Skip to main content
Start of content

House Publications

The Debates are the report—transcribed, edited, and corrected—of what is said in the House. The Journals are the official record of the decisions and other transactions of the House. The Order Paper and Notice Paper contains the listing of all items that may be brought forward on a particular sitting day, and notices for upcoming items.

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

Thursday, June 3, 2010 (No. 55)


Report Stage of Bills

Bill C-2
An Act to implement the Free Trade Agreement between Canada and the Republic of Colombia, the Agreement on the Environment between Canada and the Republic of Colombia and the Agreement on Labour Cooperation between Canada and the Republic of Colombia

Notices of Motions

Motion No. 1 — June 2, 2010 — Mr. Julian (Burnaby—New Westminster) — That Bill C-2 be amended by deleting Clause 7.
Motion No. 2 — June 2, 2010 — Mr. Julian (Burnaby—New Westminster) — That Bill C-2 be amended by deleting Clause 12.
Motion No. 3 — June 2, 2010 — Mr. Julian (Burnaby—New Westminster) — That Bill C-2 be amended by deleting Clause 48.

Bill C-3
An Act to promote gender equity in Indian registration by responding to the Court of Appeal for British Columbia decision in McIvor v. Canada (Registrar of Indian and Northern Affairs)
Pursuant to Standing Order 76.1(5), the Speaker selected and grouped for debate the following motions:
Group No. 1 -- Motions Nos. 1 and 2.
Statement and selection by Speaker — see Debates of May 25, 2010.

Resuming Debate

Group No. 1
Motion No. 1 — Question put separately.
Motion No. 2 — Question put separately.
Motion No. 1 — May 25, 2010 — Mr. Strahl (Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, Federal Interlocutor for Métis and Non-Status Indians and Minister of the Canadian Northern Economic Development Agency), seconded by Mr. Blackburn (Minister of Veterans Affairs and Minister of State (Agriculture)), — That Bill C-3, in Clause 3.1, be amended by
(a) replacing line 10 on page 3 with the following:
“3.1 (1) The Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development shall cause to be laid”
(b) replacing lines 13 to 15 on page 3 with the following:
“force, a report on the provisions and implementation of this Act.”
(c) replacing lines 22 and 23 on page 3 with the following:
“review of any provision of this Act.”
Motion No. 2 — May 25, 2010 — Mr. Strahl (Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, Federal Interlocutor for Métis and Non-Status Indians and Minister of the Canadian Northern Economic Development Agency), seconded by Mr. Blackburn (Minister of Veterans Affairs and Minister of State (Agriculture)), — That Bill C-3 be amended by restoring Clause 9 as follows:
“9. For greater certainty, no person or body has a right to claim or receive any compensation, damages or indemnity from Her Majesty in right of Canada, any employee or agent of Her Majesty, or a council of a band, for anything done or omitted to be done in good faith in the exercise of their powers or the performance of their duties, only because
(a) a person was not registered, or did not have their name entered in a Band List, immediately before the day on which this Act comes into force; and
(b) one of the person’s parents is entitled to be registered under paragraph 6(1)(c.1) of the Indian Act, as enacted by subsection 2(3).”

Bill C-9
An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 4, 2010 and other measures
Pursuant to Standing Order 76.1(5), the Speaker selected and grouped for debate the following motions:
Group No. 1 -- Motions Nos. 1, 2 and 16 to 62.
Group No. 2 -- Motions Nos. 3 to 15.
Statement and selection by Speaker — see Debates of May 26, 2010.

