Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  I'm not sure what the question is.

Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  It was one word, and this is a bit more extensive. It's just to make sure that I have the whole subamendment all together.

Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  The mover cannot amend his or her own amendment, but somebody else can.

Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  If PV-14 is adopted, you will not be able to deal with the two others. but if it's defeated, then we will go to IND-5. Also, if IND-5 is adopted, the same principle will apply, and NDP-13 will fall.

Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  PV-13 is identical to your amendment. The committee has already decided once on the amendment, so there's no need to move it twice because the committee cannot pronounce itself twice on the same question.

Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  I don't know. The principle would be the following. It's better to amend the bill first and then add a new word in the bill undefined. If the courts want to define the term maltreatment afterwards, it's up to the courts. Rather than having a definition added to the bill and the word not appearing in the bill later on, once we arrive at the definition section, if maltreatment has been added to the bill, you will be able to define it as you wish.

Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  The committee adopted a routine motion about three and a half years ago for independents, and all amendments proposed by independents are deemed moved. Even though they are not present in the room, their amendments are going to be put to the question.

Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  Yes, it is.

Canadian Heritage committee  If you want to propose amendment 10.1, it would become the new clause 24.1.

Canadian Heritage committee  It's the same thing.

Canadian Heritage committee  No. It's deemed to be moved.

Canadian Heritage committee  It would be in paragraph (b) of amendment PV-2, replacing lines 35 and 36 on page 4 with the following: “tural activities—including language nest, mentorship and immersion programs—to increase the number of new speakers of indigenous languages, to create new speakers, including”— Oh, it's already there.

Canadian Heritage committee  I can read it if you like.

Canadian Heritage committee  I'm just going to read what the final version would look like. In English, it would be “assess the status of distinct indigenous languages”. The French would read: « évaluer le statut distinct des langues autochtones ».

Canadian Heritage committee  It's an unusual request. I've been here 18 years, and it's a first for me, hence the time required to give you an answer. We don't have a straight answer for you, as it stands. We have to go in parallel with what the chamber does. It's possible to pass a piece of legislation in the House at all stages, but it requires unanimous consent.