Skip to main content
Start of content

FINA Committee Meeting

Notices of Meeting include information about the subject matter to be examined by the committee and date, time and place of the meeting, as well as a list of any witnesses scheduled to appear. The Evidence is the edited and revised transcript of what is said before a committee. The Minutes of Proceedings are the official record of the business conducted by the committee at a sitting.

For an advanced search, use Publication Search tool.

If you have any questions or comments regarding the accessibility of this publication, please contact us at accessible@parl.gc.ca.

Previous day publication Next day publication
MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS
 
Meeting No. 39
 
Thursday, May 29, 2014
 

The Standing Committee on Finance met in a televised session at 3:36 p.m. this day, in Room 253-D, Centre Block, the Chair, James Rajotte, presiding.

 

Members of the Committee present: Mike Allen, Guy Caron, Nathan Cullen, Gerald Keddy, James Rajotte, Murray Rankin, Andrew Saxton and Dave Van Kesteren.

 

Acting Members present: Stella Ambler for Mark Adler, Raymond Côté for Guy Caron, Ted Hsu for Hon. Scott Brison, Laurin Liu for Nathan Cullen, Hon. John McKay for Hon. Scott Brison, Cathy McLeod for Andrew Saxton, Peggy Nash for Murray Rankin, Scott Simms for Hon. Scott Brison and Susan Truppe for Mark Adler.

 

Other Members present: Irene Mathyssen and Elizabeth May.

 

In attendance: Library of Parliament: Mark Mahabir, Analyst; Michaël Lambert-Racine, Analyst. House of Commons: David-Andrés Novoa, Legislative Clerk; Justin Vaive, Legislative Clerk.

 

Witnesses: Department of Finance: Sophie Amberg, Senior Economist, Financial Crimes - Domestic; Dan Calof, Director, Financial Markets Division; Ted Cook, Senior Legislative Chief, Tax Legislation Division, Tax Policy Branch; Brian Ernewein, General Director, Tax Policy Branch; Wayne Foster, Director, Securities Policies; Michèle Govier, Chief, Trade Remedies and General Trade Relations; Rachel Grasham, Chief, Financial Sector Division; Soren Halverson, Senior Chief, Corporate Finance and Asset Management; Nicolas Marion, Chief, Capital Markets and International Affairs, Securities Policies Division; David Smith, Senior Project Leader, Capital Markets Policy; James Wu, Chief, Financial Institutions Analysis; Robert Chapman, Tax Policy Officer, Business Income Tax Division. Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency: Denise Frenette, Vice-President, Finance and Corporate Services. Bank of Canada: Robert Turnbull, Special Counsel, Financial Systems. Canada Border Services Agency: Colette Cibula, Director, Recourse Program Management, Recourse Directorate; Barry Kong, Director, Compliance and Program Management. Canada Deposit Insurance Corporation: Mark Maltais, Director, Treasury and Investment Management. Canada Revenue Agency: Brian McCauley, Assistant Commissioner. Canadian Food Inspection Agency: Lyzette Johnston, Director, Food Regulatory Modernization, Policy and Programs Branch; Nicolas McCandie-Glustein, Manager, Legislative Affairs; Tony Ritchie, Executive Director, Strategic Policy and International Affairs; Susie Miller, Director General, Sector Development and Analysis Directorate, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. Department of Citizenship and Immigration: Maia Welbourne, Senior Director, Policy Integration and Innovation; Susan MacPhee, Director, Economic Immigration Policy and Program Division; Randal Kowalchuck, Counsel, Legal Services; Matthew Oommen, Senior Counsel, Legal Services. Department of Foreign Affairs: Vishva Ramlall, Deputy Director, Softwood Lumber. Department of Employment and Social Development: Colin Spencer James, Director, Policy and Program Design, Temporary Foreign Workers, Skills and Employment Branch; Nathalie Martel, Director, Old Age Security Policy, Income Security and Social Development Branch; Atiq Rahman, Director, Operational Policy and Research; Jean-François Roussy, Director, Self Employed and Other Initiatives, Employment and Social Development Canada; Laurent Quintal, Assistant Director, Strategic Policy. Department of Canadian Heritage: Cynthia White-Thornley, Executive Director, Heritage Group. Department of Health: Suzy McDonald, Director General, Workplace Hazardous Materials Directorate, Healthy Environments and Consumer Safety Branch; John Morales, Legal Counsel, Legal Services Unit; Jason Wood, Director, Policy and Program Development, Workplace Hazardous Materials Directorate, Healthy Environments and Consumer Safety Branch. Department of Industry: Darlene Carreau, Chairperson, Trade-marks Opposition Board; Paul Halucha, Director General, Marketplace Framework Policy Branch; Christopher Johnstone, Senior Director, Industry Framework Policy; Pamela Miller, Director General, Telecommunications Policy Branch; Phil Morrison, Senior Analyst, Marketplace Framework Policy Branch; Michael Ryan, Senior Analyst, Copyright and Trade-mark Policy Directorate. Department of Justice: Sonia Beaulieu, General Counsel, Tax Counsel Division, Finance Canada; Rambod Behboodi, General Counsel, General Legal Services Division, Finance Canada; Diana Cacic, Counsel, General Legal Services Division, Finance Canada; Ann Chaplin, Senior General Counsel; Martin Marcone, Senior Counsel, General Legal Services Division, Finance Canada; Catherine McKinnon, Senior Counsel, Judicial Affairs, Courts and Tribunal Policy; France Pégeot, Special Advisor to the Deputy Minister; Patrick Xavier, Counsel, Judicial Affairs, Courts and Tribunal Policy. Department of National Defence: LCol Dave Antonyshyn, Directorate of Law Military Personnel; LCol Jeff Smith, Director, Defence Force Planning; LCol Perry Poirier, Assistant G1, Canadian Army. Department of Transport: Isabelle Jacques, General Counsel and Associate Head; Thao Pham, Assistant Deputy Minister, Federal Montreal Bridges; Kash Ram, Director General, Road Safety and Motor Vehicle Regulation; Donald Roussel, Acting Associate Assistant Deputy Minister, Safety and Security; Michel Leclerc, Director, Regulatory Affairs Coordination. Treasury Board Secretariat: Dennis Duggan, Senior Policy Analyst, Compensation and Labour Relations Sector; Drew Heavens, Senior Director, Labour Relations Operations; Laura MacLean, Analyst, Pension Policy and Stakeholder Relations; Deborah Weekes, Pension Policy Officer, Pension and Benefits Sector. Department of Veterans Affairs: Bernard Butler, Director General, Policy Division, Policy, Communications and Commemoration Branch.

