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.
| 40th PARLIAMENT, 3rd SESSION | |
|
|
|
JournalsNo. 49 Wednesday, May 26, 2010 2:00 p.m. |
|
|
|
|
| Prayers |
| National Anthem |
| Statements By Members |
|
Pursuant to Standing Order 31, Members made statements. |
| Oral Questions |
|
Pursuant to Standing Order 30(5), the House proceeded to Oral Questions. |
| Daily Routine Of Business |
Tabling of Documents |
Pursuant to Standing Order 32(2), Mr. Nicholson (Minister of Justice) laid upon the Table, — Document entitled "Proposed Canadian Securities Act". — Sessional Paper No. 8525-403-10.
|
|
|
|
Pursuant to Standing Order 32(2), Mr. Lukiwski (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons) laid upon the Table, — Government responses, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8), to the following petitions: |
— Nos. 403-0308, 403-0310, 403-0375 and 403-0395 concerning foreign ownership. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-403-52-03;
|
— Nos. 403-0316 and 403-0423 concerning health care services. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-403-24-03;
|
— Nos. 403-0324 and 403-0373 concerning euthanasia. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-403-8-06;
|
— Nos. 403-0325, 403-0402, 403-0416, 403-0421, 403-0434 and 403-0445 concerning cruelty to animals. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-403-15-05;
|
— No. 403-0327 concerning the situation in Israel. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-403-36-02;
|
— Nos. 403-0329, 403-0392 and 403-0404 concerning immigration. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-403-32-03;
|
— Nos. 403-0330 to 403-0371 and 403-0432 concerning the Criminal Code of Canada. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-403-23-04;
|
— Nos. 403-0376 and 403-0464 concerning transportation. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-403-7-08;
|
— No. 403-0408 concerning the mining industry. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-403-39-05;
|
— No. 403-0411 concerning the Employment Insurance Program. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-403-1-04;
|
— Nos. 403-0475, 403-0476 and 403-0485 concerning funding aid. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-403-35-07.
|
|
|
Pursuant to Standing Order 32(2), Mr. Ritz (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food and Minister for the Canadian Wheat Board) laid upon the Table, — Report of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency regarding inspection staff numbers for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2010. — Sessional Paper No. 8530-403-11.
|
Presenting Reports from Committees |
|
Mr. Chong (Wellington—Halton Hills), from the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology, presented the First Report of the Committee (Main Estimates 2010-2011 — Votes 1, 5 and 10 under ATLANTIC CANADA OPPORTUNITIES AGENCY; Votes 1 and 5 under ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF CANADA FOR THE REGIONS OF QUEBEC; Votes 1, 5, 10, L15, L20, 25, 30, 35, 40, 45, 50, 55, 60, 65, 70, 75, 80, 85, 90, 95, 100 and 105 under INDUSTRY; Votes 1 and 5 under WESTERN ECONOMIC DIVERSIFICATION). — Sessional Paper No. 8510-403-60. |
|
A copy of the relevant Minutes of Proceedings (Meeting No. 16) was tabled. |
|
|
|
Mr. Preston (Elgin—Middlesex—London), from the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, presented the 11th Report of the Committee (Main Estimates 2010-2011 — Vote 5 under PARLIAMENT and Vote 15 under PRIVY COUNCIL). — Sessional Paper No. 8510-403-61. |
|
A copy of the relevant Minutes of Proceedings (Meeting No. 16) was tabled. |
|
|
|
Mr. Richardson (Calgary Centre), from the Standing Committee on International Trade, presented the First Report of the Committee, "Canada-United States Agreement on Government Procurement". — Sessional Paper No. 8510-403-62. |
|
A copy of the relevant Minutes of Proceedings (Meetings Nos. 2 to 8, 10, 11 and 17) was tabled. |
First Reading of Senate Public Bills |
|
Pursuant to Standing Order 69(2), on motion of Mr. O'Connor (Minister of State) for Mr. Toews (Minister of Public Safety), seconded by Mr. Van Loan (Minister of International Trade), Bill S-2, An Act to amend the Criminal Code and other Acts, was read the first time and ordered for a second reading at the next sitting of the House. |
Motions |
|
Mr. Bélanger (Ottawa—Vanier), seconded by Mr. Proulx (Hull—Aylmer), moved, — That the First Report of the Standing Committee on Official Languages, presented on Monday, April 19, 2010, be concurred in. (Concurrence in Committee Reports No. 3) |
|
Debate arose thereon. |
|
Pursuant to Order made Friday, May 14, 2010, the question was deemed put on the motion, a recorded division was deemed requested and, pursuant to Standing Order 45, was deferred until later today, at the expiry of the time provided for Government Orders. |
Presenting Petitions |
|
Pursuant to Standing Order 36, petitions certified correct by the Clerk of Petitions were presented as follows: |
— by Mr. Braid (Kitchener—Waterloo), one concerning genetic engineering (No. 403-0568);
|
— by Mr. Maloway (Elmwood—Transcona), one concerning the Food and Drugs Act (No. 403-0569) and one concerning transportation (No. 403-0570);
|
— by Mr. Bélanger (Ottawa—Vanier), one concerning immigration (No. 403-0571).
