Transport Committee on June 3rd, 2010

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

But you weren't on the floor on a point of order; you were addressing the amendment. That's the place where we were, on amendment G-6.1.

[Joe Volpe, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

But you asked whether it was acceptable to table this.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Right.

[Joe Volpe, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

And I just wanted to clarify that I actually did speak with the president of the Canadian Jewish Congress, who was unaware that the letter had gone out. He was completely unaware. I spoke then to the individual who's responsible for this file, who thought, quite frankly, that the letter could be issued on the basis of a conversation that was supposed to resolve the issue—but it never took place.

I'm wondering whether the parliamentary secretary wants to talk about breach of privilege or deception.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

I'll recognize Monsieur Laframboise on the same point of order.

[Mario Laframboise, Bloc, Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC]

Still on the point of order, Mr. Chair, I cannot agree to the letter being tabled because it is in English only. But I can tell you that I have received correspondence from the community in French, including a proposed subamendment. So I can confirm that there have been contacts between the government and the community. The Liberals are just doing their job.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Thank you, Mr. Laframboise, for that clarification.

Mr. Volpe, we're back to you. We're discussing G-6.1, which has been tabled by Mr. Jean.

For clarification—and here I apologize to Mr. Volpe—when I have made a ruling, I can entertain points of order, but no discussion or debate on G-6.1. Because I've ruled it inadmissible, we either accept a challenge of the chair or accept my decision. So if you're on a point of order, we can allow that to continue, but there is no debate about G-6.1. It's a point of order to make a point.

[Joe Volpe, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I believe—

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

I'll interrupt you one more time.

Mr. Jean, do you have a point of order?

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

It's not a point of order, Mr. Chair.

Does he still have the floor?

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Yes, on a point of order of his.

[Joe Volpe, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

As I understand it, until I finish on the point of order and you rule on the point of order, nobody can make a motion to challenge the chair. So we're not even on that yet.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

We're on a point of order raised by you.

[Joe Volpe, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

So we're still on a collegial, cooperative basis. Wonderful.

My point of order is that I don't think any amendments and decisions by the chair can contravene the basic principle established in the House, that being that you cannot sneak in the back door what can't go through the front door.

What the front door represents is all of the decisions made by the committee leading up to and including the vote on 7.1. The votes up to and including 7.1 say that the Government of Canada is going to be responsible for finding the terrain, erecting the monument, and maintaining that monument, because that's the only way this is going to be a Canadian public monument. Any other monument is something erected by a very specific element of the Canadian citizenry, and that's not the intent of the legislation.

Any of these amendments that go against that basic principle, in other words, that try to sneak in the back door what has already been shut out of the front door, have to be ruled out of order.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Thank you, Mr. Volpe.

Mr. Jean.

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

I challenge the chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Okay. The ruling of the chair has been challenged.

I'll go to Bonnie.

[The Clerk of the Committee, Ms. Bonnie Charron]

[Inaudible--Editor]...that the decision of the chair be sustained.

(Ruling of the chair overturned: nays 7; yeas 4)

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

So the ruling of the chair has been overturned, and we will now debate G-6.1.

Mr. Volpe, on a point of order.

[Joe Volpe, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

It's with great regret that I see, first of all, that we are yet again challenging the chair and that this time the challenge was sustained.

I know that the Bloc refused to have a letter presented by the parliamentary secretary to be tabled. It is well within its rights to do that, for exactly the reasons it indicated. However, parts of the letter were read into the record for the purposes of influencing a decision. I just want the record to indicate that that letter was obtained under false pretences, and I—

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

I object, Mr. Chair. I certainly object.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Mr. Jean.

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

That is a direct insult to me, Mr. Chair. I did not ask for that letter. That letter was provided to me. It was provided directly to me.

[An hon. member]

Out of the blue?

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

The point is that the letter has been provided. The point is that the substance of the letter confirms that they support the government's amendments and this bill.

To suggest that I obtained it under false pretenses is just simply wrong, and, quite frankly Mr. Volpe, it is insulting. I thought better of you, bluntly.