 
Pursuant to the Order of Reference of Tuesday, April 8, 2014, the Committee resumed consideration of Bill C-31, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on February 11, 2014 and other measures.
 

Ted Cook, Brian Ernewein, Bernard Butler, Jason Wood, Suzy McDonald, John Morales, Brian McCauley, Denise Frenette, Soren Halverson, Wayne Foster, James Wu, Lyzette Johnston, Michel Leclerc, Donald Roussel, Kash Ram, Nicolas McCandie Glustein, Matthew Oommen, Colin Spencer James, Susan MacPhee, Maia Welbourne, Randal Kowalchuck, Darlene Carreau, Paul Halucha, Michael Ryan, Nathalie Martel, Thao Pham, Ann Chaplin and France Pégeot answered questions.

 

The Committee resumed its clause-by-clause study of the Bill.

 

On Clause 99,

Murray Rankin moved, — That Bill C-31, in Clause 99, be amended by adding after line 11 on page 73 the following:

“(2) Despite any other provision of this Act or the Agreement, for all purposes related to the implementation of this Act and the Agreement, “U.S. Person” and “Specified U.S. Person” does not include any person who is

(a) a Canadian citizen within the meaning of the Citizenship Act or a permanent resident within the meaning of subsection 2(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act; and

(b) ordinarily resident in Canada.”

 

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Murray Rankin and it was negatived on the following recorded division: YEAS: Guy Caron, Nathan Cullen, Ted Hsu, Murray Rankin — 4; NAYS: Mike Allen, Gerald Keddy, Andrew Saxton, Susan Truppe, Dave Van Kesteren — 5.

 
Ted Hsu moved, — That Bill C-31, in Clause 99, be amended by deleting lines 15 to 21 on page 73.

 

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Ted Hsu and it was negatived on the following recorded division: YEAS: Guy Caron, Nathan Cullen, Ted Hsu, Murray Rankin — 4; NAYS: Mike Allen, Gerald Keddy, Andrew Saxton, Susan Truppe, Dave Van Kesteren — 5.

 

Pursuant to the order adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, November 5, 2013, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-31, in Clause 99, be amended by replacing lines 17 to 19 on page 73 with the following:

“this Act or the Agreement and Article XXVII of the Convention, as defined in section 2 of the Canada-United States Tax Convention Act, 1984, the provisions of this Act and”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment and it was negatived on the following recorded division: YEAS: Guy Caron, Nathan Cullen, Ted Hsu, Murray Rankin — 4; NAYS: Mike Allen, Gerald Keddy, Andrew Saxton, Susan Truppe, Dave Van Kesteren — 5.

 
Murray Rankin moved, — That Bill C-31, in Clause 99, be amended by adding after line 21 on page 73 the following:

“(1.1) For greater certainty, the phrase “other law” in subsection (1) does not include any Act that express fundamental values such as the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the Canadian Bill of Rights, the Canadian Human Rights Act, the Privacy Act, the Official Languages Act and the Access to Information Act.”

 

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Murray Rankin and it was negatived on the following recorded division: YEAS: Guy Caron, Nathan Cullen, Ted Hsu, Murray Rankin — 4; NAYS: Mike Allen, Gerald Keddy, Andrew Saxton, Susan Truppe, Dave Van Kesteren — 5.

 
Ted Hsu moved, — That Bill C-31, in Clause 99, be amended by adding after line 30 on page 73 the following:

“(2) The regulations made under subsection (1) may not come into force earlier than one year after the coming into force of this Act.”

 

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Ted Hsu and it was negatived on the following recorded division: YEAS: Guy Caron, Nathan Cullen, Ted Hsu, Murray Rankin — 4; NAYS: Mike Allen, Gerald Keddy, Andrew Saxton, Susan Truppe, Dave Van Kesteren — 5.

 
Ted Hsu moved, — That Bill C-31, in Clause 99, be amended by adding after line 40 on page 73 the following:

“(2.1) No instrument amending the Agreement may enter into force unless it has been tabled in the House of Commons by the Minister of Finance.”

 

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Ted Hsu and it was negatived on the following recorded division: YEAS: Guy Caron, Nathan Cullen, Ted Hsu, Murray Rankin — 4; NAYS: Mike Allen, Gerald Keddy, Andrew Saxton, Susan Truppe, Dave Van Kesteren — 5.

 
Murray Rankin moved, — That Bill C-31, in Clause 99, be amended by adding after line 44 on page 73 the following:

“7. (1) This Act is repealed.

(2) The portion of subsection 162(6) of the Income Tax Act before paragraph (b) is replaced by the following:

(6) Every person or partnership who fails to provide on request their Social Insurance Number or their business number to a person required under this Act or a regulation to make an information return requiring the number is liable to a penalty of $100 for each such failure, unless

(a) an application for the assignment of the number is made within 15 days after the request was received; and

(3) Part XVIII of the Income Tax Act is repealed.

(4) Subsections (1), (2) and (3) come into force on the effective date of the termination referred to in Article 10 of the Agreement.

(5) The Minister must cause the effective date of the termination of the Agreement to be published in the Canada Gazette .”

 

By unanimous consent, the amendment was withdrawn.

 

Clause 99 carried on the following recorded division: YEAS: Mike Allen, Gerald Keddy, Andrew Saxton, Susan Truppe, Dave Van Kesteren — 5; NAYS: Guy Caron, Nathan Cullen, Ted Hsu, Murray Rankin — 4.

 

Clause 100 carried on the following recorded division: YEAS: Mike Allen, Gerald Keddy, Andrew Saxton, Susan Truppe, Dave Van Kesteren — 5; NAYS: Guy Caron, Nathan Cullen, Ted Hsu, Murray Rankin — 4.

 

On Clause 101,

Pursuant to the order adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, November 5, 2013, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-31, in Clause 101, be amended by replacing line 29 on page 76 with the following:

“treated as a U.S. reportable account, other than

(a) if the account holder is an individual, a financial account that, at any time during the reporting period, was held by an individual that is

(i) a Canadian citizen within the meaning of the Citizenship Act or a permanent resident within the meaning of subsection 2(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, and

(ii) ordinarily resident in Canada; and

(b) if the account holder is an entity that is a company, estate or trust, a financial account that, at any time during the reporting period, was held by an entity that derived its status from the laws in force in Canada.”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment and it was negatived on the following recorded division: YEAS: Guy Caron, Nathan Cullen, Ted Hsu, Murray Rankin — 4; NAYS: Mike Allen, Gerald Keddy, Andrew Saxton, Susan Truppe, Dave Van Kesteren — 5.