Resuming Debate

Group No. 1
Motion No. 1 -- Question put separately. Its vote also applies to Motion No. 2.
Motion No. 16 -- Question put separately. Its vote also applies to Motions Nos. 17 and 18.
Motion No. 19 -- Question put separately. Its vote also applies to Motions Nos. 20 to 38.
Motion No. 39 -- Question put separately. Its vote also applies to Motions Nos. 40 to 62.
Motion No. 1 — May 31, 2010 — Ms. Charlton (Hamilton Mountain), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 96.
Motion No. 2 — May 31, 2010 — Ms. Charlton (Hamilton Mountain), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 97.
Motion No. 16 — May 31, 2010 — Ms. Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2149.
Motion No. 17 — May 31, 2010 — Ms. Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2150.
Motion No. 18 — May 31, 2010 — Ms. Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2151.
Motion No. 19 — May 31, 2010 — Ms. Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2152.
Motion No. 20 — May 31, 2010 — Ms. Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2153.
Motion No. 21 — May 31, 2010 — Ms. Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2154.
Motion No. 22 — May 31, 2010 — Ms. Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2155.
Motion No. 23 — May 31, 2010 — Ms. Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2156.
Motion No. 24 — May 31, 2010 — Ms. Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2157.
Motion No. 25 — May 31, 2010 — Ms. Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2158.
Motion No. 26 — May 31, 2010 — Ms. Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2159.
Motion No. 27 — May 31, 2010 — Ms. Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2160.
Motion No. 28 — May 31, 2010 — Ms. Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2161.
Motion No. 29 — May 31, 2010 — Ms. Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2162.
Motion No. 30 — May 31, 2010 — Ms. Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2163.
Motion No. 31 — May 31, 2010 — Ms. Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2164.
Motion No. 32 — May 31, 2010 — Ms. Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2165.
Motion No. 33 — May 31, 2010 — Ms. Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2166.
Motion No. 34 — May 31, 2010 — Ms. Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2167.
Motion No. 35 — May 31, 2010 — Ms. Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2168.
Motion No. 36 — May 31, 2010 — Ms. Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2169.
Motion No. 37 — May 31, 2010 — Ms. Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2170.
Motion No. 38 — May 31, 2010 — Ms. Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2171.
Motion No. 39 — May 31, 2010 — Mr. Godin (Acadie—Bathurst), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2185.
Motion No. 40 — May 31, 2010 — Mr. Godin (Acadie—Bathurst), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2186.
Motion No. 41 — May 31, 2010 — Mr. Godin (Acadie—Bathurst), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2187.
Motion No. 42 — May 31, 2010 — Mr. Godin (Acadie—Bathurst), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2188.
Motion No. 43 — May 31, 2010 — Mr. Godin (Acadie—Bathurst), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2189.
Motion No. 44 — May 31, 2010 — Mr. Godin (Acadie—Bathurst), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2190.
Motion No. 45 — May 31, 2010 — Mr. Godin (Acadie—Bathurst), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2191.
Motion No. 46 — May 31, 2010 — Mr. Godin (Acadie—Bathurst), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2192.
Motion No. 47 — May 31, 2010 — Mr. Godin (Acadie—Bathurst), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2193.
Motion No. 48 — May 31, 2010 — Mr. Godin (Acadie—Bathurst), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2194.
Motion No. 49 — May 31, 2010 — Mr. Godin (Acadie—Bathurst), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2195.
Motion No. 50 — May 31, 2010 — Mr. Godin (Acadie—Bathurst), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2196.
Motion No. 51 — May 31, 2010 — Mr. Godin (Acadie—Bathurst), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2197.
Motion No. 52 — May 31, 2010 — Mr. Godin (Acadie—Bathurst), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2198.
Motion No. 53 — May 31, 2010 — Mr. Godin (Acadie—Bathurst), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2199.
Motion No. 54 — May 31, 2010 — Mr. Godin (Acadie—Bathurst), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2200.
Motion No. 55 — May 31, 2010 — Mr. Godin (Acadie—Bathurst), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2201.
Motion No. 56 — May 31, 2010 — Mr. Godin (Acadie—Bathurst), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2202.
Motion No. 57 — May 31, 2010 — Mr. Godin (Acadie—Bathurst), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2203.
Motion No. 58 — May 31, 2010 — Mr. Godin (Acadie—Bathurst), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2204.
Motion No. 59 — May 31, 2010 — Mr. Godin (Acadie—Bathurst), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2205.
Motion No. 60 — May 31, 2010 — Mr. Godin (Acadie—Bathurst), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2206.
Motion No. 61 — May 31, 2010 — Mr. Godin (Acadie—Bathurst), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2207.
Motion No. 62 — May 31, 2010 — Mr. Godin (Acadie—Bathurst), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2208.

