HUMA Committee Meeting

     I would like to call the meeting of the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities to order.

    As we agreed at the last meeting, I believe we're going to continue with committee business and the motion put forward by Mr. Lessard. I'm hoping that we have more debate on this so we can come to a conclusion as quickly as possible.

    I will start taking names on the list.

    Mr. Savage.

    Thank you, Chair.

    As members may recall, we finished the last meeting with some very interesting reading from Conservative members, Mr. Lake in particular, who was trying to talk this thing through. I understand he has a copy of George Bush's autobiography, which is the next thing to go into the official record.

    In light of the serious work we have to do on the employability study, at the appropriate time I'd like to withdraw part of my motion--I guess we're discussing the subamendment--to take out some of the more deliberate language and see if we can't get this passed back to the House.

    Should I read that now, or should we come back to that?

    Go ahead. Do you want to make your proposal? Then we'll see if we have unanimous consent to withdraw what you've put in.

     I will be withdrawing the words “and the inadequate response of the government to date”, which means that Mr. Lessard's motion would read:

    Do we have more discussion on it?

    I have one little thing. It should say it would be reported to the House at the earliest opportunity “after the employability study”.

    We had a subamendment as well.

    The suggestion is that Mr. Savage is going to remove “and the inadequate response of the government to date”. We'll need unanimous consent for that.

    But you had a subamendment, Mr. Lake. Did you want to withdraw your subamendment to Mr. Savage's motion? We'll have to work backwards.

    Sure.

    If you want to withdraw, then once again we need unanimous consent for that.

    Is that the direction you want to go in?

    Some hon. members: Agreed.

    Let's go back to Mr. Savage then. Do we have unanimous consent for him to withdraw that part of the motion that he just read in?

    Some hon. members: Agreed.

    The Chair: As Mr. Savage just read, it stands as follows:

    That's what we have so far.

    Would it be acceptable to put “after the employability study”?

    You are shaking your head no.

    That wasn't what he said.

    Could you read that again?

    “That the committee recommend to the government, in view of the serious crisis in the forestry and manufacturing sectors...”. What was stricken from the record here is “and the inadequate response to the government to date”. So that's removed. Then go back to the motion as it read, “that it implement without delay an improved assistance plan for the forestry and manufacturing sectors...”. Everything after that is deleted, until we get to the last line, which says “and that the adoption of this motion be reported to the House at the earliest opportunity”.

    That's where we are with the motion. Is there any other discussion?

    It doesn't matter. I'm happy with the motion as it is, but it would be nice to prioritize the employability study in such motions. It has been ignored for far too long. We never seem to bring it into any of our future business. We always put the employability study off as if it isn't a priority, and it certainly is.

     I just want to know if we can do it. If not, I don't want to go into long debate. I really don't.

    Go ahead, Mr. Savage.

    I appreciate that point of view. If delaying this until after the employability study would then speed it up going to the House, I would support that. But this can go to the House and we can continue the employability study. We're very likely going to be the government by the time this employability study actually gets through, so we want to get this done now.

     Maybe I didn't miss anything.

    No, you didn't miss anything.

    Okay, if there's no further debate I'll call the question on the amended motion as was read.

    All those in favour of the amended motion?

    Sorry, Mr. Chair.

    All those in favour of the amended motion, or all those in favour of the amendment?

    Thank you for the clarification. All those in favour of the amendment.

    The amendment was the withdrawal....

    Mr. Lessard.

    A point of order, Mr. Chair. Confusion reigns about Ms. Yelich's subamendment. Has she moved it or not? Are we voting on a subamendment or on Mr. Savage's amendment? If the vote is on Mr. Savage's amendment, there is no problem. But if it is on a subamendment, I have something to say, Mr. Chair.

    We are voting on Mr. Savage's amendment, as he proposed, minus the “inadequate response to the government to date”.

    If my subamendment brings any debate at all, I don't even want to bring it up.

    I'll call the question on the amendment, as amended by Mr. Savage.

    (Amendment agreed to)

    I'll go back to the main motion, as amended. Is there any more discussion on that?

    Nobody cares about the employability study.

    Mr. Lessard.

    I am asking for a recorded vote, please.

    Okay.

    It looks as if there's a recorded vote. Thank you, sir.

    Since there's no more discussion, we'll have a recorded vote on this.

    Mr. Chair, could you please reread the motion in its entirety and then hold a recorded vote?

    Okay.

    We will reread the motion:

    (Motion agreed to: yeas 7; nays 2) [See Minutes of Proceedings]

    We'll now take one second to go back in camera for the employability study. If you can give us a second to get that changed over, then we'll restart.

    Mr. Lessard.

    Mr. Chair, could you tell the committee when you propose to table this report in the House?

    The clerk says he could have it ready for tomorrow, so I'd be happy to present it in the House tomorrow.

    Thank you, Mr. Chair.

    Okay.

    We'll take a break to get back in camera.

    [Proceedings continue in camera]