 
Ted Hsu moved, — That Bill C-31, in Clause 101, be amended by replacing line 29 on page 76 with the following:

“treated as a U.S. reportable account, other than

(a) if the account holder is an individual, a financial account that, at any time during the reporting period, was held by an individual that is ordinarily resident in Canada; and

(b) if the account holder is an entity that is a company, estate or trust, a financial account that, at any time during the reporting period, was held by an entity that derived its status from the laws in force in Canada.”

 

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Ted Hsu and it was negatived on the following recorded division: YEAS: Guy Caron, Nathan Cullen, Ted Hsu, Murray Rankin — 4; NAYS: Mike Allen, Gerald Keddy, Andrew Saxton, Susan Truppe, Dave Van Kesteren — 5.

 

Pursuant to the order adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, November 5, 2013, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-31, in Clause 101, be amended by adding after line 6 on page 77 the following:

“(2.1) For the purposes of this Part, the agreement is to be read as if subparagraph (1) of the definition of “U.S. Person“ in subparagraph 1(ee) of Article 1 of the agreement were read as follows:

(1) a U.S. citizen or resident individual who is not a resident of Canada.”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 4; NAYS: 5.

 

Pursuant to the order adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, November 5, 2013, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-31, in Clause 101, be amended by replacing line 39 on page 77 with the following:

“ing Canadian financial institution shall designate”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 4; NAYS: 5.

 

Pursuant to the order adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, November 5, 2013, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-31, in Clause 101, be amended by adding after line 9 on page 78 the following:

“(e) held by an individual who is a resident of Canada for the purposes of this Act.”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 4; NAYS: 5.

 

Pursuant to the order adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, November 5, 2013, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-31, in Clause 101, be amended by adding after line 22 on page 78 the following:

“(1.1) The due diligence procedures established by the reporting Canadian financial institution shall provide that only a form authorized by it or the Minister may be used.”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 3; NAYS: 6.

 
Ted Hsu moved, — That Bill C-31, in Clause 101, be amended by adding after line 19 on page 81 the following:

“(5.1) For the purposes of this Part, a reference in the agreement to “which may be on an IRS Form W-8” or to “which may be on an IRS Form W-8 or W-9” is to be read as a reference to “which may only be on a form similar to the IRS Form W-8 that has been established by the Minister of Finance”.”

 

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Ted Hsu and it was negatived on the following recorded division: YEAS: Guy Caron, Nathan Cullen, Ted Hsu, Murray Rankin — 4; NAYS: Mike Allen, Gerald Keddy, Andrew Saxton, Susan Truppe, Dave Van Kesteren — 5.

 
Murray Rankin moved, — That Bill C-31, in Clause 101, be amended by adding after line 23 on page 82 the following:

“265.1 Every reporting Canadian financial institution shall send a written notice to the holder of the U.S. reportable account at least 60 days before sending the information concerning the account under the agreement.”

 

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Murray Rankin and it was negatived on the following recorded division: YEAS: Guy Caron, Nathan Cullen, Ted Hsu, Murray Rankin — 4; NAYS: Mike Allen, Gerald Keddy, Andrew Saxton, Susan Truppe, Dave Van Kesteren — 5.

 
Ted Hsu moved, — That Bill C-31, in Clause 101, be amended by adding after line 42 on page 82 the following:

“266.1 No information in respect of a taxpayer shall be provided under the agreement if the taxpayer can demonstrate

(a) if the taxpayer is an individual, that, at any time during the reporting period, he or she was ordinarily resident in Canada; or

(b) if the taxpayer is an entity that is a company, estate or trust, that, at any time during the reporting period, its status was derived from the laws in force in Canada.”

 

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Ted Hsu and it was negatived on the following recorded division: YEAS: Raymond Côté, Nathan Cullen, Ted Hsu, Murray Rankin — 4; NAYS: Mike Allen, Gerald Keddy, Andrew Saxton, Susan Truppe, Dave Van Kesteren — 5.

 
Ted Hsu moved, — That Bill C-31, in Clause 101, be amended by replacing line 39 on page 83 with the following:

“(2) Subsection (1) comes into force one year after the”

 

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Ted Hsu and it was negatived on the following recorded division: YEAS: Raymond Côté, Nathan Cullen, Ted Hsu, Murray Rankin — 4; NAYS: Mike Allen, Gerald Keddy, Andrew Saxton, Susan Truppe, Dave Van Kesteren — 5.

 

Clause 101 carried on the following recorded division: YEAS: Mike Allen, Gerald Keddy, Andrew Saxton, Susan Truppe, Dave Van Kesteren — 5; NAYS: Raymond Côté, Nathan Cullen, Ted Hsu, Murray Rankin — 4.

 

At 5:30 p.m., the sitting was suspended.

At 5:51 p.m., the sitting resumed.

 

On Clause 102,

Nathan Cullen moved, — That Bill C-31, in Clause 102, be amended by replacing lines 5 and 6 on page 84 with the following:

“Act for the period that began on April 1, 2006 and ended on September 30, 2012—or”

Debate arose thereon.

 

RULING BY THE CHAIR

Bill C-31 establishes, retroactively, a period for which Earning Loss Benefit applicants and recipients will receive a compensation.

The amendment seeks to expand this period. As House of Commons Procedure and Practice, Second Edition, states on pages 767-768:

“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, by modifying the period of admissibility, infringes on the conditions and qualifications specified in the royal recommendation. Therefore I rule the amendment inadmissible.

 

After debate, Clause 102 carried on the following recorded division: YEAS: Mike Allen, Gerald Keddy, Andrew Saxton, Scott Simms, Susan Truppe, Dave Van Kesteren — 6; NAYS: Raymond Côté, Nathan Cullen, Murray Rankin — 3.

 

On Clause 103,

Nathan Cullen moved, — That Bill C-31, in Clause 103, be amended by replacing line 2 on page 85 with the following:

“the period that began on April 1, 2006 and”

Debate arose thereon.

 

RULING BY THE CHAIR

Bill C-31 establishes, retroactively, a period for which Canadian Forces Income Support applicants and recipients will receive a compensation. The amendment seeks to expand this period.

