SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 128

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
November 16, 2022 02:00PM
Context: House Hansard - 128 - Nov/16/22
Mr. Daniel Blaikie (Elmwood—Transcona, NDP)
Mr. Speaker, I am rising to follow up on the point of order that was raised earlier this week by the member for Winnipeg North in respect to Bill C-228. The bill, presented by the member for Sarnia—Lambton, has to do with protection of pensions. The member forWinnipeg North highlighted that the finance committee had ruled a particular amendment having to do with the protection of severance and termination pay in the case of bankruptcy as being out of order. I would like to call to the Speaker's attention, first of all, the fact that the committee did consider that question—
106 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 128 - Nov/16/22
The Speaker
I am now prepared to rule on the point of order raised on November 14, 2022, by the parliamentary secretary to the government House leader regarding an amendment adopted by the Standing Committee on Finance during clause-by-clause consideration of Bill C-228, an act to amend the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, the Companies' Creditors Arrangement Act and the Pension Benefits Standards Act, 1985. In raising the point of order, the parliamentary secretary explained that the committee passed an amendment to protect termination and severance pay in case of bankruptcy. The chair of the committee ruled the amendment inadmissible on the grounds that it was beyond the scope of the bill. The decision was challenged and overturned. The committee then debated the amendment and adopted it. According to the parliamentary secretary, this amendment broadens the scope and principle of the bill as agreed to at second reading. In addition, because the amendment introduces a new concept that was not contemplated at second reading, the parliamentary secretary argued that it should be removed from the version of the bill that will be considered at report stage and third reading. However, the members for Niagara West and Sarnia—Lambton contended that decisions made by committees should not be overturned by the government of the day but allowed to stand in order to uphold their independence. For his part, the member for Elmwood—Transcona is of the view that the amendment should be allowed because the sponsor believed it to be relevant and it had also been referenced during debate at second reading. After the report of the Standing Committee on Finance was presented to the House, the Chair was asked to ensure compliance with certain fundamental rules and practices and to consider if the committee had exceeded its powers with regard to an amendment included in its report. As Speaker Fraser explained on April 28, 1992, at page 9801 of the Debates: When a bill is referred to a standing or legislative committee of the House, that committee is only empowered to adopt, amend or negative the clauses found in that piece of legislation and to report the bill to the House with or without amendments. The committee is restricted in its examination in a number of ways. It cannot…go beyond the scope of the bill as passed at second reading, and it cannot reach back to the parent act to make further amendments not contemplated in the bill no matter how tempting this may be. The amendment at issue would create new clause 4.1 of the bill, which would protect the termination and severance pay that a bankrupt owes to various categories of its employees. Bill C-228 is limited in scope. The summary of the bill at second reading states the following: This enactment amends the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act and the Companies' Creditors Arrangement Act to ensure that claims in respect of unfunded liabilities or solvency deficiencies of pension plans and claims relating to the cessation of an employer’s participation in group insurance plans are paid in priority in the event of bankruptcy proceedings. The chair of the committee was right to conclude that the amendment is beyond the scope of the bill, as Bill C‑228 is intended to protect only employee pension funds and group insurance plans, not termination or severance pay for certain categories of employees in case of bankruptcy. The Chair would like to remind members that the scope of a bill is not determined by its sponsor, by the government or even by the committee considering it, but by the House itself when it adopts the bill at second reading. House of Commons Procedure and Practice, third edition, states the following on page 770: “An amendment to a bill that was referred to a committee after second reading is out of order if it is beyond the scope and principle of the bill.” While the Chair recognizes that considering a bill at committee involves its share of challenges, committees must fulfill their mandate without exceeding their powers. Committees overstep the authority granted to them when they pass amendments that go beyond the scope of a bill referred to them after second reading. In consequence, the Chair must rule the amendment adopted by the Standing Committee on Finance creating new clause 4.1 of Bill C-228 null and void, and order that it no longer form part of the bill that the committee reported to the House. The Chair further orders a reprint of Bill C-228 so that the new version may be considered by the House at report stage. I thank members for their attention.
787 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border