I would like to return to a point of order raised earlier today by the member for Barrie—Innisfil. He questioned the validity of the vote on Motion No. 92, given that the seconder, the Minister of Finance, had left the chamber during the putting of the question by the Chair. The Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons suggested that the Minister of Canadian Heritage, who was present for the entirety of the putting of the question, could simply be replaced as the seconder.
The situation is similar to one in December 2012, when it was noticed the next sitting day after the taking of a vote that the minister moving the motion was not present as indicated when the Speaker put the question on a government bill to the House. The Speaker's ruling on December 5, 2012, included, as found on page 12908 of Debates, the following:
This kind of occurrence is, in my view, a minor oversight. It is our practice to consider that this progress of government bills represent the will of the cabinet.
That being the case for the mover of the bill, I am satisfied that it also holds for the case of a seconder. As has been pointed out, other government ministers were present for the duration of the putting of the question and as such, I am satisfied that the motion was properly before the House and the results of the vote are valid.
On a point of order, the hon. opposition House leader.