PROC 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.

Previous day publication Next day publication

MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS

Meeting No. 37

Thursday, May 1, 2014

The Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs met in a televised session at 11:37 a.m. this day, in Room 253-D, Centre Block, the Chair, Joe Preston, presiding.

Members of the Committee present: David Christopherson, Kevin Lamoureux, Alexandrine Latendresse, Tom Lukiwski, Ted Opitz, Joe Preston, Scott Reid, Blake Richards and Craig Scott.

Acting Members present: Colin Carrie for Ted Opitz, Nathan Cullen for David Christopherson, Fin Donnelly for Craig Scott, Peter Julian for Alexandrine Latendresse, Dave MacKenzie for Brad Butt, Marie-Claude Morin for Alexandrine Latendresse, Scott Simms for Kevin Lamoureux, Glenn Thibeault for David Christopherson and David Wilks for Ted Opitz.

Other Members present: Elizabeth May.

In attendance: House of Commons: Mike MacPherson, Legislative Clerk ; Justin Vaive, Legislative Clerk ; Paul Cardegna, Procedural Clerk . Library of Parliament: Andre Barnes, Analyst ; Erin Virgint, Research Assistant.

Witnesses: Privy Council Office: Marc Chénier, Senior Officer and Counsel; Natasha Kim, Director, Democratic Reform.

The Committee proceeded to the consideration of matters related to Committee business.

Craig Scott moved, — That the Committee present a report to the House of Commons recommending that Bill C-23, An Act to amend the Canada Elections Act and other Acts and to make consequential amendments to certain Acts, be withdrawn.

After debate, the question was put on the motion and it was negatived on the following recorded division: YEAS: David Christopherson, Alexandrine Latendresse, Craig Scott, Scott Simms — 4; NAYS: Tom Lukiwski, Dave MacKenzie, Ted Opitz, Scott Reid, Blake Richards — 5.

Pursuant to the Order of Reference of Monday, February 10, 2014, the Committee resumed consideration of Bill C-23, An Act to amend the Canada Elections Act and other Acts and to make consequential amendments to certain Acts.

The Committee resumed its clause-by-clause study of the Bill.

The witnesses answered questions.

The Committee resumed consideration of the amendment of Craig Scott, — That Bill C-23 be amended by adding after line 1 on page 26 the following new clause:

“49.1 The Act is amended by adding the following after section 149:

149.1 The Chief Electoral Officer shall ensure that the notice of confirmation of registration that is sent under section 95 or 102 is marked with a prominent message informing the elector that this notice of confirmation of registration may not be used as a piece of identification for the purposes of voting.”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Craig Scott and it was negatived on the following recorded division: YEAS: David Christopherson, Alexandrine Latendresse, Craig Scott, Scott Simms — 4; NAYS: Tom Lukiwski, Dave MacKenzie, Ted Opitz, Scott Reid, Blake Richards — 5.

At 12:25 p.m., the sitting was suspended.

At 12:28 p.m., the sitting resumed.

Clause 50 was negatived.

Clause 51 carried.

On Clause 52,

Tom Lukiwski moved, — That Bill C-23, in Clause 52, be amended by replacing line 31 on page 26 with the following:

“section 143 or to take an oath otherwise”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Tom Lukiwski and it was agreed to on division.

Clause 52, as amended, carried on division.

On Clause 53,

Scott Simms moved, — That Bill C-23, in Clause 53, be amended by deleting line 34 on page 26 to line 3 on page 27.

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Scott Simms and it was negatived on the following recorded division: YEAS: David Christopherson, Alexandrine Latendresse, Craig Scott, Scott Simms — 4; NAYS: Tom Lukiwski, Dave MacKenzie, Ted Opitz, Scott Reid, Blake Richards — 5.

