FINA Committee Meeting
Notices of Meeting include information about the subject matter to be examined by the committee and date, time and place of the meeting, as well as a list of any witnesses scheduled to appear. The Evidence is the edited and revised transcript of what is said before a committee. The Minutes of Proceedings are the official record of the business conducted by the committee at a sitting.
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.
Minutes of Proceedings
The committee resumed its clause-by-clause study of the Bill.
After debate, Clause 269 carried on division.
After debate, Clause 270 carried on division.
After debate, Clause 271 carried on division.
On Clause 272,
Peter Julian moved, — That Bill C-30, in Clause 272, be amended by replacing line 28 on page 287 with the following:“the month in which a person attains 65 years of age, the”
Debate arose thereon.
The Chair ruled the proposed amendment inadmissible because it infringed on the financial initiative of the Crown, as provided on page 772 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice, Third Edition.
Whereupon, Peter Julian appealed the decision of the Chair.
The question: "Shall the decision of the Chair be sustained?" was put and the decision was sustained on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Rachel Bendayan, Julie Dzerowicz, Ted Falk, Ed Fast, Peter Fragiskatos, Tamara Jansen, Pat Kelly, Annie Koutrakis, Michael V. McLeod — 9;
NAYS: Peter Julian, Gabriel Ste-Marie — 2.
After debate, Clause 272 carried on division.
On Clause 273,
Peter Julian moved, — That Bill C-30, in Clause 273, be amended by adding after line 16 on page 288 the following:“(1.1) Paragraph 7.1(4)(b) of the Act is repealed.”
Debate arose thereon.
The Chair ruled the proposed amendment inadmissible because it infringed on the financial initiative of the Crown, as provided on page 772 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice, Third Edition.
Whereupon, Peter Julian appealed the decision of the Chair.
The question: "Shall the decision of the Chair be sustained?" was put and the decision was sustained on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Rachel Bendayan, Julie Dzerowicz, Ted Falk, Ed Fast, Peter Fragiskatos, Tamara Jansen, Pat Kelly, Annie Koutrakis, Michael V. McLeod — 9;
NAYS: Peter Julian, Gabriel Ste-Marie — 2.
(a) by replacing line 21 on page 288 with the following:
“the month in which a person attains 65 years of age, the”
(b) by replacing line 26 on page 288 with the following:
“the month in which a person attains 65 years of age, the”
Debate arose thereon.
The Chair ruled the proposed amendment inadmissible because it infringed on the financial initiative of the Crown, as provided on page 772 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice, Third Edition.
Whereupon, Peter Julian appealed the decision of the Chair.
The question: "Shall the decision of the Chair be sustained?" was put and the decision was sustained on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Rachel Bendayan, Julie Dzerowicz, Ted Falk, Ed Fast, Peter Fragiskatos, Tamara Jansen, Pat Kelly, Annie Koutrakis, Michael V. McLeod — 9;
NAYS: Peter Julian, Gabriel Ste-Marie — 2.
Clause 273 carried on division.
After debate, Clause 274 carried on division.
After debate, Clause 275 carried on division.
On Clause 276,
Peter Julian moved, — That Bill C-30, in Clause 276, be amended by replacing line 10 on page 289 with the following:“Act, who are or will be 65 years of age or older on”
Debate arose thereon.
The Chair ruled the proposed amendment inadmissible because it infringed on the financial initiative of the Crown, as provided on page 772 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice, Third Edition.
Whereupon, Peter Julian appealed the decision of the Chair.
The question: "Shall the decision of the Chair be sustained?" was put and the decision was sustained on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Rachel Bendayan, Julie Dzerowicz, Ted Falk, Ed Fast, Peter Fragiskatos, Tamara Jansen, Pat Kelly, Annie Koutrakis, Michael V. McLeod — 9;
NAYS: Peter Julian, Gabriel Ste-Marie — 2.
After debate, Clause 276 carried on division.
After debate, Clause 277 carried on division.
After debate, Clause 278 carried on division.
After debate, Clause 279 carried on division.
After debate, Clauses 280 to 287 inclusive carried on division severally.
After debate, Clause 288 carried on division.
After debate, Clauses 289 and 290 inclusive carried on division severally.
On Clause 291,
Gabriel Ste-Marie moved, — That Bill C-30, in Clause 291, be amended by replacing lines 11 to 28 on page 294 with the following:“291 Subsection 8(2) of the Act is replaced by the following:”
Debate arose thereon.
The Chair ruled the proposed amendment inadmissible because it infringed on the financial initiative of the Crown, as provided on page 772 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice, Third Edition.
Whereupon, Gabriel Ste-Marie appealed the decision of the Chair.
The question: "Shall the decision of the Chair be sustained?" was put and the decision was sustained on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Julie Dzerowicz, Ted Falk, Ed Fast, Peter Fragiskatos, Sean Fraser, Tamara Jansen, Pat Kelly, Annie Koutrakis, Michael V. McLeod — 9;
NAYS: Peter Julian, Gabriel Ste-Marie — 2.
After debate, Clause 291 carried on division.
After debate, Clause 292 carried on division.
After debate, Clause 293 carried on division.
After debate, Clauses 294 to 302 inclusive carried on division severally.
After debate, Clause 303 carried on division.
