JUST 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.
Minutes of Proceedings
The Committee resumed its clause-by-clause study of the Bill.
Carole Morency, Joanne Klineberg, Helen McElroy and Sharon Harper answered questions.
On Clause 3,
Ted Falk moved, — That Bill C-14, in Clause 3, be amended by replacing lines 26 to 28 on page 7 with the following:“terial benefit resulting from that person’s death; or”
Debate arose thereon.
The Chair ruled the proposed amendment inadmissible because it was beyond the scope of the Bill, as provided on page 766 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice, Second Edition.
Pursuant to the order adopted by the Committee on Monday, May 2, 2016, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:
That Bill C-14, in Clause 3, be amended by adding after line 32 on page 7 the following:
“(6.1) In communities where it is not possible to find another independent medical practitioner or nurse practitioner to provide the written opinion referred to in paragraph (3)(e), the opinion may be provided by recorded video conference by another independent medical practitioner or nurse practitioner from elsewhere in Canada.?”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 0; NAYS: 9.
“(7.1) It is recognized that the medical practitioner, nurse practitioner, pharmacist or other health care institution care provider, or any such institution, is free to refuse to provide direct or indirect medical assistance in dying.
(7.2) No medical practitioner, nurse practitioner, pharmacist or other healthcare institution care provider, or any such institution, shall be deprived of any benefit, or be subject to any obligation or sanction, under any law of the Parliament of Canada solely by reason of their exercise, in respect of medical assistance in dying, of the freedom of conscience and religion guaranteed under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms or the expression of their beliefs in respect of medical assistance in dying based on that guaranteed freedom.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Michael Cooper and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 3; NAYS: 6.
“(9) For greater certainty, nothing in this section compels an individual to provide or assist in providing medical assistance in dying.”
Debate arose thereon.
Ted Falk moved, — That the amendment be amended by adding after the word “assist” the following: “either directly or indirectly”.
After debate, the question was put on the subamendment of Ted Falk and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 1; NAYS: 8.
“(9) For greater certainty, nothing in this section compels an individual to provide or assist in providing medical assistance in dying.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Murray Rankin and it was agreed to, by a show of hands: YEAS: 9; NAYS: 0.
“(7.1) Every person is entitled to refuse
(a) to receive medical assistance in dying; and
(b) to provide, or refer for, medical assistance in dying.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Ted Falk and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 3; NAYS: 6.
“of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for life without eligibility for parole until they have served 10 years of their sentence.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Ted Falk and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 0; NAYS: 9.
Pursuant to the order adopted by the Committee on Monday, May 2, 2016, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:
That Bill C-14, in Clause 3, be amended by adding after line 31 on page 8 the following:
“241.5 (1) The Governor in Council may, on the recommendation of the Minister of Health and if satisfied that there are in force provisions under the laws of a province that are equivalent in effect to sections 241.1 to 241.4, by order, declare that certain of the provisions in those sections do not apply within that province.
(2) The Governor in Council may, if satisfied that a provision under the laws of the province is no longer equivalent in effect to a provision or provisions that are set out in the order or is not being adequately administ?ered or enforced, revoke the order.
(3) The Governor in Council may revoke the order only if the Minister has given notice of the proposed revocation to the province.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 0; NAYS: 9.
“241.41 (1) Any person who is involved in providing medical assistance in dying may ask a judge of the court of appeal to order the suspension of the request for medical assistance in dying.
(2) Medical assistance in dying cannot be provided until the court of appeal has ruled on the request.
(3) The judge of the court of appeal seized of the request may make an order cancelling the request for medical assistance in dying if satisfied that the person is vulnerable and must be protected from being induced to end their life.”
Debate arose thereon.
The Chair ruled the proposed amendment inadmissible because it was beyond the scope of the Bill, as provided on page 766 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice, Second Edition.
Clause 3, as amended, carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 4.
At 5:00 p.m., the sitting was suspended.
At 5:15 p.m., the sitting resumed.
On Clause 4,
Ted Falk moved, — That Bill C-14, in Clause 4, be amended by replacing line 17 on page 9 with the following:“(3) The Minister of Health shall make regulations”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Ted Falk and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 0; NAYS: 7.
“(iv) the collection of information from coroners and medical examiners;”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Colin Fraser and it was agreed to, by a show of hands: YEAS: 9; NAYS: 0.
Ted Falk moved, — That Bill C-14, in Clause 4, be amended by adding after line 35 on page 9 the following:
“(3.1) The Minister of Health, in cooperation with representatives of the provincial governments responsible for health, may establish guidelines on the information to be included on death certificates in cases where medical assistance in dying has been provided, which may include the manner in which to clearly identify medical assistance in dying as the primary cause of death, as well as the illness, disease or disability that prompted the request for medical assistance in dying.”