|
Questions on the Order Paper |
|
Mr. Lukiwski (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons) presented the answers to questions Q-184 and Q-189 on the Order Paper. |
|
|
|
Pursuant to Standing Order 39(7), Mr. Lukiwski (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons) presented the returns to the following questions made into Orders for Returns: |
Q-176 — Mr. Bélanger (Ottawa—Vanier) — With respect to the advertising to promote the government’s Economic Action Plan, following the introduction of the 2009-2010 Budget, how much was spent in 2009-2010 on advertisements carried by: (a) radio stations belonging to the Alliance des radios communautaires du Canada; (b) community television channels; and (c) media belonging to the Association de la presse francophone? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-403-176.
|
|
|
Q-177 — Mr. Julian (Burnaby—New Westminster) — With regard to nanotechnology: (a) what are the total federal funds spent and committed for expenditure, for each of the fiscal years from 2005-2006 through 2008-2009 inclusive, broken down by department and criterion; (b) who are the recipients of these funds; (c) to what purpose was funding for nanotechnology used by institutions and departments, including the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, Canadian Institutes of Health Research, the Canadian Foundation for Innovation, Natural Resources Canada, Industry Canada, and the National Research Council of Canada; (d) what were the amounts allocated to test health, safety, and environmental impacts of nanoproducts and nanomaterials; (e) what is the list of nanomaterials currently in the market; (f) which of these have been extensively tested to determine possible effects on human and environmental health and safety and, of those tested, which, if any, raised concern or required mitigation or prevention; (g) how many assessments on nanomaterial notification packages have been submitted to the New Substances Notification Program to date and (i) of these notification packages, have there been any nanomaterials rejected for entry into Canada, (ii) have there been any conditions of use placed based on assessment results and, if so, how many; (h) did the government ever request notifiers (companies or individuals) providing nanomaterial notification packages to submit additional toxicity data above and beyond what is requested in the schedules of the New Substances Notification Regulations and, if so, did this result in refusal of entry into the Canadian market or justify use of material with conditions; and (i) what information, notifications or advisories have been issued to ensure the safe discovery, production, manufacturing, use and disposal of nanomaterials and nano-enabled products, (i) when, (ii) by which departments? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-403-177.
