Evidence of meeting #21 for Transport, Infrastructure and Communities in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was amendment.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Clerk of the Committee  Ms. Bonnie Charron

1:35 p.m.

Liberal

Joe Volpe Liberal Eglinton—Lawrence, ON

Mr. Chairman, in view of the debate that we've already had on this, I think you should call the question.

1:35 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed

Thank you.

(Amendment agreed to)

Monsieur Laframboise.

1:35 p.m.

Bloc

Mario Laframboise Bloc Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC

I move the amendment I proposed earlier, in other words, that Bill C-442, in clause 8, be amended by adding, after line 18 on page 3, the following:

8. (2) Nothing shall prevent the Minister from contributing funds for the cost of planning, designing, constructing, installing and maintaining the Monument.

1:35 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed

The advice I'm getting is that the amendment is in the wrong place in the bill, and therefore I would....

Mr. Jean.

1:35 p.m.

Conservative

Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB

I would challenge your finding, Mr. Chair.

1:35 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed

The ruling of the chair has been challenged.

Mr. Jean.

1:35 p.m.

Conservative

Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB

I know it's not debatable, but I'm asking for a point of clarification. Does that mean it should be--

1:35 p.m.

Liberal

Joe Volpe Liberal Eglinton—Lawrence, ON

Hold on. I don't know how you can say you can't, on the one hand, have any other interventions and then ask for clarification on your own motion to challenge the chair.

1:35 p.m.

An hon. member

That's right. There was a vote called.

1:35 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed

It's been challenged. We'll go to the vote.

June 3rd, 2010 / 1:35 p.m.

The Clerk

The question is, shall the decision of the chair be sustained?

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

1:35 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed

The ruling of the chair has been overturned.

Debate?

Seeing none, I will call the question. Shall the amendment of Mr. Laframboise pass?

(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

(Clause 8 as amended agreed to on division)

(On clause 9--Three years)

1:35 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed

Mr. Jean, you are moving G-8.1?

1:35 p.m.

Conservative

Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB

Yes, I am, Mr. Chair. I think it makes sense, just in listening to the Liberals across the way expressing the problem with the first section 9 as it was originally, that it “be completed not later than three years after this Act comes into force”. What we're worried about as a government is that there won't be sufficient funds, and we don't want to have a situation where the monument is not completed for that reason. As a result, we're asking for this amendment to be supported by the committee so that not “later than three years after the day on which sufficient funds, as determined by the National Capital Commission, have been raised under subsection 7(2).”

1:35 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed

Debate?

1:35 p.m.

Liberal

Joe Volpe Liberal Eglinton—Lawrence, ON

Is it in order, Mr. Chairman?

1:35 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed

If it wasn't, I would state that. It is in order.

1:35 p.m.

Liberal

Joe Volpe Liberal Eglinton—Lawrence, ON

Oh man.

Mr. Chairman, I just can't believe this.

1:35 p.m.

An hon. member

[Inaudible--Editor]

1:35 p.m.

Liberal

Joe Volpe Liberal Eglinton—Lawrence, ON

I don't challenge the chair.

1:35 p.m.

An hon. member

We leave that to you.

1:35 p.m.

Liberal

Joe Volpe Liberal Eglinton—Lawrence, ON

And please recognize that the opposition members have been attempting to work within the system, and they've always supported the chair. We've never challenged the chair. We've left that to the government, and the government has challenged the chair on every one of its decisions.

But at any rate, Mr. Chairman, this amendment essentially puts a constraint on the fundraisers, mandating the fundraisers as to what they ought to do and what they cannot do. This is a volunteer group. It says “as determined by the National Capital Commission”. So here you have the Government of Canada--let me repeat it again--through its executive branch, the minister, washing his hands of the whole affair and saying that the National Capital Commission will determine whether these guys were able to get enough funds on the table to build the monument. Incredible. Just absolutely incredible.

Thank heaven for the subamendment by my colleague from the NDP, and thank heaven for the other amendment from the Bloc Québécois about contributions that can be made. This points out once again that the government has not only said goodbye to this monument, it's turned its back on it. It has done everything it can to the concept, to say to heck with you, and to treat the Jewish community differently from everybody else by making them pay for something the Canadian public has already accepted. That is scandalous and shameful that they should be taxed specifically for something that represents all Canadians' interests. I'm embarrassed they would put in this clause.

1:40 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed

Mr. Laframboise.

1:40 p.m.

Bloc

Mario Laframboise Bloc Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC

I just wanted to ask the parliamentary secretary something. In light of what Mr. Volpe said about the amendment to clause 8, I think we should extend the period, that it should be five years instead of three.

But it says that nothing shall prevent the minister from contributing or advancing funds—because, at the end of the day, contributing can mean advancing funds and so forth. I think that, out of respect—I know this community is extremely proud and will see to fundraising—if we wanted to make it five years rather than making it conditional upon a determination regarding the funds, I could understand.

I would like the parliamentary secretary to think about it. Five years might be a good time frame to at least be able to have a definite date. I am certain that the community will be able to do it before that time frame.

I can also understand the government not wanting to back the National Capital Commission into a corner regarding the funds. The parliamentary secretary could check; we have a few minutes. I know he uses his BlackBerry, as do others. Perhaps he could extend it by two or five years. That would satisfy me.

1:40 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed

Mr. Jean.