastructure and Communities in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was chair.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
Mr. Chair, this is one on which there are obviously some mixed feelings on this committee, but certainly I would suggest that the boilerplate structure of amendment G-6 is very effective and efficient. It's going to require the master plan to be put before the House of Parliament. It also requires some other issues, including that there's a timeframe that must be adhered to.
Liberal
Marcel Proulx Liberal Hull—Aylmer, QC
So that we can confirm on the record the disposal of Liberal-5 amendment, this was a result of a previous vote, right?
December 9th, 2009 / 5:05 p.m.
Conservative
Liberal
Mauril Bélanger Liberal Ottawa—Vanier, ON
It says if L-4 were to carry, L-5 would be negated. Isn't that what you had said?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
They go together, in the sense that if one is voted for and accepted, then L-5 is automatically accepted. If it's defeated, L-5 is automatically defeated. L-4 was the amendment that impacted L-5. We voted to defeat L-4; therefore we were defeating L-5 at the same time.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
When I introduced BQ-4, I said that if it was adopted, L-4 cannot be proposed and L-5 is adopted.
When L-4 is applied, it automatically applies to L-5, but it was defeated, so L-5 would automatically be defeated at the same time.
Mr. Jean.
Conservative
Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
It also deals with timeframes, in that the master plan laid before Parliament cannot be approved before either 30 sitting days or 160 calendar days after the master plan is laid before the House of Parliament.
Finally, in 10.31, the management of Gatineau Park, I did have a question for our officials at a meeting prior to this in relation to immovable objects. It's set out in law that the commission is going to manage any property of the commission that is immovable in regard to the pursuit of recreational activities.
Bloc
Bloc
Mario Laframboise Bloc Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC
I think it has to be a friendly amendment. It has to be accepted.
Conservative
Bloc
Richard Nadeau Bloc Gatineau, QC
In paragraph (2), where it says, “In the development ...”, I would add “and at the same time ...”.
Bloc
Richard Nadeau Bloc Gatineau, QC
At the end of paragraph (2), I would add, “and at the same time, for consultation with the provinces concerned.”
Conservative
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
—where it reads “for public comments at the national and regional levels” and you're adding the following.