Notices of Motions

Group No. 2
Motion No. 3 -- Question put separately.
Motion No. 4 -- Question put separately. Its vote also applies to Motions Nos. 5 to 15.
Motion No. 3 — May 20, 2010 — Mr. Mulcair (Outremont) — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 1885.
Pursuant to Standing Order 76.1(2), notice also received from:
Ms. Charlton (Hamilton Mountain) — May 25, 2010
Motion No. 4 — May 20, 2010 — Mr. Mulcair (Outremont) — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2137.
Pursuant to Standing Order 76.1(2), notice also received from:
Mr. Cullen (Skeena—Bulkley Valley) and Ms. Charlton (Hamilton Mountain) — May 25, 2010
Motion No. 5 — May 20, 2010 — Mr. Mulcair (Outremont) — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2138.
Pursuant to Standing Order 76.1(2), notice also received from:
Mr. Cullen (Skeena—Bulkley Valley) and Ms. Charlton (Hamilton Mountain) — May 25, 2010
Motion No. 6 — May 20, 2010 — Mr. Mulcair (Outremont) — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2139.
Pursuant to Standing Order 76.1(2), notice also received from:
Mr. Cullen (Skeena—Bulkley Valley) and Ms. Charlton (Hamilton Mountain) — May 25, 2010
Motion No. 7 — May 20, 2010 — Mr. Mulcair (Outremont) — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2140.
Pursuant to Standing Order 76.1(2), notice also received from:
Mr. Cullen (Skeena—Bulkley Valley) and Ms. Charlton (Hamilton Mountain) — May 25, 2010
Motion No. 8 — May 20, 2010 — Mr. Mulcair (Outremont) — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2141.
Pursuant to Standing Order 76.1(2), notice also received from:
Mr. Cullen (Skeena—Bulkley Valley) and Ms. Charlton (Hamilton Mountain) — May 25, 2010
Motion No. 9 — May 20, 2010 — Mr. Mulcair (Outremont) — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2142.
Pursuant to Standing Order 76.1(2), notice also received from:
Mr. Cullen (Skeena—Bulkley Valley) and Ms. Charlton (Hamilton Mountain) — May 25, 2010
Motion No. 10 — May 20, 2010 — Mr. Mulcair (Outremont) — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2143.
Pursuant to Standing Order 76.1(2), notice also received from:
Mr. Cullen (Skeena—Bulkley Valley) and Ms. Charlton (Hamilton Mountain) — May 25, 2010
Motion No. 11 — May 20, 2010 — Mr. Mulcair (Outremont) — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2144.
Pursuant to Standing Order 76.1(2), notice also received from:
Mr. Cullen (Skeena—Bulkley Valley) and Ms. Charlton (Hamilton Mountain) — May 25, 2010
Motion No. 12 — May 20, 2010 — Mr. Mulcair (Outremont) — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2145.
Pursuant to Standing Order 76.1(2), notice also received from:
Mr. Cullen (Skeena—Bulkley Valley) and Ms. Charlton (Hamilton Mountain) — May 25, 2010
Motion No. 13 — May 20, 2010 — Mr. Mulcair (Outremont) — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2146.
Pursuant to Standing Order 76.1(2), notice also received from:
Mr. Cullen (Skeena—Bulkley Valley) and Ms. Charlton (Hamilton Mountain) — May 25, 2010
Motion No. 14 — May 20, 2010 — Mr. Mulcair (Outremont) — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2147.
Pursuant to Standing Order 76.1(2), notice also received from:
Mr. Cullen (Skeena—Bulkley Valley) and Ms. Charlton (Hamilton Mountain) — May 25, 2010
Motion No. 15 — May 20, 2010 — Mr. Mulcair (Outremont) — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2148.
Pursuant to Standing Order 76.1(2), notice also received from:
Mr. Cullen (Skeena—Bulkley Valley) and Ms. Charlton (Hamilton Mountain) — May 25, 2010