As House of Commons Procedure and Practice, Second Edition, states on pages 767-768:

“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, by modifying the period of admissibility, infringes on the conditions and qualifications specified in the royal recommendation. Therefore I rule the amendment inadmissible.

 

After debate, Clause 103 carried on the following recorded division: YEAS: Mike Allen, Gerald Keddy, Andrew Saxton, Scott Simms, Susan Truppe, Dave Van Kesteren — 6; NAYS: Raymond Côté, Nathan Cullen, Peggy Nash — 3.

 

On Clause 104,

Nathan Cullen moved, — That Bill C-31, in Clause 104, be amended by replacing line 38 on page 85 with the following:

“began on April 1, 2006 and ended on”

Debate arose thereon.

 

RULING BY THE CHAIR

Bill C-31 establishes, retroactively, a period for which War Veterans allowance applicants and recipients will receive a compensation. The amendment seeks to expand this period.

As House of Commons Procedure and Practice, Second Edition, states on pages 767-768:

“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, by modifying the period of admissibility, infringes on the conditions and qualifications specified in the royal recommendation. Therefore I rule the amendment inadmissible.

 

After debate, Clause 104 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 3.

 

On Clause 105,

Nathan Cullen moved, — That Bill C-31, in Clause 105, be amended by replacing line 22 on page 86 with the following:

“for the period that began on April 1, 2006”

 

RULING BY THE CHAIR

Bill C-31 establishes, retroactively, a period for which Civilian War Veterans Allowance applicants and recipients will receive a compensation. The amendment seeks to expand this period.

As House of Commons Procedure and Practice, Second Edition, states on pages 767-768:

“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, by modifying the period of admissibility, infringes on the conditions and qualifications specified in the royal recommendation. Therefore I rule the amendment inadmissible.

 

After debate, Clause 105 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 6; NAYS: 3.

 

Clause 106 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 9; NAYS: 0.

 

Clause 107 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 9; NAYS: 0.

 

By unanimous consent, Clauses 108 and 109 carried severally.

 

By unanimous consent, after debate, Clauses 110 to 113 inclusive carried on division severally.

 

On Clause 114,

John McKay moved, — That Bill C-31, in Clause 114, be amended by replacing line 3 on page 93 with the following:

“the regulations made under that subsection, unless exempted by the regulations.”

 

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of John McKay and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 1; NAYS: 8.

 

Pursuant to the order adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, November 5, 2013, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-31, in Clause 114, be amended

(a) by replacing lines 7 to 13 on page 93 with the following:

“storage in a work place in Canada.”

(b) by replacing lines 17 to 23 on page 93 with the following:

“storage in a work place in Canada.”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 1; NAYS: 5.

 

Clause 114 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 6; NAYS: 3.

 

On Clause 115,

Pursuant to the order adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, November 5, 2013, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-31, in Clause 115, be amended by adding after line 29 on page 97 the following:

“(l.1) requiring any supplier who sells or imports a product, mixture, material or substance injected into the ground in hydraulic fracturing operations for the extraction of oil and gas to make its complete chemical composition and toxicity publicly available;”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment and it was negatived on the following recorded division: YEAS: Raymond Côté, Nathan Cullen, John McKay, Peggy Nash — 4; NAYS: Mike Allen, Stella Ambler, Gerald Keddy, Andrew Saxton, Dave Van Kesteren — 5.

 

Pursuant to the order adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, November 5, 2013, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-31, in Clause 115, be amended by adding after line 35 on page 97 the following:

“(2.1) In the absence of scientific consensus regarding the safety of a product intended for use, handling or storage in a work place in Canada, the Governor in Council shall apply the precautionary principle to that product and classify it by regulations made under subsection (1) as a hazardous product.”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 3; NAYS: 5.

 

Clause 115 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 6; NAYS: 3.

 

By unanimous consent, Clauses 116 to 118 inclusive carried severally carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 6; NAYS: 3.

 

On Clause 119,

Pursuant to the order adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, November 5, 2013, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-31, in Clause 119, be amended by adding after line 28 on page 99 the following:

“(2) The Governor in Council may delete or amend a reference under subsection (1) only after having taken into account the precautionary principle and any change in the scientific consensus regarding the safety of a product.

(3) The Governor in Council shall make publicly available all relevant information taken into account in amending Schedule 1 or 2.”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 2; NAYS: 6.

 

Clause 119 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 6; NAYS: 3.

 

By unanimous consent, Clauses 120 to 162 inclusive carried on division severally.

 

On Clause 163,

Pursuant to the order adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, November 5, 2013, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-31, in Clause 163, be amended by adding after line 18 on page 131 the following:

“(i) the importation of wine, beer or spirits from a province by an individual or a small-scale, Canadian-owned producer of wine, beer or spirits, if the individual or the producer brings the wine, beer or spirits or causes them to be brought into another province, in quantities and as permitted by the laws of the other province, for the promotion of wine, beer or spirits produced by the small-scale, Canadian-owned producer of wine, beer or spirits.”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 3; NAYS: 5.

 

Clause 163 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 9; NAYS: 0.

 

By unanimous consent, Clauses 164 to 174 inclusive carried severally.

 

After debate, Clause 175 carried on the following recorded division: YEAS: Mike Allen, Stella Ambler, Gerald Keddy, Cathy McLeod, Dave Van Kesteren — 5; NAYS: Raymond Côté, Nathan Cullen, Laurin Liu, Murray Rankin — 4.

 

Clause 176 carried on division.

 

On Clause 177,

Nathan Cullen moved, — That Bill C-31, in Clause 177, be amended by replacing lines 6 and 7 on page 135 with the following:

“177. Subsection 21(2) of the Act is replaced by the following:

(2) The President shall, on or before September 15, 2017 and every four years after that, submit to the Minister a comprehensive report, in addition to the annual report of the Agency, providing an evaluation of all activities in which the Agency was involved and the impact those activities have had on regional disparity.”

Debate arose thereon.

 

RULING BY THE CHAIR

Bill C-31 seeks to amend the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency Act by removing the requirement that a comprehensive report be submitted by the Agency President to the responsible minister. The amendment aims to re-establish the requirement for a report and that it be submitted to the minister every four years.

As House of Commons Procedure and Practice, Second Edition, states on page 766:

“An amendment to a bill that was referred to 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 seeks to maintain the report requirement, which is contrary to the principle of the Bill. Therefore I rule the amendment inadmissible.

 

After debate, Clause 177 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 4.