Tom Lukiwski moved, — That Bill C-23, in Clause 53, be amended by

(a) replacing line 34 on page 26 to line 3 on page 27 with the following:

“53. (1) The portion of subsection 161(1) of the French version of the Act before paragraph (a) is replaced by the following:

161. (1) L’électeur dont le nom ne figure pas déjà sur la liste électorale peut, le jour du scrutin, s’inscrire en personne :

(1.1) Paragraphs 161(1)(a) and (b) of the Act are replaced by the following:

(a) provides as proof of his or her identity and residence the piece or pieces of identification referred to in paragraph 143(2)(a) or (b), respectively, the piece or one of those pieces containing an address that proves his or her residence; or

(b) proves his or her identity by providing two pieces of identification of a type authorized under subsection 143(2.1) that establish the elector’s name, proves his or her residence by taking an oath in writing in the prescribed form — the form including the statement that he or she has received the oral advice set out in subsection 161.1(1) — and is accompanied by another elector whose name appears on the list of electors for the same polling division who

(i) proves their own identity and residence by providing the piece or pieces of identification referred to in paragraph 143(2)(a) or (b), respectively, the piece or one of those pieces containing either an address that proves that other elector’s residence or an address that is consistent with information related to that other elector that appears on the list of electors, and

(ii) attests to the elector’s residence on oath in writing in the prescribed form, the form including the statements that

(A) they have received the oral advice set out in subsection 161.1(2),

(B) they know the elector personally,

(D) they have not attested to the residence of another elector at the election, and

(E) their own residence has not been attested to by another elector at the election.”

(b) replacing line 40 on page 27 with the following:

“are replaced by the following:

(6) No elector shall attest to the residence of more than one elector at an election.

(7) No elector whose own residence has been attested to at an election shall attest to another elector’s residence at that election.”

Debate arose thereon.

By unanimous consent, the amendment was allowed to stand.

By unanimous consent, Clause 53 was allowed to stand.

On Clause 54,

Tom Lukiwski moved, — That Bill C-23, in Clause 54, be amended by replacing line 1 on page 28 with the following:

“54. Section 161.1 of the Act is replaced by the following:

161.1 (1) If a person decides to prove his or her residence by taking an oath in writing in the prescribed form, the person who administers the oath shall, before doing so, orally advise the oath-taker of the qualifications for electors and the penalty that may be imposed under this Act on a person who contravenes subsection 161(5.1) or 549(3).

(2) If a person decides to attest to an elector’s residence by taking an oath in writing in the prescribed form, the person who administers the oath shall, before doing so, orally advise the oath-taker of the penalty that may be imposed under this Act on a person who contravenes subsection 161(6) or (7) or 549(3).”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Tom Lukiwski and it was agreed to on division.

Clause 54, as amended, carried on division.

Clause 55 carried on division.

On New Clause 55.1,

Tom Lukiwski moved, — That Bill C-23 be amended by adding after line 21 on page 28 the following new clause:

“55.1 The Act is amended by adding the following after section 164:

Audit 164.1

For each general election and by-election, the Chief Electoral Officer shall engage an auditor that he or she considers to have technical or specialized knowledge — other than a member of his or her staff or an election officer — to perform an audit and report on whether deputy returning officers, poll clerks and registration officers have, on all days of advance polling and on polling day, properly exercised the powers conferred on them, and properly performed the duties and functions imposed on them, under sections 143 to 149, 161 to 162 and 169.”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Tom Lukiwski and it was agreed to on division.

On Clause 56,

Tom Lukiwski moved, — That Bill C-23, in Clause 56, be amended by

(a) replacing lines 22 to 30 on page 28 with the following:

“56. (1) The portion ofsubsection 169(2) of the French version of the Act before paragraph (a) is replaced by the following:

(2) Il ne peut toutefois être inscrit que si :

(1.1) Paragraphs 169(2)(a) and (b) of the Act are replaced by the following:

(b) proves his or her identity by providing two pieces of identification of a type authorized under subsection 143(2.1) that establish the elector’s name, proves his or her residence by taking an oath in writing in the prescribed form — the form including the statement that he or she has received the oral advice set out in subsection 169.1(1) — and is accompanied by another elector whose name appears on the list of electors for the same polling division who

(ii) attests to the elector’s residence on oath in writing in the prescribed form, the form including the statements that

(A) they have received the oral advice set out in subsection 169.1(2),

(B) they know the elector personally,

(D) they have not attested to the residence of another elector at the election, and

(E) their own residence has not been attested to by another elector at the election.

(1.2) Section 169 of the Act is amended by adding the following after subsection (2):”

(b) replacing line 24 on page 29 with the following:

“are replaced by the following:

(5) No elector shall attest to the residence of more than one elector at an election.

(6) No elector whose residence has been attested to at an election shall attest to another elector’s residence at that election.”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Tom Lukiwski and it was agreed to.

Clause 56, as amended, carried on division.