Bill C-13
An Act to amend the Employment Insurance Act

Notices of Motions

Motion No. 1 — June 2, 2010 — The Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development — That Bill C-13, in Clause 4, be amended by replacing lines 9 to 12 on page 2 with the following:
“4. (1) Sections 2 and 3 apply to a claimant whose benefit period began less than 104 weeks before the day on which this Act comes into force if the period referred to in subsection 23(2) of the Employment Insurance Act
(a) has not ended before that day; or
(b) ended before that day and, within the period referred to in that subsection, the claimant's parental leave is deferred or the claimant is directed to return to duty from parental leave in accordance with regulations made under the National Defence Act, and the claimant's deferral or return to duty, as the case may be, has not ended before that day.
(2) Section 2 applies to a claimant and the period referred to in subsection 23(2) of the Employment Insurance Act is extended to 104 weeks if
(a) within the period referred to in that subsection, in accordance with regulations made under the National Defence Act, the claimant's parental leave is deferred or the claimant is directed to return to duty from parental leave, as the case may be;
(b) the claimant's deferral or return to duty ended before the day on which this Act comes into force;
(c) the claimant's benefit period has not ended before that day; and
(d) the period referred to in that subsection ended before that day.
(3) A claimant's benefit period and the period referred to in subsection 23(2) of the Employment Insurance Act are each extended to 104 weeks if
(a) within the period referred to in that subsection, in accordance with regulations made under the National Defence Act, the claimant's parental leave is deferred or the claimant is directed to return to duty from parental leave, as the case may be;
(b) the claimant's deferral or return to duty ended before the day on which this Act comes into force; and
(c) the claimant's benefit period and the period referred to in that subsection each began less than 104 weeks before that day and both ended before that day.”
Recommendation
(Pursuant to Standing Order 76.1(3))
Her Excellency the Governor General recommends to the House of Commons the appropriation of public revenue under the circumstances, in the manner and for the following amendment to Bill C-13, “An Act to amend the Employment Insurance Act”: That Bill C-13, in Clause 4, be amended by replacing lines 9 to 12 on page 2 with the following:
“4. (1) Sections 2 and 3 apply to a claimant whose benefit period began less than 104 weeks before the day on which this Act comes into force if the period referred to in subsection 23(2) of the Employment Insurance Act
(a) has not ended before that day; or
(b) ended before that day and, within the period referred to in that subsection, the claimant's parental leave is deferred or the claimant is directed to return to duty from parental leave in accordance with regulations made under the National Defence Act, and the claimant's deferral or return to duty, as the case may be, has not ended before that day.
(2) Section 2 applies to a claimant and the period referred to in subsection 23(2) of the Employment Insurance Act is extended to 104 weeks if
(a) within the period referred to in that subsection, in accordance with regulations made under the National Defence Act, the claimant's parental leave is deferred or the claimant is directed to return to duty from parental leave, as the case may be;
(b) the claimant's deferral or return to duty ended before the day on which this Act comes into force;
(c) the claimant's benefit period has not ended before that day; and
(d) the period referred to in that subsection ended before that day.
(3) A claimant's benefit period and the period referred to in subsection 23(2) of the Employment Insurance Act are each extended to 104 weeks if
(a) within the period referred to in that subsection, in accordance with regulations made under the National Defence Act, the claimant's parental leave is deferred or the claimant is directed to return to duty from parental leave, as the case may be;
(b) the claimant's deferral or return to duty ended before the day on which this Act comes into force; and
(c) the claimant's benefit period and the period referred to in that subsection each began less than 104 weeks before that day and both ended before that day.”