 

Clause 178 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 6; NAYS: 3.

 

By unanimous consent, Clauses 179 to 181 inclusive carried severally.

 

On Clause 182,

John McKay moved, — That Bill C-31, in Clause 182, be amended by replacing line 13 on page 137 with the following:

“described in subsection (2) or an employee who was hired after June 1, 2008, through a process that the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner considers to have been a wrongdoing under paragraph 8(e) of the Public Servants Disclosure Protection Act, is deemed, on the”

 

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of John McKay and it was negatived on the following recorded division: YEAS: Guy Caron, Nathan Cullen, John McKay, Peggy Nash — 4; NAYS: Mike Allen, Stella Ambler, Gerald Keddy, Cathy McLeod, Dave Van Kesteren — 5.

 

Clause 182 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 4.

 

On Clause 183,

John McKay moved, — That Bill C-31, in Clause 183, be amended by replacing lines 22 and 23 on page 138 with the following:

“Corporations's Board of Directors has any right to”

 

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of John McKay and it was negatived on the following recorded division: YEAS: Guy Caron, Nathan Cullen, John McKay, Peggy Nash — 4; NAYS: Mike Allen, Stella Ambler, Gerald Keddy, Cathy McLeod, Dave Van Kesteren — 5.

 

Clause 183 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 4.

 

By unanimous consent, Clauses 184 to 192 inclusive carried severally by a show of hands: YEAS: 6; NAYS: 3.

 

Clause 193 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 8; NAYS: 1.

 

By unanimous consent, Clauses 194 and 195 inclusive carried severally by a show of hands: YEAS: 9; NAYS: 0.

 

By unanimous consent, Clauses 196 to 199 inclusive carried severally by a show of hands: YEAS: 8; NAYS: 1.

 

Clause 200 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 9; NAYS: 0.

 

By unanimous consent, Clauses 201 to 204 inclusive carried severally by a show of hands: YEAS: 8; NAYS: 1.

 

Clause 205 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 9; NAYS: 0.

 

At 7:37 p.m., the sitting was suspended.

At 7:48 p.m., the sitting resumed.

 

Clause 206 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 4.

 

On Clause 207,

Nathan Cullen moved, — That Bill C-31, in Clause 207, be amended by replacing line 35 on page 143 with the following:

“Canada, provided the minister responsible for the administration of that Act publishes any written undertaking from the person to Her Majesty in right of Canada referred to in paragraph 19(1)(c) of that Act, and”

 

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Nathan Cullen and it was negatived on the following recorded division: YEAS: Guy Caron, Nathan Cullen, John McKay, Peggy Nash — 4; NAYS: Mike Allen, Stella Ambler, Gerald Keddy, Cathy McLeod, Dave Van Kesteren — 5.

 

Clause 207 carried on the following recorded division: YEAS: Mike Allen, Stella Ambler, Gerald Keddy, Cathy McLeod, Dave Van Kesteren — 5; NAYS: Guy Caron, Nathan Cullen, John McKay, Peggy Nash — 4.

 

By unanimous consent, Clauses 208 and 209 carried severally by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 4.

 

On Clause 210,

Pursuant to the order adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, November 5, 2013, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-31, in Clause 210, be amended by replacing line 22 on page 144 with the following:

“415.2 (1) The Governor in Council may, for the purposes of ensuring the systemic stability of the Canadian banking sector and of guaranteeing Canadians the maximum possible accountability and transparency of banks' activities in relation to derivatives, ”

The question was put on the amendment and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 3; NAYS: 6.

 

After debate, Clause 210 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 9; NAYS: 0.

 

On Clause 211,

John McKay moved, — That Bill C-31, in Clause 211, be amended by replacing lines 22 and 23 on page 145 with the following:

“211. (1) Subsections 237(1.4) and (1.5) of the Insurance Companies Act are replaced by the following:

(1.4) All policyholders of a policy issued by the mutual company, whether or not they are eligible policyholders, are entitled to notice of and to vote at a special meeting.

(1.5) Any approval, confirmation or authorization referred to in subsection (1.1) must be given by special resolution of all policyholders of a policy issued by the mutual company, whether or not they are eligible policyholders, and a quorum of policyholders is present if a majority of all policyholders are present in person or represented by proxyholders.

(1.1) Subsection 237(2) of the Act is amended by adding”

 

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of John McKay and it was negatived on the following recorded division: YEAS: Guy Caron, Laurin Liu, John McKay, Murray Rankin — 4; NAYS: Mike Allen, Stella Ambler, Gerald Keddy, Andrew Saxton, Dave Van Kesteren — 5.

 
Guy Caron moved, — That Bill C-31, in Clause 211, be amended by replacing lines 22 and 23 on page 145 with the following:

“211. (1) Subsection 237(1.5) of the Insurance Companies Act is replaced by the following:

(1.5) Any approval, confirmation or authorization referred to in subsection (1.1) must be given by special resolution of the policyholders of a policy issued by the mutual company, whether or not they are eligible policyholders.

(1.1) Subsection 237(2) of the Act is amended by adding”

 

The question was put on the amendment of Guy Caron and it was negatived on the following recorded division: YEAS: Guy Caron, Laurin Liu, John McKay, Murray Rankin — 4; NAYS: Mike Allen, Stella Ambler, Gerald Keddy, Andrew Saxton, Dave Van Kesteren — 5.

 
Guy Caron moved, — That Bill C-31, in Clause 211, be amended by replacing line 28 on page 145 with the following:

“of a conversion proposal that guarantees all policyholders of a policy issued by the mutual company the right to vote on the proposal, whether or not they are eligible policyholders, and respecting the”

 

The question was put on the amendment of Guy Caron and it was negatived on the following recorded division: YEAS: Guy Caron, Laurin Liu, John McKay, Murray Rankin — 4; NAYS: Mike Allen, Stella Ambler, Gerald Keddy, Andrew Saxton, Dave Van Kesteren — 5.

 

Clause 211 carried on the following recorded division: YEAS: Mike Allen, Stella Ambler, Gerald Keddy, Andrew Saxton, Dave Van Kesteren — 5; NAYS: Guy Caron, Laurin Liu, John McKay, Murray Rankin — 4.

 

By unanimous consent, Clauses 212 to 222 inclusive carried on division severally.

 

After debate, Clause 223 carried on the following recorded division: YEAS: Mike Allen, Stella Ambler, Gerald Keddy, Andrew Saxton, Dave Van Kesteren — 5; NAYS: Guy Caron, Laurin Liu, John McKay, Murray Rankin — 4.