|
|
|
Q-182 — Ms. Charlton (Hamilton Mountain) — With respect to mental health support in prisons and other detention facilities operated by Correctional Services Canada (CSC): (a) what progress has been made since 2004 in the implementation of the CSC Mental Health Strategy; (b) what plans are in place for the operation of the Community Mental Health and Institutional Mental Health initiatives over the next five years; (c) what plans are in place to act on the recommendations in the 2008-2009 Annual Report of the Office of the Correctional Investigator; (d) what is the total amount of funds allocated to all types of mental health support by CSC for the upcoming fiscal year, broken down by program type; (e) what percentage of overall CSC funds is allocated to mental health support for the upcoming fiscal year; (f) what percentage of overall CSC funds is allocated to security, risk management and control for the upcoming fiscal year; (g) how many offenders have access to intermediate mental health care units in the region in which they are incarcerated; (h) what processes are in place to review the effectiveness of existing mental health programs and identify gaps in services; (i) what recommendations have arisen from such reviews in the last two years; (j) what progress has been made in conducting an independent review of long-term segregation cases; (k) what progress has been made in the creation of a measurable set of performance indicators to evaluate CSC’s response to offender mental health concerns; (l) what guidelines does CSC provide to operational staff on the use of segregation placements with offenders who have mental health concerns; (m) what progress has the National Population Management Committee made in reviewing specific cases of the use of lengthy periods in segregation and treatment alternatives for offenders with mental health concerns; (n) what progress has been made on the creation of a national strategy for managing chronic self-harming behaviours; (o) what percentage of offenders who chronically self-harm have clinical management plans in place; (p) what is the definition of a clinical management and intervention plan for offenders with mental health concerns used by CSC; (q) which section of CSC is responsible for the coordination and oversight of clinical management plans; (r) how many regions have specialized, dedicated units to manage chronically self-harming offenders; (s) how many self-harm incidents appear in CSC’s internal situation reporting system for the past five years, broken down by year, gender, and region; (t) what are CSC’s estimates of prison population over the next ten years; (u) what percentage of offenders does CSC estimate deal with diagnosed or undiagnosed mental health issues; (v) in 2009, how many hours did CSC staff psychologists spend conducting risk assessments (including security reclassifications, conditional release reviews, and segregation reviews) and what did this work cost; (w) in 2009, how many hours did CSC staff psychologists spend in clinical intervention, evaluation and treatment of offender’s mental health needs, and what did this work cost; (x) over the past five years, what was the average length of stay for offenders at Regional Treatment Centres; and (y) over the past five years, how many offenders were discharged from a Regional Treatment Centre and subsequently placed in segregation within the same year? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-403-182.
|
|
|
Q-183 — Ms. Charlton (Hamilton Mountain) — With respect to Correctional Service Canada's (CSC) drug interdiction activities: (a) what does CSC estimate is the success rate of drug interdiction over the past ten years; (b) what is the capital expenditure on equipment related to drug interdiction over the past five years, broken down by year; (c) what is the total expenditure on drug treatment programs for offenders over the past five years, broken down by year; (d) what is the expected spending on drug interdiction for the fiscal year 2010-2011; (e) what internal assessments, if any, exist regarding the efficacy of CSC’s drug interdiction activities; (f) what internal assessments, if any, exist regarding the efficacy of CSC’s drug interdiction equipment; and (g) what are the conclusions or recommendations of these assessments? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-403-183.
|
|
|
Q-185 — Ms. Charlton (Hamilton Mountain) — With respect to tasers and other conducted energy weapons used by the RCMP, over the past five years: (a) what is the number and nature of incidents in which a conducted energy weapon was used, broken down by year; (b) what was the type of use (i.e., push stun, probe, threat of use, de-holster, etc.); (c) what was the number of instances medical care was required after use; (d) what was the nature of medical concerns or conditions after use; (e) what was the number of RCMP members and instructors trained in the use of conducted energy weapons; (f) what was the number of RCMP members and instructors that successfully passed training and number that were unsuccessful at training; and (g) what was the number of RCMP members and instructors that successfully re-certified and number that were unsuccessful at re-certification? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-403-185.
|
|
|
Q-186 — Mr. Layton (Toronto—Danforth) — With regard to communications policies for scientists for each department, agency and crown corporation: (a) what is, in full, the current communications policy for scientists, (i) when did that policy come into effect, (ii) who is the lead communications contact person, (iii) at what point does that person need to contact a central agency; (b) what was, in full, the previous communications policy; and (c) what government-wide policies exist, (i) when did those policies come into effect, (ii) who is the lead for the implementation and monitoring of these policies? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-403-186.
|
|
|
Q-188 — Mr. Layton (Toronto—Danforth) — With respect to the prison farms program currently operated by Correctional Services Canada (CSC): (a) what plans exist for the use and/or sale of the land currently used by CSC for prison farms over the next five years; (b) what is the estimated value of the land currently used by the prison farms program; (c) what, if any, internal or external consultations have taken place about the sale of the land currently used by the program; (d) how many jobs will be directly and indirectly affected by the closure of the program; (e) how many food banks will be affected by the closure of the program; (f) what internal CSC and external third-party evaluations exist on the efficacy of the program; and (g) how were these evaluations considered in the decision to terminate the program? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-403-188.