By unanimous consent, the Committee reverted to the consideration of the amendment of Tom Lukiwski previously stood which read as follows: That Bill C-23, in Clause 53, be amended by

(a) replacing line 34 on page 26 to line 3 on page 27 with the following:

“53. (1) The portion of subsection 161(1) of the French version of the Act before paragraph (a) is replaced by the following:

161. (1) L’électeur dont le nom ne figure pas déjà sur la liste électorale peut, le jour du scrutin, s’inscrire en personne :

(1.1) Paragraphs 161(1)(a) and (b) of the Act are replaced by the following:

(ii) attests to the elector’s residence on oath in writing in the prescribed form, the form including the statements that

(A) they have received the oral advice set out in subsection 161.1(2),

(B) they know the elector personally,

(D) they have not attested to the residence of another elector at the election, and

(E) their own residence has not been attested to by another elector at the election.”

(b) replacing line 40 on page 27 with the following:

“are replaced by the following:

(6) No elector shall attest to the residence of more than one elector at an election.

(7) No elector whose own residence has been attested to at an election shall attest to another elector’s residence at that election.”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Tom Lukiwski and it was agreed to.

Clause 53, as amended, carried on division.

On Clause 57,

Tom Lukiwski moved, — That Bill C-23, in Clause 57, be amended by replacing line 25 on page 29 with the following:

“57. Section 169.1 of the Act is replaced by the following:

169.1 (1) If a person decides to prove his or her residence by taking an oath in writing in the prescribed form, the person who administers the oath shall, before doing so, orally advise the oath-taker of the qualifications for electors and the penalty that may be imposed under this Act on a person who contravenes subsection 169(4.1) or 549(3).

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Tom Lukiwski and it was agreed to on division.

Clause 57, as amended, carried on division.

On Clause 58,

Pursuant to order adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, October 29, 2013, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 58, be amended by replacing lines 29 to 31 on page 29 with the following:

“open between the hours of noon and 8:00 p.m. on Saturday that is the 16th day before polling day, and on Friday, Saturday, and Monday, the 10th, 9th, and 7th days, respectively, before”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May, and it was negatived.

Clause 58, as amended, carried on division.

On Clause 59,

Tom Lukiwski moved, — That Bill C-23, in Clause 59, be amended by replacing line 37 on page 29 with the following:

“section 143 or to take an oath other-”

The question was put on the amendment of Tom Lukiwski and it was agreed to on division.

Clause 59, as amended, carried on division.

Clause 60 carried on division.

Clause 61 carried on division.

On Clause 62,

Scott Simms moved, — That Bill C-23, in Clause 62, be amended by replacing lines 33 and 34 on page 32 with the following:

“returning officer to receive”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Scott Simms and it was agreed to.

Tom Lukiwski moved, — That Bill C-23, in Clause 62, be amended by

(a) replacing line 38 on page 32 with the following:

“section 143.”

(b) adding after line 5 on page 33 the following:

“(3.1) No elector shall attest to the residence of more than one elector at an election.

(3.2) No elector whose own residence has been attested to at an election shall attest to another elector’s residence at that election.”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Tom Lukiwski and it was agreed to.

Scott Simms moved, — That Bill C-23, in Clause 62, be amended by replacing line 7 on page 33 with the following:

“following provisions apply, with any necessary modifications, in respect of the”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Scott Simms and it was agreed to.

Clause 62, as amended, carried on division.

Clause 63 carried on division.

On Clause 64,

Tom Lukiwski moved, — That Bill C-23, in Clause 64, be amended by adding after line 5 on page 34 the following:

“288.01 The deputy returning officer shall place the form for each oath taken under subsection 143(3) or paragraph 161(1)(b) or 169(2)(b) in an envelope supplied for the purpose.”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Tom Lukiwski and it was agreed to.

Clause 64, as amended, carried.

Clause 65 carried on division.

On Clause 66,

Tom Lukiwski moved, — That Bill C-23, in Clause 66, be amended by replacing line 32 on page 34 with the following:

“that contains the registration certificates, the envelope referred to in section 288.01 and, in”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Tom Lukiwski and it was agreed to.

Clause 66, as amended, carried on division.

On Clause 67,

Pursuant to order adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, October 29, 2013, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 67, be amended by replacing line 42 on page 34 to line 2 on page 35 with the following:

“with one copy of each statement of the vote in respect of the candidate's electoral district.”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 4; NAYS: 5.