 

Clause 224 carried on the following recorded division: YEAS: Mike Allen, Stella Ambler, Gerald Keddy, Andrew Saxton, Dave Van Kesteren — 5; NAYS: Guy Caron, Laurin Liu, John McKay, Murray Rankin — 4.

 

After debate, Clause 225 carried on the following recorded division: YEAS: Mike Allen, Stella Ambler, Gerald Keddy, Andrew Saxton, Dave Van Kesteren — 5; NAYS: Guy Caron, Laurin Liu, John McKay, Murray Rankin — 4.

 

By unanimous consent, Clauses 226 to 230 inclusive carried severally by a show of hands: YEAS: 8; NAYS: 1.

 

On Clause 231,

Pursuant to the order adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, November 5, 2013, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-31, in Clause 231, be amended by replacing line 27 on page 156 with the following:

“and the heading before it are replaced by the following:

REGULATIONS — TRANSPARENCY

50.(1) Except where the Minister is of the opinion that a regulation must be made expeditiously in order to prevent injury to person or damage to property, the Minister shall, respecting every regulation that is proposed to be made under this Act,

(a) publish a copy of each proposed regulation in the Canada Gazette at least 180 days before its proposed effective date; and

(b) engage in consultation with any community that could be affected by the proposed regulation.”

 

RULING BY THE CHAIR

Bill C-13 amends the Railway Safety Act by removing section 50, which requires pre-publication of certain proposed regulations Canada Gazette. The amendment seeks to re-establish the pre-publication requirement by expanding it to every regulation made under the act.

As House of Commons Procedure and Practice, Second Edition, states on page 766:

“An amendment to a bill that was referred to 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 seeks to maintain the pre-publication requirement, which is contrary to the principle of the Bill. Therefore the amendment is inadmissible.

 

After debate, Clause 231 carried on the following recorded division: YEAS: Mike Allen, Stella Ambler, Gerald Keddy, Andrew Saxton, Dave Van Kesteren — 5; NAYS: Guy Caron, Laurin Liu, John McKay, Murray Rankin — 4.

 

Clause 232 carried on the following recorded division: YEAS: Mike Allen, Stella Ambler, Gerald Keddy, Andrew Saxton, Dave Van Kesteren — 5; NAYS: Guy Caron, Laurin Liu, John McKay, Murray Rankin — 4.

 

Clause 233 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 8; NAYS: 1.

 

By unanimous consent, Clauses 234 to 238 inclusive carried severally by a show of hands: YEAS: 9; NAYS: 0.

 

At 8:52 p.m., the sitting was suspended.

At 9:00 p.m., the sitting resumed.

 

Clause 239 carried on the following recorded division: YEAS: Mike Allen, Stella Ambler, Guy Caron, Gerald Keddy, Laurin Liu, John McKay, Murray Rankin, Andrew Saxton, Dave Van Kesteren — 9; NAYS: — 0.

 

By unanimous consent, Clauses 240 and 241 carried severally by a show of hands: YEAS: 9; NAYS: 0.

 

Clause 242 carried on the following recorded division: YEAS: Mike Allen, Stella Ambler, Guy Caron, Gerald Keddy, Laurin Liu, John McKay, Murray Rankin, Andrew Saxton, Dave Van Kesteren — 9; NAYS: — 0.

 

By unanimous consent, Clauses 243 to 248 carried severally by a show of hands: YEAS: 9; NAYS: 0.

 

By unanimous consent, Clauses 249 to 251 inclusive carried severally by a show of hands: YEAS: 9; NAYS: 0.

 

By unanimous consent, Clauses 252 and 253 inclusive carried severally by a show of hands: YEAS: 8; NAYS: 1.

 

By unanimous consent, Clauses 254 to 257 inclusive carried severally by a show of hands: YEAS: 9; NAYS: 0.

 

After debate, Clause 258 carried on the following recorded division: YEAS: Mike Allen, Stella Ambler, Gerald Keddy, John McKay, Andrew Saxton, Dave Van Kesteren — 6; NAYS: Guy Caron, Laurin Liu, Murray Rankin — 3.

 

By unanimous consent, Clauses 259 to 293 inclusive carried severally by a show of hands: YEAS: 9; NAYS: 0.

 

After debate, Clause 294 carried on the following recorded division: YEAS: Mike Allen, Stella Ambler, Gerald Keddy, John McKay, Andrew Saxton, Dave Van Kesteren — 6; NAYS: Guy Caron, Laurin Liu, Murray Rankin — 3.

 

By unanimous consent, Clauses 295 to 298 inclusive carried severally by a show of hands: YEAS: 9; NAYS: 0.

 

Clause 299 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 8; NAYS: 0.

 

After debate, Clause 300 carried on the following recorded division: YEAS: Mike Allen, Stella Ambler, Gerald Keddy, John McKay, Andrew Saxton, Dave Van Kesteren — 6; NAYS: Guy Caron, Laurin Liu, Murray Rankin — 3.

 

On Clause 301,

John McKay moved, — That Bill C-31, in Clause 301, be amended by replacing lines 3 to 8 on page 198 with the following:

“(5) The regulations may provide that foreign nationals who make an application for a visa or other document under subsection 11(1) and foreign nationals who were issued an invitation under Division 0.1 to apply for permanent residence may make those applications by means”

 

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of John McKay and it was negatived on the following recorded division: YEAS: Guy Caron, Laurin Liu, John McKay, Murray Rankin — 4; NAYS: Mike Allen, Stella Ambler, Gerald Keddy, Andrew Saxton, Dave Van Kesteren — 5.

 

By unanimous consent, it was agreed, — That the result of the vote on the previous amendment be applied to the following amendment which is therefore also negatived:

That Bill C-31, in Clause 302, be amended by replacing lines 19 and 20 on page 198 with the following:

“paragraph (d.1), the amounts of those penalties and a review of the decisions to impose a penalty and of the amount of the penalty imposed; ”

 

Clause 301 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 6; NAYS: 3.

 

On Clause 302,

Guy Caron moved, — That Bill C-31, in Clause 302, be amended by adding after line 20 on page 198 the following:

“(d.5) a requirement to report on a periodic basis on the operation of the system of administrative monetary penalties referred to in paragraph (d.4) and, in particular, against whom the penalties have been imposed and the circumstances in which they have been imposed;”

 

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Guy Caron and it was negatived on the following recorded division: YEAS: Guy Caron, Laurin Liu, John McKay, Murray Rankin — 4; NAYS: Mike Allen, Stella Ambler, Gerald Keddy, Andrew Saxton, Dave Van Kesteren — 5.