|
|
|
Q-192 — Ms. Chow (Trinity—Spadina) — With respect to the 2010 G20 summit: (a) what is the expected cost of the summit to the federal government; (b) what financial analyses or studies have been done on the impact the summit will have on small businesses; (c) what compensation will be provided to small businesses and tourism event organizers for costs directly related to the summit; (d) what compensation will be provided to the City of Toronto for costs directly related to the summit; (e) what were the costs incurred in the past by Canadian host cities of similar summits; (f) what compensation has been provided by the federal government in the past to host cities of similar summits; and (g) will the federal government post bonds up front to cover costs incurred as a direct result of the summit to (i) the City of Toronto, (ii) small businesses, (iii) tourism event organizers? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-403-192.
|
|
|
Q-195 — Mr. Thibeault (Sudbury) — With respect to full body scanners: (a) what is the approximate cost of each unit; (b) what is the total cost for all scanners purchased or slated to be purchased between 2009 and 2013; (c) what is the average cost of installing a full body scanner in an airport; (d) what proportion of passengers screened in Canadian airports is expected to be scanned by full body scanners; (e) how many passengers does this amount to in a year; (f) what is the average time needed to scan a single passenger using a full body scanner; (g) what is the average time needed to scan a passenger using conventional security measures; (h) how many Canadian Air Transport Security Authority (CATSA) screening officers have been trained to operate the scanners since 2009; (i) how many CATSA screening officers will be trained to operate the scanners once they are fully implemented; (j) what kind of training do CATSA screening officers receive before operating the scanners; (k) what was the number of CATSA screening officers and instructors that successfully received certification and the number that were unsuccessful since 2009; (l) what internal assessments, if any, exist regarding the efficacy of full body scanners; (m) what are the conclusions or recommendations of these assessments; and (n) what is the number and nature of complaints to CATSA pertaining to the use of full body scanners since 2009? — Sessional Paper No. 8555-403-195.
|
| Government Orders |
|
The Order was read for the consideration at report stage of Bill C-9, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 4, 2010 and other measures, as reported by the Standing Committee on Finance without amendment. |
|
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. |
| Group No. 1 |
|
Ms. Charlton (Hamilton Mountain), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), moved Motion No. 1, — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 96. |
|
Ms. Charlton (Hamilton Mountain), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), moved Motion No. 2, — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 97. |
|
Ms. Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), moved Motion No. 16, — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2149. |
|
Ms. Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), moved Motion No. 17, — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2150. |
|
Ms. Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), moved Motion No. 18, — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2151. |
|
Ms. Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), moved Motion No. 19, — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2152. |
|
Ms. Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), moved Motion No. 20, — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2153. |
|
Ms. Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), moved Motion No. 21, — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2154. |
|
Ms. Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), moved Motion No. 22, — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2155. |
|
Ms. Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), moved Motion No. 23, — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2156. |
|
Ms. Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), moved Motion No. 24, — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2157. |
|
Ms. Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), moved Motion No. 25, — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2158. |
|
Ms. Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), moved Motion No. 26, — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2159. |
|
Ms. Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), moved Motion No. 27, — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2160. |
|
Ms. Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), moved Motion No. 28, — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2161. |
|
Ms. Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), moved Motion No. 29, — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2162. |
|
Ms. Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), moved Motion No. 30, — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2163. |
|
Ms. Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), moved Motion No. 31, — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2164. |
|
Ms. Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), moved Motion No. 32, — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2165. |
|
Ms. Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), moved Motion No. 33, — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2166. |
|
Ms. Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), moved Motion No. 34, — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2167. |
|
Ms. Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), moved Motion No. 35, — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2168. |
|
Ms. Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), moved Motion No. 36, — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2169. |
|
Ms. Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), moved Motion No. 37, — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2170. |
|
Ms. Duncan (Edmonton—Strathcona), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), moved Motion No. 38, — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2171. |
|
Mr. Godin (Acadie—Bathurst), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), moved Motion No. 39, — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2185. |
|
Mr. Godin (Acadie—Bathurst), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), moved Motion No. 40, — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2186. |
