Evidence of meeting #24 for Veterans Affairs in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was medals.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Tom Scrimger  Assistant Deputy Minister, Citizenship and Heritage, Department of Canadian Heritage
Lyn Elliot Sherwood  Executive Director, Heritage Group, Department of Canadian Heritage
André Lévesque  Director, Honours and Recognition, Department of National Defence
Brian Storseth  Westlock—St. Paul, CPC

4:45 p.m.

Liberal

Judy Sgro Liberal York West, ON

I mean the overall bill, yes. I'm sorry.

4:45 p.m.

Conservative

The Acting Chair Conservative David Sweet

Okay.

(Clause 2 as amended agreed to)

There's an amendment to the short title. It's amendment G-2 and it's on page 2.

Mr. Kerr, would you like to speak to amendment G-2 on the short title of the bill?

4:45 p.m.

Conservative

Greg Kerr Conservative West Nova, NS

Yes, Mr. Chair.

It's, again, clarification of the actual terminology. There was a previous question about recognizing that it included orders, insignia, and medals, and this I think makes it consistent with other legislation.

4:45 p.m.

Conservative

The Acting Chair Conservative David Sweet

Very good.

I think our witnesses mentioned that as well.

Madam Zarac.

4:45 p.m.

Liberal

Lise Zarac Liberal LaSalle—Émard, QC

I would simply like to check something. Did the witnesses not recommend that we not use the word “military”, because some of the medals are not awarded?

4:45 p.m.

Director, Honours and Recognition, Department of National Defence

André Lévesque

In fact, the bill doesn't refer to military medals. What I said was that members of the military receive other medals, like the cross of courage. So it wouldn't be covered. Do we want to preserve military heritage or military medals? It's one or the other.

4:45 p.m.

Liberal

Lise Zarac Liberal LaSalle—Émard, QC

Thank you for that clarification.

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

The Acting Chair Conservative David Sweet

Okay. Very good.

(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

Shall clause 1 as amended carry?

(Clause 1 as amended agreed to)

Mr. Storseth.

4:50 p.m.

Westlock—St. Paul, CPC

Brian Storseth

I realize I'm coming to the party late with this. It's just a question. We've already passed the amendment.

It's on paragraph 3(2)(b). I was reading the amendment that we did. Paragraph 3(2)(b) reads as follows:

Subsection (1) does not apply to the transfer of an insignia to

(a) a near relative of the owner of insignia; or

(b) to an heir of the owner of the insignia upon the death of the owner.

Would it still read that way in the bill, Mr. Chair?

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

The Acting Chair Conservative David Sweet

Sorry, could you clarify what you are talking about?

4:50 p.m.

Westlock—St. Paul, CPC

Brian Storseth

I'm in paragraph 3(2)(b). Would it still read that way? We sped through it quickly.

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

The Acting Chair Conservative David Sweet

No, it would not. If you look at G-5.1, you'll see the actual wording of (2). There is no (a) and (b) anymore. There is (1)(a) and (b) and then (2).

4:50 p.m.

Westlock—St. Paul, CPC

Brian Storseth

So then “heir” would be taken out of there?

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

The Acting Chair Conservative David Sweet

No, it's there. It's just in the complete section of (2).

4:50 p.m.

Westlock—St. Paul, CPC

Brian Storseth

Can you read it to me then, Mr. Chair?

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

The Acting Chair Conservative David Sweet

I certainly will.

(2) Subsection (1) does not apply to the export of the insignia to a spouse or common-law partner, father, mother, grandfather, grandmother, child, child of the spouse or common-law partner, grandchild, brother, sister or heir of the owner of the insignia.

4:50 p.m.

Westlock—St. Paul, CPC

Brian Storseth

Thank you.

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

The Acting Chair Conservative David Sweet

You're quite welcome. Any time, Mr. Storseth.

4:50 p.m.

Westlock—St. Paul, CPC

Brian Storseth

I appreciate it.

(On clause 6)

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

The Acting Chair Conservative David Sweet

Amendment G-8.

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

Greg Kerr Conservative West Nova, NS

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Again, since we have the value of our witnesses here, you have expressed what might have been a concern with the wording of this...or have you actually seen the wording of this?

4:50 p.m.

Executive Director, Heritage Group, Department of Canadian Heritage

Lyn Elliot Sherwood

The wording that is proposed in this amendment addresses the concern we had raised in respect of the different language between the bill, as it had been presented, and the language of the Cultural Property Export and Import Act. The transaction “fair cash offer” is the transaction that mirrors the current “fair cash offer” role of the Canadian Cultural Property Export Review Board in case of a disputed price. The term is “fair cash offer”. The change is from “fair market value” to “fair cash offer”, and the amendment addresses that.

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

Greg Kerr Conservative West Nova, NS

So we did cover the concern that you raised?

October 21st, 2010 / 4:50 p.m.

Executive Director, Heritage Group, Department of Canadian Heritage

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

Greg Kerr Conservative West Nova, NS

That's as well as I could have explained it, but it was to make sure that we weren't in conflict with the pricing, and that it's “fair cash” and not “market”. That's the change this makes.

(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

(Clause 6 as amended agreed to)