 

Clause 302 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 9; NAYS: 0.

 

Clause 303 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 4.

 

Bu unanimous consent, Clauses 304 and 305 inclusive carried severally by a show of hands: YEAS: 8; NAYS: 1.

 

By unanimous consent, Clauses 306 and 307 inclusive carried severally by a show of hands: YEAS: 6; NAYS: 3.

 

By unanimous consent, Clauses 308 to 310 inclusive carried severally by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 3.

 

By unanimous consent, Clauses 311 and 312 inclusive carried severally by a show of hands: YEAS: 9; NAYS: 0.

 

Clause 313 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 6; NAYS: 3.

 

By unanimous consent, Clauses 314 to 316 inclusive carried severally by a show of hands: YEAS: 9; NAYS: 0.

 

By unanimous consent, Clauses 317 to 329 inclusive carried severally by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 4.

 

On Clause 330,

John McKay moved, — That Bill C-31, in Clause 330, be amended by replacing line 1 on page 213 with the following:

“trademark that the applicant or their predecessor in title has used in Canada or made known in Canada in association with goods or services is entitled, subject to section 38, to”

 

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of John McKay and it was negatived on the following recorded division: YEAS: Guy Caron, Laurin Liu, John McKay, Murray Rankin — 4; NAYS: Mike Allen, Stella Ambler, Gerald Keddy, Andrew Saxton, Dave Van Kesteren — 5.

 

By unanimous consent, it was agreed, — That the result of the vote on the previous amendment be applied to the following two (2) amendments which are therefore also negatived:

That Bill C-31, in Clause 339, be amended by adding after line 31 on page 216 the following:

“(a.1) in the case of a trademark that has been used in Canada, the date from which the applicant or his named predecessors in title, if any, have so used the trademark in association with each of the general classes of goods or services described in the application;

(a.2) in the case of a trademark that has not been used in Canada but is made known in Canada, the name of a country of the Union in which it has been used by the applicant or his named predecessors in title, if any, and the date from and the manner in which the applicant or named predecessors in title have made it known in Canada in association with each of the general classes of goods or services described in the application;

(a.3) in the case of a trademark that is the subject in or for another country of the Union of a registration or an application for registration by the applicant or the applicant’s named predecessor in title on which the applicant bases the applicant’s right to registration, particulars of the application or registration and, if the trademark has neither been used in Canada nor made known in Canada, the name of a country in which the trademark has been used by the applicant or the applicant’s named predecessor in title, if any, in association with each of the general classes of goods or services described in the application;

(a.4) in the case of a proposed trademark, a statement that the applicant, by itself or through a licensee, or by itself and through a licensee, intends to use the trademark in Canada;”

That Bill C-31, in Clause 345, be amended

(a) by replacing line 41 on page 223 with the following:

“the applicant, the Registrar shall, on receipt of a declaration of use that meets the requirements set out in subsection (2), register the”

(b) by adding after line 3 on page 224 the following:

“(2) A declaration of use must specify that the use of the trademark in Canada, in association with the goods or services specified in the application, has been commenced by

(a) the applicant;

(b) the applicant’s successor in title; or

(c) an entity that is licensed by or with the authority of the applicant to use the trademark, if the applicant has direct or indirect control of the character or quality of the goods or services.”

 

Clause 330 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 4.

 

By unanimous consent, Clauses 331 to 338 inclusive carried severally by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 4.

 

Clause 339 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 4.

 

By unanimous consent, Clauses 340 to 344 inclusive carried severally by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 4.

 

Clause 345 carried on the following recorded division: YEAS: Mike Allen, Stella Ambler, Gerald Keddy, Andrew Saxton, Dave Van Kesteren — 5; NAYS: Guy Caron, Nathan Cullen, John McKay, Murray Rankin — 4.

 

By unanimous consent, Clauses 346 to 368 inclusive carried severally by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 4.

 

By unanimous consent, Clauses 369 and 370 inclusive carried severally by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 4.

 

At 10:04 p.m., the sitting was suspended.

At 10:12 p.m., the sitting resumed.

 

On Clause 371,

Andrew Saxton moved, — That Bill C-31, in Clause 371, be amended by

(a) replacing line 16 on page 259 with the following:

371. (1) Paragraph 11(7)(e) of the Old Age

(b) adding after line 21 on page 259 the following:

(2) Subsection 11(8) of the Act is replaced by the following:

(8) Paragraph (7)(e) does not apply

(a) to a person who was qualified to receive a pension or an allowance immediately before the day on which this paragraph comes into force, whether or not they had applied for it; or

(b) to a pensioner if an event as provided by the regulations has occurred.

 

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Andrew Saxton and it was agreed to, by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 0.

 

Clause 371, as amended, carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 4.

 

On Clause 372,

Andrew Saxton moved, — That Bill C-31, in Clause 372, be amended by

(a) replacing line 22 on page 259 with the following:

372. (1) Paragraph 19(6)(d) of the Act is

(b) adding after line 28 on page 259 the following:

(2) Subsection 19(6.2) of the Act is replaced by the following:

(6.2) Paragraph (6)(d) does not apply to a spouse or common-law partner

(a) who was qualified to receive an allowance immediately before the day on which this paragraph comes into force, whether or not they had applied for it; or

(b) if an event as provided by the regulations has occurred.

 

The question was put on the amendment of Andrew Saxton and it was agreed to, by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 0.

 

Clause 372, as amended, carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 4.

 

On Clause 373,

Andrew Saxton moved, — That Bill C-31, in Clause 373, be amended by

(a) replacing line 1 on page 260 with the following:

373. (1) Paragraph 21(9)(c) of the Act is

(b) adding after line 6 on page 260 the following:

(2) Subsection 21(9.1) of the Act is replaced by the following:

(9.1) Paragraph (9)(c) does not apply to a survivor

(a) who was qualified to receive an allowance immediately before the day on which this paragraph comes into force, whether or not they had applied for it; or

(b) if an event as provided by the regulations has occurred.

 

The question was put on the amendment of Andrew Saxton and it was agreed to, by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 0.

 

Clause 373, as amended, carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 3.

 

Clause 374 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 4.

