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:

Mr. Tilson (Dufferin—Caledon), from the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration, presented the Fifth Report of the Committee (Bill C-43, An Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, with amendments). — Sessional Paper No. 8510-411-154.

A copy of the relevant Minutes of Proceedings (Meetings Nos. 54 to 58, 60 and 62 to 64) was tabled.

Mr. Tilson (Dufferin—Caledon), from the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration, presented the Sixth Report of the Committee (Supplementary Estimates (B), 2012-13 — Votes 1b and 7b under CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION). — Sessional Paper No. 8510-411-155.

A copy of the relevant Minutes of Proceedings (Meeting No. 64) was tabled.

Mr. Kerr (West Nova), from the Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs, presented the Sixth Report of the Committee (Supplementary Estimates (B), 2012-13 — Votes 1b and 5b under VETERANS AFFAIRS). — Sessional Paper No. 8510-411-156.

A copy of the relevant Minutes of Proceedings (Meeting No. 55) was tabled.

Pursuant to Standing Order 36, petitions certified correct by the Clerk of Petitions were presented as follows:

The Order was read for the consideration at report stage of Bill C-45, A second Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 29, 2012 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:

Debate arose on the motions in Group No. 1.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Mr. Marston (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek), moved Motion No. 1, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 1.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Mr. Marston (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek), moved Motion No. 3, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 2.

Mr. Lamoureux (Winnipeg North), seconded by Mr. Bélanger (Ottawa—Vanier), moved Motion No. 7, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 3.

Mr. Lamoureux (Winnipeg North), seconded by Mr. Bélanger (Ottawa—Vanier), moved Motion No. 9, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 4.

Mr. Lamoureux (Winnipeg North), seconded by Mr. Bélanger (Ottawa—Vanier), moved Motion No. 11, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 5.

Mr. Lamoureux (Winnipeg North), seconded by Mr. Bélanger (Ottawa—Vanier), moved Motion No. 18, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 6.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Mr. Marston (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek), moved Motion No. 22, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 7.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Mr. Marston (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek), moved Motion No. 25, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 8.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Mr. Marston (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek), moved Motion No. 26, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 9.

Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands), seconded by Mr. Fortin (Haute-Gaspésie—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia), moved Motion No. 29, — That Bill C-45, in Clause 9, be amended by deleting lines 12 and 13 on page 14.

Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands), seconded by Mr. Fortin (Haute-Gaspésie—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia), moved Motion No. 30, — That Bill C-45, in Clause 9, be amended by replacing line 3 on page 15 with the following:

Mr. Lamoureux (Winnipeg North), seconded by Mr. Bélanger (Ottawa—Vanier), moved Motion No. 32, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 10.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Mr. Marston (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek), moved Motion No. 34, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 11.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Mr. Marston (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek), moved Motion No. 35, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 12.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Mr. Marston (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek), moved Motion No. 36, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 13.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Mr. Marston (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek), moved Motion No. 37, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 14.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Mr. Marston (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek), moved Motion No. 38, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 15.

Mr. Lamoureux (Winnipeg North), seconded by Mr. Bélanger (Ottawa—Vanier), moved Motion No. 40, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 16.

Mr. Lamoureux (Winnipeg North), seconded by Mr. Bélanger (Ottawa—Vanier), moved Motion No. 42, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 17.

Mr. Lamoureux (Winnipeg North), seconded by Mr. Bélanger (Ottawa—Vanier), moved Motion No. 44, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 18.

Mr. Lamoureux (Winnipeg North), seconded by Mr. Bélanger (Ottawa—Vanier), moved Motion No. 46, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 19.

Mr. Lamoureux (Winnipeg North), seconded by Mr. Bélanger (Ottawa—Vanier), moved Motion No. 48, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 20.

Mr. Lamoureux (Winnipeg North), seconded by Mr. Bélanger (Ottawa—Vanier), moved Motion No. 50, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 21.