|
Mr. Godin (Acadie—Bathurst), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), moved Motion No. 41, — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2187. |
|
Mr. Godin (Acadie—Bathurst), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), moved Motion No. 42, — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2188. |
|
Mr. Godin (Acadie—Bathurst), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), moved Motion No. 43, — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2189. |
|
Mr. Godin (Acadie—Bathurst), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), moved Motion No. 44, — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2190. |
|
Mr. Godin (Acadie—Bathurst), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), moved Motion No. 45, — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2191. |
|
Mr. Godin (Acadie—Bathurst), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), moved Motion No. 46, — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2192. |
|
Mr. Godin (Acadie—Bathurst), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), moved Motion No. 47, — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2193. |
|
Mr. Godin (Acadie—Bathurst), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), moved Motion No. 48, — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2194. |
|
Mr. Godin (Acadie—Bathurst), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), moved Motion No. 49, — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2195. |
|
Mr. Godin (Acadie—Bathurst), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), moved Motion No. 50, — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2196. |
|
Mr. Godin (Acadie—Bathurst), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), moved Motion No. 51, — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2197. |
|
Mr. Godin (Acadie—Bathurst), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), moved Motion No. 52, — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2198. |
|
Mr. Godin (Acadie—Bathurst), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), moved Motion No. 53, — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2199. |
|
Mr. Godin (Acadie—Bathurst), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), moved Motion No. 54, — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2200. |
|
Mr. Godin (Acadie—Bathurst), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), moved Motion No. 55, — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2201. |
|
Mr. Godin (Acadie—Bathurst), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), moved Motion No. 56, — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2202. |
|
Mr. Godin (Acadie—Bathurst), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), moved Motion No. 57, — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2203. |
|
Mr. Godin (Acadie—Bathurst), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), moved Motion No. 58, — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2204. |
|
Mr. Godin (Acadie—Bathurst), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), moved Motion No. 59, — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2205. |
|
Mr. Godin (Acadie—Bathurst), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), moved Motion No. 60, — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2206. |
|
Mr. Godin (Acadie—Bathurst), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), moved Motion No. 61, — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2207. |
|
Mr. Godin (Acadie—Bathurst), seconded by Mr. Siksay (Burnaby—Douglas), moved Motion No. 62, — That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 2208. |
|
Debate arose on the motions in Group No. 1. |
| Deferred Recorded Divisions |
Concurrence in Committee Reports |
|
Pursuant to Standing Order 45, the House proceeded to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the motion of Mr. Bélanger (Ottawa—Vanier), seconded by Mr. Proulx (Hull—Aylmer), — That the First Report of the Standing Committee on Official Languages, presented on Monday, April 19, 2010, be concurred in. (Concurrence in Committee Reports No. 3) |
|
|
The question was put on the motion and it was agreed to on the following division: |
|
| (Division No. 49 -- Vote no 49) | |
| YEAS: 252, NAYS: 0 |
|
|
YEAS -- POUR Abbott Day Kramp (Prince Edward—Hastings) Proulx Total: -- 252 |
|
|
NAYS -- CONTRE Nil--Aucun |
|
Private Members' Business |
|
Pursuant to Order made Tuesday, May 11, 2010, the House proceeded to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the motion of Mr. Rafferty (Thunder Bay—Rainy River), seconded by Mr. Marston (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek), — That Bill C-501, An Act to amend the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act and other Acts (pension protection), be now read a second time and referred to the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology. |
|
|
The question was put on the motion and it was agreed to on the following division: |
|
| (Division No. 50 -- Vote no 50) | |
| YEAS: 144, NAYS: 111 |
|
|
YEAS -- POUR Allen (Welland) Davies (Vancouver East) Kennedy Paquette Total: -- 144 |
|
|
NAYS -- CONTRE Abbott Day Lauzon Rickford Total: -- 111 |
|
|
Accordingly, Bill C-501, An Act to amend the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act and other Acts (pension protection), was read the second time and referred to the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology. |
|
| Private Members' Business |
|
At 6:09 p.m., pursuant to Standing Order 30(7), the House proceeded to the consideration of Private Members' Business. |
|
The Order was read for the second reading and reference to the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration of Bill C-467, An Act to amend the Citizenship Act (children born abroad). |
|
Mr. Dosanjh (Vancouver South), seconded by Mr. Bélanger (Ottawa—Vanier), moved, — That the Bill be now read a second time and referred to the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration. |
|
Debate arose thereon. |
|
Pursuant to Standing Order 93(1), the Order was dropped to the bottom of the order of precedence on the Order Paper. |
| Adjournment Proceedings |
|
At 7:10 p.m., pursuant to Standing Order 38(1), the question “That this House do now adjourn” was deemed to have been proposed. |
|
After debate, the question was deemed to have been adopted. |
|
Accordingly, at 7:31 p.m., the Speaker adjourned the House until tomorrow at 2:00 p.m., pursuant to Order made Thursday, May 6, 2010. |