HESA Committee Meeting

The Standing Committee on Health met at 4:27 p.m. this day, in Room 209 West Block, the Chair, Bonnie Brown, presiding.

The witnesses answered questions.

By unanimous consent, the Committee reverted to Clause 6 previously stood.

“antine station at any place in Canada, but only with the agreement of the Minister of Health of the province where the quarantine station is established.”

The question was put on the amendment of Réal Ménard and it was negatived on the following recorded division: YEAS: Nicole Demers, Réal Ménard — 2; NAYS: Bill Blaikie, Ruby Dhalla, James Lunney, Rob Merrifield, Lee Richardson, Michael John Savage, Robert Thibault — 7.

“provide any area”

The question was put on the amendment of Rob Merrifield and it was negatived.

“for establishing a quarantine station.”

“or facility, along with its fixtures, that the Minister considers necessary”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Brenda Chamberlain and it was agreed to.

Clause 6, as amended, carried.

By unanimous consent, the Committee reverted to Clause 8 previously stood.

Rob Merrifield proposed to move, — That Bill C-12, in Clause 8, be amended by replacing lines 1 and 2 on page 4 with the following:

“(3) The Minister shall, in accordance with the regulations, compensate any person”

The Chair ruled the proposed amendment inadmissible because it infringes on the financial initiative of the Crown, as provided on page 655 of the House of Commons Procedure and Practice.

James Lunney proposed to move, -- That Bill C-12, in Clause 8, be amended by replacing line 1 on page 4 with the following:

“(3) The Minister shall compensate any person”

The Chair ruled the proposed amendment inadmissible because it infringes on the financial initiative of the Crown, as provided on page 655 of the House of Commons Procedure and Practice.

Clause 8, as amended, carried.

The Committee reverted to new Clause 33.1.

Rob Merrifield proposed to move, — That Bill C-12 be amended by adding after line 16 on page 11 the following new clause:

“33.1 If a traveller who is a Canadian citizen or an employee of the Government of Canada is detained under this Act and incurs a loss of income as a result of being detained, the Minister shall compensate the traveller for that loss in accordance with the regulations.”

The Chair ruled the proposed amendment inadmissible because it infringes on the financial initiative of the Crown, as provided on page 655 of the House of Commons Procedure and Practice.

By unanimous consent, the Committee reverted to Clause 43 previously stood.

James Lunney proposed to move, — That Bill C-12, in Clause 43, be amended by replacing line 15 on page 14 with the following:

“43. The Minister shall compensate the owner”

The Chair ruled the proposed amendment inadmissible because it infringes on the financial initiative of the Crown, as provided on page 655 of the House of Commons Procedure and Practice.

Clause 43, as amended, carried.

On Clause 50,

“section 47 and any person found in the”

Clause 50, as amended, carried.

Clauses 51 to 53 inclusive carried severally.

On Clause 54,

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of James Lunney and it was negatived.

Clause 54 carried.

On Clause 55, Robert Thibault moved, — That Bill C-12, in Clause 55, be amended by replacing line 4 on page 18 with the following: “55. The Minister may collect relevant medical in-”

Debate arose thereon.

Réal Ménard moved, -- That the amendment be amended by replacing, in the French version only, the words “médicaux qui présentent un intérêt” with the words “médicaux pertinents”

After debate, the question was put on the subamendment of Réal Ménard and it was agreed to.

The question was put on the amendment of Robert Thibault, as amended, and it was agreed to.

Clause 55, as amended, carried.

On Clause 56,

“tion if the Minister has reasonable grounds to believe that the”

“communicable disease or to enable Canada to fulfill its international obligations.”

(a) replacing line 23 on page 18 with the following:

“information relates has or might have a communicable disease,”

(b) replacing line 25 on page 18 with the following:

“person who has or might have a communicable disease, and”

Debate arose thereon.

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Robert Thibault and it was agreed to.

Rob Merrifield moved, -- That Bill C-12, in Clause 56, be amended by adding after line 27 on page 18 the following:

“(3) If any personal information or confidential business information is disclosed under this section, the Minister shall immediately notify the person or business to whom the information relates of the disclosure.”

Debate arose thereon.

Robert Thibault moved, — That the amendment be amended by deleting the word “immediately”

After debate, the question was put on the subamendment of Robert Thibault and it was agreed to.

The question was put on the amendment of Rob Merrifield, as amended, and it was agreed to.

Clause 56, as amended, carried.

Clause 57 carried.

On New Clause 57.1,

57.1 The disclosure of information under this Act does not contravene any provision of the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act.”

By unanimous consent, the amendment was allowed to stand.

Clauses 58 to 61 inclusive carried severally.

On Clause 62,

“(a.1) respecting any compensation that is to be paid under this Act;”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Rob Merrifield and it was agreed to.

“(c.1) respecting the specifications for areas and facilities provided under subsection 6(2);”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Robert Thibault and it was agreed to.

“(g) after consultation with the Privacy Commissioner, as defined in the Privacy Act, respecting the protection of personal”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Robert Thibault and it was agreed to.

Clause 62, as amended, carried.

On New Clause 62.1,

“62.1 (1) The Governor in Council may not make a regulation under section 62 unless the Minister has first laid the proposed regulation before the House of Commons.

(2) A proposed regulation that is laid before the House of Commons is deemed to be automatically referred to the appropriate committee of the House, as determined by the rules of the House, and the committee may conduct inquiries or public hearings with respect to the proposed regulation and report its findings to the House.

(3) The Governor in Council may make a regulation under section 62 only if

(a) the House of Commons has not concurred in any report from a committee respecting the proposed regulation within the 30 sitting days following the day on which the proposed regulation was laid before the House, in which case the regulation may only be made in the form laid; or

(b) the House of Commons has concurred in a report from a committee approving the proposed regulation or an amended version of it, in which case the Governor in Council may only make the regulation in the form concurred in.

(4) For the purpose of this section, "sitting day" means a day on which the House of Commons sits.”

Debate arose thereon.

By unanimous consent, the amendment was allowed to stand.

Clauses 63 to 73 inclusive carried severally.

On Clause 74,

“or agent or mandatary of the accused, provided that the employee or agent or mandatary is”

After debate, by unanimous consent, the amendment was withdrawn.

Clauses 75 to 84 inclusive carried severally.

At 6:23 p.m., the Committee adjourned to the call of the Chair.