SMEM Committee Meeting

    I call the meeting to order.

    This is meeting number 5 of the Subcommittee on Private Members' Business of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, and we are here for the determination of non-votable items pursuant to Standing Order 91.1(1). I think we only have one item of business before us today.

    This should be a very quick one.

    The only bill for the consideration of the subcommittee this morning is Bill S-209, an act to amend the Criminal Code with respect to prize fights. This bill would modernize the exceptions for prize fighting in the Criminal Code.

     I will just remind members that this is a Senate public bill, so the only criterion used by the subcommittee is whether or not there has been a similar bill voted on in the House of Commons in the current Parliament, and it is not the case.

    My understanding, from the wise people at the table, is that we deal with it by consensus. If there's a consensus that it be votable, then we will send that message to the procedure and House affairs committee, PROC.

     I think it's votable.

    I just have a point of clarification. If we agree that it's votable, it doesn't go to the procedure and House affairs committee; it goes straight to the House of Commons. Is that not right?

    By a legal fiction, the report of the subcommittee is presented to the House as a report of PROC, by the chair of PROC, and since it's a votable item, it is deemed concurrent by the House.

    Okay?

    For efficacy reasons, we can get this one done for a change. I don't think we're going to have any long-winded arguments against it.

     I need somebody to move that the subcommittee present a report recommending that the item that it has determined should not be designated non-votable be considered by the House.

    It is so moved.

    On another topic, if this one is done...?

    We're satisfied? Okay.

    Why do we only have one item? Is there something else that will come?

    I think they can explain it to you.

    The replenishment take place in two weeks?

     Next week.

    Then you will come with a list of things that we need to review? Why did we need this meeting? Why didn't we wait?

    After the bill has been read a first time, it is placed at the bottom of the order of precedence. Every sitting day it moves up one spot in the order of precedence. We needed to consider the votability of this bill before it reached the top of the order of precedence so that the debate could start on the bill. It's a kind of urgency. It's good sometimes if we can combine the study of Senate bills along with the study of bills that are included in the replenishment, but this time it wasn't possible because of the timeline.

    So there is some urgency.

     It's going to get to the top too soon.

    So the next meeting is in two weeks.

    About two weeks.

    The replenishment is next week, and then there's a break week. Members with multiple items will have until Monday after we come back to confirm their items. We are likely not to have a complete list of the new items before that Monday. Then you will receive the packages with all the items, and perhaps we could meet the week after. I think that's the week of November 23.

    The last time, the previous group agreed that it would be good to have a week's notice. It has happened previously that we have had only one or two days' notice and it really was not easy to go through the 15 items in so short a time. Sometimes, we have no choice, but if we could have a week's notice, it would certainly be appreciated.

    That works.

    Thank you.

    Thank you.

    Is there nothing else?

    It's short and sweet.

     We're adjourned.