Mr. Lamoureux (Winnipeg North), seconded by Mr. Bélanger (Ottawa—Vanier), moved Motion No. 52, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 22.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Mr. Marston (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek), moved Motion No. 61, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 23.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Mr. Marston (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek), moved Motion No. 63, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 24.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Mr. Marston (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek), moved Motion No. 64, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 25.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Mr. Marston (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek), moved Motion No. 65, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 26.

Mr. Lamoureux (Winnipeg North), seconded by Mr. Bélanger (Ottawa—Vanier), moved Motion No. 74, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 27.

Ms. May (Saanich—Gulf Islands), seconded by Mr. Fortin (Haute-Gaspésie—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia), moved Motion No. 78, — That Bill C-45, in Clause 27, be amended by replacing line 17 on page 35 with the following:

Mr. Fortin (Haute-Gaspésie—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia), seconded by Mr. Bellavance (Richmond—Arthabaska), moved Motion No. 83, — That Bill C-45, in Clause 27, be amended by deleting line 14 on page 38 to line 11 on page 39.

Mr. Fortin (Haute-Gaspésie—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia), seconded by Mr. Bellavance (Richmond—Arthabaska), moved Motion No. 84, — That Bill C-45, in Clause 27, be amended by replacing line 22 on page 38 to line 11 on page 39 with the following:

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Mr. Marston (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek), moved Motion No. 95, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 28.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Mr. Marston (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek), moved Motion No. 96, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 29.

Mr. Lamoureux (Winnipeg North), seconded by Mr. Bélanger (Ottawa—Vanier), moved Motion No. 97, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 30.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Mr. Marston (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek), moved Motion No. 99, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 31.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Mr. Marston (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek), moved Motion No. 100, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 32.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Mr. Marston (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek), moved Motion No. 101, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 34.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Mr. Marston (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek), moved Motion No. 102, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 36.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Mr. Marston (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek), moved Motion No. 103, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 37.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Mr. Marston (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek), moved Motion No. 104, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 38.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Mr. Marston (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek), moved Motion No. 105, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 39.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Mr. Marston (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek), moved Motion No. 106, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 40.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Mr. Marston (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek), moved Motion No. 108, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 41.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Mr. Marston (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek), moved Motion No. 109, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 42.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Mr. Marston (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek), moved Motion No. 110, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 43.

Mr. Lamoureux (Winnipeg North), seconded by Mr. Bélanger (Ottawa—Vanier), moved Motion No. 111, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 44.

Mr. Lamoureux (Winnipeg North), seconded by Mr. Bélanger (Ottawa—Vanier), moved Motion No. 112, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 45.

Mr. Lamoureux (Winnipeg North), seconded by Mr. Bélanger (Ottawa—Vanier), moved Motion No. 113, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 46.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Mr. Marston (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek), moved Motion No. 114, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 47.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Mr. Marston (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek), moved Motion No. 115, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 48.

Mr. Lamoureux (Winnipeg North), seconded by Mr. Bélanger (Ottawa—Vanier), moved Motion No. 116, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 49.

Mr. Lamoureux (Winnipeg North), seconded by Mr. Bélanger (Ottawa—Vanier), moved Motion No. 131, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 50.

Mr. Lamoureux (Winnipeg North), seconded by Mr. Bélanger (Ottawa—Vanier), moved Motion No. 136, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 51.

Mr. Lamoureux (Winnipeg North), seconded by Mr. Bélanger (Ottawa—Vanier), moved Motion No. 138, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 52.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Mr. Marston (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek), moved Motion No. 139, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 53.

Mr. Lamoureux (Winnipeg North), seconded by Mr. Bélanger (Ottawa—Vanier), moved Motion No. 140, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 54.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Mr. Marston (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek), moved Motion No. 142, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 55.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Mr. Marston (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek), moved Motion No. 143, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 56.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Mr. Marston (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek), moved Motion No. 144, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 58.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Mr. Marston (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek), moved Motion No. 145, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 59.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Mr. Marston (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek), moved Motion No. 146, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 60.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Mr. Marston (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek), moved Motion No. 147, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 62.