On Clause 304,
Peter Julian moved, — That Bill C-30, in Clause 304, be amended by replacing line 13 on page 301 with the following:“(b) has had during their qualifying period at least 360”
Debate arose thereon.
The Chair ruled the proposed amendment inadmissible because it infringed on the financial initiative of the Crown, as provided on page 772 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice, Third Edition.
Whereupon, Peter Julian appealed the decision of the Chair.
The question: "Shall the decision of the Chair be sustained?" was put and the decision was sustained on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Julie Dzerowicz, Ted Falk, Ed Fast, Peter Fragiskatos, Sean Fraser, Tamara Jansen, Pat Kelly, Annie Koutrakis, Michael V. McLeod — 9;
NAYS: Peter Julian, Gabriel Ste-Marie — 2.
After debate, Clause 304 carried on division.
After debate, Clauses 305 to 307 inclusive carried on division severally.
On Clause 308,
Gabriel Ste-Marie moved, — That Bill C-30, in Clause 308, be amended by replacing line 24 on page 303 to line 34 on page 304 with the following:“(2.3) Despite subsection (2) and subsection 77.992(5) of the Employment Insurance Regulations, the maximum number of weeks for which benefits may be paid in a benefit period because of a reason other than those mentioned in subsection (3) to a claimant who is included in Pilot Project No. 21 established under those Regulations and whose benefit period begins during the period beginning on September 27, 2020 and ending on September 24, 2022 is 50.”
Debate arose thereon.
The Chair ruled the proposed amendment inadmissible because it infringed on the financial initiative of the Crown, as provided on page 772 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice, Third Edition.
Whereupon, Gabriel Ste-Marie appealed the decision of the Chair.
The question: "Shall the decision of the Chair be sustained?" was put and the decision was sustained on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Julie Dzerowicz, Ted Falk, Ed Fast, Peter Fragiskatos, Sean Fraser, Tamara Jansen, Pat Kelly, Annie Koutrakis, Michael V. McLeod — 9;
NAYS: Peter Julian, Gabriel Ste-Marie — 2.
“tine is 50;”
Debate arose thereon.
The Chair ruled the proposed amendment inadmissible because it infringed on the financial initiative of the Crown, as provided on page 772 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice, Third Edition.
Whereupon, Peter Julian appealed the decision of the Chair.
The question: "Shall the decision of the Chair be sustained?" was put and the decision was sustained on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Julie Dzerowicz, Ted Falk, Ed Fast, Peter Fragiskatos, Sean Fraser, Tamara Jansen, Pat Kelly, Annie Koutrakis, Michael V. McLeod — 9;
NAYS: Peter Julian, Gabriel Ste-Marie — 2.
After debate, Clause 308 carried on division.
On new Clause 308.1,
Peter Julian moved, — That Bill C-30 be amended by adding after line 18 on page 305 the following new clause:“308.1 The portion of subsection 14(2) of the Act before the table is replaced by the following:
(2) A claimant’s weekly insurable earnings are their insurable earnings in the calculation period divided by 14 for the period beginning on September 26, 2021 and ending on September 24, 2022 or, for any other period, by the number of weeks determined in accordance with the following table by reference to the applicable regional rate of unemployment.”
Debate arose thereon.
The Chair ruled the proposed amendment inadmissible because it infringed on the financial initiative of the Crown, as provided on page 772 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice, Third Edition.
Whereupon, Peter Julian appealed the decision of the Chair.
The question: "Shall the decision of the Chair be sustained?" was put and the decision was sustained on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Julie Dzerowicz, Ted Falk, Ed Fast, Peter Fragiskatos, Sean Fraser, Tamara Jansen, Pat Kelly, Annie Koutrakis, Michael V. McLeod — 9;
NAYS: Peter Julian, Gabriel Ste-Marie — 2.
After debate, Clause 309 carried on division.
After debate, Clauses 310 to 316 inclusive carried on division severally.
After debate, Clause 317 carried on division.
After debate, Clauses 318 to 323 inclusive carried on division severally.
After debate, Clause 324 carried on division.
After debate, Clauses 325 to 361 inclusive carried on division severally.
At 5:32 p.m., the sitting was suspended.
At 6:02 p.m., the sitting resumed.
After debate, Clauses 362 and 363 inclusive carried on division severally.
Schedule 1 carried on division.
Schedule 2 carried on division.
On Schedule 3,
Pursuant to the order adopted by the committee on Thursday, February 18, 2021, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the committee, was deemed moved:
That Bill C-30, in Schedule 3, be amended by replacing section 5 on page 342 with the following:
“5 The region of Prince Edward Island, consisting of all Census Divisions.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Peter Julian, Gabriel Ste-Marie — 2;
NAYS: Julie Dzerowicz, Ted Falk, Ed Fast, Peter Fragiskatos, Sean Fraser, Tamara Jansen, Pat Kelly, Annie Koutrakis, Michael V. McLeod — 9.
Schedule 3 carried on division.
Schedule 4 carried on division.
Clause 1, Short Title, carried on division.
The Title carried on division.
The Bill, as amended, was adopted.
ORDERED, — That the Chair report the Bill, as amended, to the House.
ORDERED, — That Bill C-30, as amended, be reprinted for the use of the House of Commons at report stage.
At 6:18 p.m., the committee adjourned to the call of the Chair.