Craig Scott moved, — That Bill C-23, in Clause 67, be amended by adding after line 2 on page 35 the following:

“291.1 (1) If the copy of the documents prepared under paragraph 162(i.1) is missing, the returning officer may open the ballot box and the envelope that contains the copy of the documents.

(2) The returning officer shall not open an envelope that appears to contain ballots.”

By unanimous consent, the amendment was allowed to stand.

By unanimous consent, Clause 67 was allowed to stand.

On new Clause 67.1,

Tom Lukiwski moved, — That Bill C-23 be amended by adding after line 2 on page 35 the following new clause:

“67.1 The Act is amended by adding the following after section 292:

292.1 A returning officer, on the receipt of each envelope referred to in section 288.01, shall create a list of the names of all persons who took an oath under subsection 143(3) or paragraph 161(1)(b) or 169(2)(b) and shall include in the list the address of each of those persons.”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Tom Lukiwski and it was agreed to on division.

Clause 68 carried on division.

Clause 69 carried on division.

Clause 70 carried on division.

Clause 71 carried on division.

Clause 72 carried on division.

Clause 73 carried on division.

On Clause 74,

Craig Scott moved, — That Bill C-23, in Clause 74, be amended by replacing lines 6 and 7 on page 36 with the following:

“74. Section 329 of the Act is replaced by the following:

329. The returning officer shall not transmit the result or purported result of the vote in an electoral district to the public before the close of all the polling stations in Canada.”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Craig Scott and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 3; NAYS: 6.

Tom Lukiwski moved, — That Bill C-23 be amended by adding after line 7 on page 36 the following:

“74.1 Subsection 345(3) of the Act is replaced by the following:

(3) The value of free broadcasting time made available to a registered party under this section shall not be taken into consideration in calculating its election expenses within the meaning of section 376.”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Tom Lukiwski and it was agreed to on division.

Clause 74, as amended, carried on division.

On New Clause 74.1,

Pursuant to order adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, October 29, 2013, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23 be amended by adding after line 7 on page 36 the following new clause:

“74.1 The Act is amended by adding the following after section 329:

ELECTION DEBATES

329.1 The Chief Electoral Officer shall

(a) determine the date for and number of election debates;

(b) supervise the debates;

(c) invite to the debate the leader of every party that, in the last election, won at least 5 per cent of the vote or had a candidate elected; and

(d) require all broadcasters to broadcast the debates.”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived.

Clause 75 carried.

On Clause 76,

Craig Scott moved, — That Bill C-23, in Clause 76, be amended by adding after line 3 on page 39 the following:

“(2) Any agreement referred to in subsection (1) must include provisions specifying that

(a) the calling service provider shall not block the display of its telephone number when contacting voters;

(b) the calling service provider shall indicate, at the beginning of the call, the name of the person or group on whose behalf the call is made and their party affiliation , if any, and whether the person or group has authorized the call; and

(c) the calling service provider is to indicate, at the end of the call, the telephone number of the person or group on whose behalf the call is made or of their official representative.”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Craig Scott and it was negatived on the following recorded division: YEAS: Marie-Claude Morin, Craig Scott, Scott Simms, Glenn Thibeault — 4; NAYS: Tom Lukiwski, Dave MacKenzie, Ted Opitz, Scott Reid, Blake Richards — 5.

At 1:58 p.m., the sitting was suspended.

At 3:24 p.m., the sitting resumed.

The Committee resumed clause-by-clause consideration on Clause 76 of the Bill.

Pursuant to order adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, October 29, 2013, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 76, be amended by replacing line 30 on page 39 with the following:

“identification for five years after the end of the”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 4; NAYS: 5.

Pursuant to order adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, October 29, 2013, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 76, be amended by replacing line 27 on page 40 with the following:

“identification for five years after the end of the”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 4; NAYS: 5.

Scott Simms moved, — That Bill C-23, in Clause 76, be amended

(a) by replacing line 36 on page 40 with the following:

“be filed prior to the first call”

(b) by replacing line 14 on page 41 with the following:

“be filed prior to the first call”

“(2) The registration notice shall be filed prior to the first live voice call”

(d) by replacing lines 29 and 30 on page 42 with the following:

“(2) The registration notice shall be filed prior to the first call is made”

Debate arose thereon.

At 3:34 p.m., the sitting was suspended.