 

On Clause 375,

John McKay moved, — That Bill C-31, in Clause 375, be amended by replacing line 10 on page 261 with the following:

“the bridge;”

 

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of John McKay and it was negatived on the following recorded division: YEAS: Guy Caron, Nathan Cullen, John McKay, Murray Rankin — 4; NAYS: Mike Allen, Stella Ambler, Gerald Keddy, Andrew Saxton, Dave Van Kesteren — 5.

 

The Chair ruled that the following five (5) amendments were consequential to the previous amendment and therefore they were also negatived:

That Bill C-31, in Clause 375, be amended by deleting lines 31 to 33 on page 261.

That Bill C-31, in Clause 375, be amended by replacing lines 5 to 8 on page 262 with the following:

“bridge or any related work.

(1.1) No agreement entered into under subsection (1) may include provisions for the collection of tolls, fees or other charges.”

That Bill C-31, in Clause 375, be amended by replacing lines 5 to 8 on page 262 with the following:

“bridge or any related work.”

That Bill C-31, in Clause 375, be amended by deleting lines 30 to 37 on page 262.

That Bill C-31, in Clause 375, be amended by deleting lines 20 to 22 on page 263.

 

Clause 375 carried on the following recorded division: YEAS: Mike Allen, Stella Ambler, Gerald Keddy, John McKay, Andrew Saxton, Dave Van Kesteren — 6; NAYS: Guy Caron, Nathan Cullen, Murray Rankin — 3.

 

On Clause 376,

Murray Rankin moved, — That Bill C-31, in Clause 376, be amended by replacing lines 24 and 25 on page 264 with the following:

“office during good behaviour for a term up to five years but may be removed by the Governor in Council at any time for cause.”

 

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Murray Rankin and it was negatived on the following recorded division: YEAS: Guy Caron, Nathan Cullen, John McKay, Murray Rankin — 4; NAYS: Mike Allen, Stella Ambler, Gerald Keddy, Andrew Saxton, Dave Van Kesteren — 5.

 

Clause 376 carried on the following recorded division: YEAS: Mike Allen, Stella Ambler, Gerald Keddy, Andrew Saxton, Dave Van Kesteren — 5; NAYS: Guy Caron, Nathan Cullen, John McKay, Murray Rankin — 4.

 

On Clause 377,

John McKay moved, — That Bill C-31, in Clause 377, be amended

(a) by deleting lines 2 and 3 on page 267;

(b) by deleting lines 6 and 7 on page 267;

(c) by deleting lines 11 and 12 on page 267.

 

The question was put on the amendment of John McKay and it was negatived on the following recorded division: YEAS: Guy Caron, Nathan Cullen, John McKay, Murray Rankin — 4; NAYS: Mike Allen, Stella Ambler, Gerald Keddy, Andrew Saxton, Dave Van Kesteren — 5.

 

The Chair ruled that the following seven (7) amendments were consequential to the previous amendment and therefore they were also negatived:

That Bill C-31, in Clause 377, be amended by deleting lines 22 and 23 on page 267.

That Bill C-31, in Clause 378, be amended by replacing line 35 on page 267 with the following:

“referred to in paragraph (b) or (g) of the”

That Bill C-31, in Clause 380, be amended by replacing line 10 on page 269 with the following:

“tribunal referred to in paragraph (b)”

That Bill C-31, in Clause 381, be amended by replacing line 38 on page 270 with the following:

“paragraph (b), (g) or (k) of the”

That Bill C-31, in Clause 397, be amended

(a) by deleting lines 17 to 21 on page 274;

(b) by replacing lines 26 and 27 on page 274 with the following:

“II to “Minister of Industry” and “Minister of Indian”

That Bill C-31, in Clause 404, be amended by deleting lines 28 to 32 on page 275.

That Bill C-31, in Schedule 6, be amended by deleting the following administrative tribunals:

“Canada Industrial Relations Board

Conseil canadien des relations industrielles

“Canadian International Trade Tribunal

Tribunal canadien du commerce extérieur

“Public Servants Disclosure Protection Tribunal

Tribunal de la protection des fonctionnaires divulgateurs d’actes répréhensibles

 

After debate, Clause 377 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 4.

 

By unanimous consent, Clauses 378 to 420 inclusive carried severally by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 4.

 

After debate, Clause 421 carried on the following recorded division: YEAS: Mike Allen, Stella Ambler, Gerald Keddy, Andrew Saxton, Dave Van Kesteren — 5; NAYS: Guy Caron, Nathan Cullen, John McKay, Murray Rankin — 4.

 

By unanimous consent, Clauses 422 and 423 inclusive carried severally by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 4.

 

By unanimous consent, after debate, Clause 424 carried on the following recorded division: YEAS: Mike Allen, Stella Ambler, Gerald Keddy, Andrew Saxton, Dave Van Kesteren — 5; NAYS: Guy Caron, Nathan Cullen, John McKay, Murray Rankin — 4.

 

After debate, Clause 425 carried on the following recorded division: YEAS: Mike Allen, Stella Ambler, Gerald Keddy, Andrew Saxton, Dave Van Kesteren — 5; NAYS: Guy Caron, Nathan Cullen, John McKay, Murray Rankin — 4.

 

By unanimous consent, Clauses 426 to 482 inclusive carried severally by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 4.

 

Clause 483 carried on the following recorded division: YEAS: Mike Allen, Stella Ambler, Guy Caron, Nathan Cullen, Gerald Keddy, John McKay, Murray Rankin, Andrew Saxton, Dave Van Kesteren — 9; NAYS: — 0.

 

By unanimous consent, Clauses 484 to 486 inclusive carried severally on the following recorded division: YEAS: Mike Allen, Stella Ambler, Guy Caron, Nathan Cullen, Gerald Keddy, John McKay, Murray Rankin, Andrew Saxton, Dave Van Kesteren — 9; NAYS: — 0.

 

Schedule 1 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 1.

 

Schedule 2 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 6; NAYS: 0.

 

Schedule 3 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 4.

 

Schedule 4 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 6; NAYS: 0.

 

Schedule 5 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 6; NAYS: 0.

 

Schedule 6 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 4.

 

Clause 1, Short Title, carried.

 

The Title carried on division.

 

The Bill, as amended, carried on division.

 

ORDERED, — That the Chair report the Bill, as amended, to the House.

 

ORDERED, — That Bill C-31, as amended, be reprinted for the use of the House at report stage.

 

At 11:04 p.m., the Committee adjourned to the call of the Chair.

 



Christine Lafrance
Clerk of the Committee

 
 
2014/06/12 2:21 p.m.