Evidence of meeting #3 for Transport, Infrastructure and Communities in the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was federal.
A video is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Philip Lawrence Conservative Northumberland—Clarke, ON
I have a point of order. I'm not exactly sure how to do this, but I'd like to do it efficiently. The Conservatives would also like to add four or five different acts as well.
Conservative
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Peter Schiefke
Why don't we dispose of this first, and then I'll turn it back over to you.
Mr. Kelloway, do you want to speak to the subamendment?
Liberal
Mike Kelloway Liberal Sydney—Glace Bay, NS
I could barely hear what Mr. Lawrence was saying, but I just want clarification. Are there more things to be added?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Peter Schiefke
So far, Mr. Barsalou-Duval has read his subamendment into the record. I believe it has been circulated, but I wanted confirmation from members that they do indeed have that subamendment. Do I have confirmation from members that you do have it?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Peter Schiefke
It hasn't been distributed yet. That's what I wanted confirmation on.
Liberal
Stéphane Lauzon Liberal Argenteuil—La Petite-Nation, QC
Mr. Chair, can we suspend for a second to make sure that we have the subamendment?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Peter Schiefke
The clerks are going to ensure that everybody has a copy of the subamendment as proposed by Mr. Barsalou-Duval in both official languages. We're going to try and get that out as soon as humanly possible, because we are looking at a clock that is ticking quite quickly.
Liberal
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Peter Schiefke
I will suspend, and we'll get that to you very quickly, colleagues.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Peter Schiefke
I call this meeting back to order.
Colleagues, you should have all received the subamendment proposed by Mr. Barsalou-Duval in both official languages. I don't see any other debate on this, so we will go to a vote.
(Subamendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Now we will go to CPC-11, as amended.
Conservative
Philip Lawrence Conservative Northumberland—Clarke, ON
We have a subamendment as well. We wanted to add—and because we've got new letters here, this won't be accurate—the Auditor General Act, the Extractive Sector Transparency Measures Act, the Railway Safety Act, the Trade Unions Act, the Explosives Act and the Hazardous Products Act.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Peter Schiefke
I'm being asked by the legislative clerk to suspend to see if it's procedurally valid. We'll try and get this done, colleagues, before 11:59, because if it is not submitted by then, we won't be able to do it.
The meeting is suspended.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Peter Schiefke
I call this meeting back to order.
The legislative clerks have informed me that it is procedurally valid. That's the first point.
We do not have—correct me if I'm wrong—an official translation yet.
There was an issue with the subamendment that was moved by Mr. Barsalou-Duval and adopted. The legislative clerk wants me to read into the record “Use of French in Federally Regulated Private Businesses Act”. That's been read into the record. Thank you.
Colleagues, are we prepared to speak to Mr. Lawrence's subamendment?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Peter Schiefke
We'll go to a vote on Mr. Lawrence's subamendment.
(Subamendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Now we will go to a vote on CPC-11 as amended.
(Amendment as amended agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Now we're going to go back to CPC-10, colleagues, and according to the motion that was adopted by the House, it is now 11:59, and we've reached the point where there will no longer be any debate on any of the motions that we will be voting on. We will just go directly to a vote with no subamendments either.
Colleagues, we will now be voting on CPC-10.
(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Next we have PV-11. If PV-11 is adopted, NDP-30 and BQ-24 cannot be moved due to a line conflict.
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
We will vote on NDP-30. If NDP-30 is adopted, BQ-24 cannot be moved due to a line conflict.
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
BQ-24 has a line conflict with PV-11 and NDP-30.
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
We're on NDP-31, colleagues.
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
We have PV-12.
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
We have NDP-32.
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
We will now move on to BQ‑25.
(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
We will now move on to BQ‑26.
(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
We have NDP-33.
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
The next vote is on BQ-27.
(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
We will vote on NDP-34.
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
We will now vote on BQ-28.
(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
We are on BQ-29.
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
The next vote is NDP-35.
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
We will vote on BQ-30.
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Colleagues, we have reached NDP-36. I have to read the following decision: Bill C-5 seeks to enact the building Canada act. The amendment attempts to establish an indigenous advisory council, which would trigger additional expenses. House of Commons Procedure and Practice, third edition, states on page 772, “Since an amendment may not infringe upon the financial initiative of the Crown, it is inadmissible if it imposes a charge on the public treasury, or if it extends the objects or purposes or relaxes the conditions and qualifications specified in the royal recommendation.”
In the opinion of the chair, the amendment proposes a new scheme that imposes an additional charge on the public treasury. Therefore, I rule the amendment inadmissible.
Colleagues, we'll jump to BQ-32.
NDP-37 and BQ-31 conflict with BQ-32 since they pertain to the same line.
We shall vote on BQ-32.
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
We will vote on NDP-38.
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
We will now vote on BQ-33.
(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Colleagues, if NDP-39 is adopted, BQ-34 cannot be moved due to a line conflict.
Shall NDP-39 pass?
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Now we will go to BQ-34.
NDP-39 conflicts with BQ-34 since it pertains to the same lines of the bill.
We will now vote on BQ-34.
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
We will now vote on BQ-35.
(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
We'll now go to BQ-36.
If BQ-36 is adopted, CPC-12 and BQ-37 cannot be moved since there is a line conflict.
We will now vote on BQ-36.
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
We will now vote on BQ-37.
If BQ-37 is adopted, CPC-12 cannot be moved since it pertains to the same lines.
We will now vote on BQ-37.
(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
We are now on BQ-38.
(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
We'll now go to CPC-13, colleagues.
(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Peter Schiefke
We will now vote on BQ-39.
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Peter Schiefke
We'll now go to PV-13.
If PV-13 is adopted, NDP-40, BQ-41 and BQ-40 cannot be moved due to a line conflict.
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Peter Schiefke
We're on NDP-40.
If NDP-40 is adopted, BQ-40 and BQ-41 cannot be moved due to a line conflict.
Conservative
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Peter Schiefke
It is, yes. That's very astute of you.
Colleagues, the legislative clerk has asked me to read this for the knowledge of all members.
The committee has already adopted BQ-2, which introduces a concept that occurs only in BQ-40. In the interest of consistency, it would make sense to adopt it, but that is up to the committee.
So we will now vote on BQ-40.
(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
BQ‑41 can therefore no longer be moved.
Shall clause 4 as amended carry, colleagues? We amended a portion of it. I need an official vote.
Yes, it's adopted unanimously.
No? No, it's not adopted unanimously.
(Clause 4 as amended agreed to on division [See Minutes of Proceedings])
We'll now go to CPC-14, colleagues.
Conservative
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Peter Schiefke
Of course you are.
Colleagues, I need to read the following:
Bill C-5 enacts the free trade and labour mobility in Canada act and the building Canada act. The amendment seeks to amend the Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act. As House of Commons Procedure and Practice, third edition, states on page 770, and we all know this because we've obviously read the book from start to finish:
An amendment to a bill that was referred to a committee after second reading is out of order if it is beyond the scope and principle of the bill.
In the opinion of the chair, the amendment is beyond the scope of the bill. Therefore, I rule the amendment inadmissible.