Debate arose thereon.
At 5:34 p.m., the sitting was suspended.
At 5:35 p.m., the sitting resumed.
Iqra Khalid moved, — That the amendment be amended by replacing the words “primary cause” with the word “manner”.
After debate, the question was put on the subamendment of Iqra Khalid and it was agreed to, by a show of hands: YEAS: 9; NAYS: 0.
The Committee resumed consideration of the amendment of Ted Falk, as amended, — That Bill C-14, in Clause 4, be amended by adding after line 35 on page 9 the following:
“(3.1) The Minister of Health, in cooperation with representatives of the provincial governments responsible for health, may establish guidelines on the information to be included on death certificates in cases where medical assistance in dying has been provided, which may include the manner in which to clearly identify medical assistance in dying as the manner of death, as well as the illness, disease or disability that prompted the request for medical assistance in dying.”
The debate continued.
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Ted Falk, as amended, and it was agreed to, by a show of hands: YEAS: 9; NAYS: 0.
Clause 4, as amended, carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 9; NAYS: 0.
After debate, Clause 5 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 9; NAYS: 0.
After debate, Clause 6 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 8; NAYS: 0.
At 5:48 p.m., the sitting was suspended.
At 6:50 p.m., the sitting resumed.
Ted Falk moves, — That Bill C-14, in Clause 7, be amended by replacing, in the English version, lines 16 and 17 on page 11 with the following:
“deemed to have died as a result of the illness, disease or disability for which they were determined to be eligible”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Ted Falk and it was agreed to, by a show of hands: YEAS: 7; NAYS: 0.
Clause 7, as amended, carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 9; NAYS: 0.
After debate, Clause 8 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 9; NAYS: 0.
On Clause 9,
Ted Falk moved, — That Bill C-14, in Clause 9, be amended by replacing, in the English version, lines 13 to 15 on page 12 with the following:“eran is deemed to have died as a result of the illness, disease or disability for which they were determined to be eligible to receive that assistance, in accordance with”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Ted Falk and it was agreed to, by a show of hands: YEAS: 7; NAYS: 0.
Clause 9, as amended, carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 8; NAYS: 1.
On New Clause 9.1,
Pursuant to the order adopted by the Committee on Monday, May 2, 2016, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:
That Bill C-14 be amended by adding before line 17 on page 12 the following new clause:
“9.1 (1) Three months after the day on which this section comes into force, the Minister of Justice must cause studies to be made respecting the following requests for medical assistance in dying:
(a) requests made by mature minors;
(b) requests where the sole grievous and irremediable condition is a mental illness; and
(c) requests made in advance of loss of capacity.
(2) The Minister must prepare a report on the studies made under subsection (1), including a statement setting out any changes to the provisions that are recommended in those studies, to be laid before each House of Parliament within two years after the day on which this section comes into force.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 1; NAYS: 8.
“Independent Review
Mature minors, advance requests and mental illness
9.1 The Minister of Justice and the Minister of Health must, no later than 180 days after the day on which this Act receives royal assent, initiate one or more independent reviews of issues relating to requests by mature minors for medical assistance in dying, to advance requests and to requests where mental illness is the sole underlying medical condition.”
Debate arose thereon.
Mark Warawa moved, — That the amendment be amended by replacing the word “must” with the word “may”.
After debate, the question was put on the subamendment of Mark Warawa and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 3; NAYS: 6.
“Independent Review
Mature minors, advance requests and mental illness
9.1 The Minister of Justice and the Minister of Health must, no later than 180 days after the day on which this Act receives royal assent, initiate one or more independent reviews of issues relating to requests by mature minors for medical assistance in dying, to advance requests and to requests where mental illness is the sole underlying medical condition.”
The question was put on the amendment of Iqra Khalid and it was agreed to, by a show of hands: YEAS: 6; NAYS: 3.
On Clause 10,
Ted Falk moved, — That Bill C-14, in Clause 10, be amended by replacing line 25 on page 12 with the following:“referred is to review them and the state of palliative care in Canada and submit a report to”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Ted Falk and it was agreed to, by a show of hands: YEAS: 6; NAYS: 3.
“a committee within six months after the day on which the provisions are referred to it, including a statement setting out”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Ted Falk and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 4; NAYS: 5.
“recommends and, in the event of serious breaches of these provisions, providing for the possibility of imposing a moratorium.”
After debate, by unanimous consent, the amendment was withdrawn.
Clause 10, as amended, carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 8; NAYS: 1.
Clause 11 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 8; NAYS: 0.
At 7:58 p.m., the Committee adjourned to the call of the Chair.