Mr. Bellavance (Richmond—Arthabaska), seconded by Mr. Fortin (Haute-Gaspésie—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia), moved Motion No. 151, — That Bill C-45, in Clause 62, be amended by replacing line 26 on page 134 with the following:

Mr. Bellavance (Richmond—Arthabaska), seconded by Mr. Fortin (Haute-Gaspésie—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia), moved Motion No. 153, — That Bill C-45, in Clause 62, be amended by replacing line 30 on page 134 with the following:

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Mr. Marston (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek), moved Motion No. 155, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 63.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Mr. Marston (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek), moved Motion No. 157, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 64.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Mr. Marston (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek), moved Motion No. 158, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 65.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Mr. Marston (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek), moved Motion No. 159, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 67.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Mr. Marston (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek), moved Motion No. 160, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 68.

Ms. Nash (Parkdale—High Park), seconded by Mr. Marston (Hamilton East—Stoney Creek), moved Motion No. 162, — That Bill C-45 be amended by deleting Clause 69.

Pursuant to Standing Order 31, Members made statements.

Pursuant to Standing Order 30(5), the House proceeded to Oral Questions.

The House resumed consideration at report stage of Bill C-45, A second Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 29, 2012 and other measures, as reported by the Standing Committee on Finance without amendment;

And of the motions in Group No. 1 (Motions Nos. 1, 3, 7, 9, 11, 18, 22, 25, 26, 29, 30, 32, 34 to 38, 40, 42, 44, 46, 48, 50, 52, 61, 63 to 65, 74, 78, 83, 84, 95 to 97, 99 to 106, 108 to 116, 131, 136, 138 to 140, 142 to 147, 151, 153, 155, 157 to 160, and 162).

The debate continued on the motions in Group No. 1.

At 5:30 p.m., pursuant to Standing Order 30(6), the House proceeded to the consideration of Private Members' Business.

The House resumed consideration of the motion of Mr. Lapointe (Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup), seconded by Mr. Gravelle (Nickel Belt), — That, in the opinion of the House, the government should: (a) implement, in the year following the adoption of this motion, an industrial restructuring plan towards sustainable economic sectors for all communities in which a portion of the economy still depends on asbestos mining; (b) hold, in the six months following the adoption of this motion, a public consultation that shall (i) establish measures to be included in the industrial restructuring plan to ensure the creation of alternative employment for workers presently employed in the asbestos sector, (ii) include all organizations concerned and groups of regions still mining asbestos and who ask to participate; (c) publish, in the year following the adoption of this motion, a comprehensive list of public and quasi-public buildings under federal jurisdiction that contain asbestos and take the appropriate measures to ensure the health and integrity of the people working in these buildings; (d) support the inclusion of chrysotile on the Rotterdam Convention list of dangerous substances; and (e) stop financially supporting the asbestos industry within six months following the adoption of this motion. (Private Members' Business M-381)

The debate continued.

The question was put on the motion and, pursuant to Standing Order 93(1), the recorded division was deferred until Wednesday, December 5, 2012, immediately before the time provided for Private Members' Business.

At 6:29 p.m, pursuant to Standing Order 66(2), the House resumed consideration of the motion of Ms. Davies (Vancouver East), seconded by Mr. Morin (Chicoutimi—Le Fjord), — That the Eighth Report of the Standing Committee on Health, presented on Friday, May 18, 2012, be concurred in. (Concurrence in committee reports No. 6)

The debate continued.

At 7:18 p.m., pursuant to Standing Order 66(2), the Speaker interrupted the proceedings.

The question was put on the motion and it was agreed to on division.

Pursuant to Standing Order 36, petitions certified correct by the Clerk of Petitions were filed as follows:

At 7:19 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 7:38 p.m., the Speaker adjourned the House until tomorrow at 10:00 a.m., pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).