At 3:38 p.m., the sitting resumed.

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Scott Simms and it was negatived on the following recorded division: YEAS: David Christopherson, Alexandrine Latendresse, Craig Scott, Scott Simms — 4; NAYS: Colin Carrie, Tom Lukiwski, Dave MacKenzie, Scott Reid, Blake Richards — 5.

Pursuant to order adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, October 29, 2013, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 76, be amended by replacing lines 34 to 39 on page 41 with the following:

“person or group uses its internal services to make live voice calls for any purpose relating to the election, including a purpose referred to in any of paragraphs (a) to (e) of the definition “voter contact calling services” in section 348.01, the person or group's”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 4; NAYS: 5.

Craig Scott moved, — That Bill C-23, in Clause 76, be amended by adding after line 18 on page 43 the following:

“348.111 The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission shall keep all documents and information filed in the Voter Contact Registry for at least seven years after the day on which they are provided.”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Craig Scott and it was negatived on the following recorded division: YEAS: David Christopherson, Alexandrine Latendresse, Craig Scott, Scott Simms — 4; NAYS: Colin Carrie, Tom Lukiwski, Dave MacKenzie, Scott Reid, Blake Richards — 5.

Craig Scott moved, — That Bill C-23, in Clause 76, be amended by replacing line 2 on page 44 with the following:

“Commissioner considers relevant for the”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Craig Scott and it was negatived on the following recorded division: YEAS: David Christopherson, Alexandrine Latendresse, Craig Scott, Scott Simms — 4; NAYS: Colin Carrie, Tom Lukiwski, Dave MacKenzie, Scott Reid, Blake Richards — 5.

Craig Scott moved, — That Bill C-23, in Clause 76, be amended by adding after line 5 on page 44 the following:

“(2) The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission shall inform every employee whose work to any extent relates to this Division or Division 2 of this Part that, if he or she suspects that an offence under any provision of this Act has been committed, he or she has a duty to inform a designated Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission official.

(3) The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission shall, on receiving information from an employee who suspects that an offence mentioned in subsection (2) has been committed, refer the matter to the Commissioner for investigation.”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Craig Scott and it was negatived on the following recorded division: YEAS: David Christopherson, Alexandrine Latendresse, Craig Scott, Scott Simms — 4; NAYS: Colin Carrie, Tom Lukiwski, Dave MacKenzie, Scott Reid, Blake Richards — 5.

Craig Scott moved, — That Bill C-23, in Clause 76, be amended by adding after line 5 on page 44 the following:

“348.151 This Part applies to any calling service provider, whether it is located inside or outside Canada.”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Craig Scott and it was negatived on the following recorded division: YEAS: David Christopherson, Alexandrine Latendresse, Craig Scott, Scott Simms — 4; NAYS: Colin Carrie, Tom Lukiwski, Dave MacKenzie, Scott Reid, Blake Richards — 5.

Clause 76 carried on division.

By unanimous consent, the Committee reverted to the consideration of the amendment of Craig Scott previously stood which read as follows: That Bill C-23, in Clause 67, be amended by adding after line 2 on page 35 the following:

“291.1 (1) If the copy of the documents prepared under paragraph 162(i.1) is missing, the returning officer may open the ballot box and the envelope that contains the copy of the documents.

(2) The returning officer shall not open an envelope that appears to contain ballots.”

By unanimous consent, the amendment was withdrawn.

Clause 67 carried on division.

On Clause 77,

Pursuant to order adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, October 29, 2013, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 77, be amended by replacing line 10 on page 44 with the following:

“contact calling services shall keep, for five years”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 4; NAYS: 5.

Tom Lukiwski moved, — That Bill C-23, in Clause 77, be amended by replacing line 10 on page 44 with the following:

“contact calling services shall keep, for three years”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Tom Lukiwski and it was agreed to on the following recorded division: YEAS: Colin Carrie, David Christopherson, Alexandrine Latendresse, Tom Lukiwski, Dave MacKenzie, Scott Reid, Blake Richards, Craig Scott, Scott Simms — 9; NAYS: — 0.

Pursuant to order adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, October 29, 2013, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 77, be amended by replacing line 24 on page 44 with the following:

“provided shall keep, for five years after the end of”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 4; NAYS: 5.

Pursuant to order adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, October 29, 2013, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 77, be amended by replacing line 2 on page 45 with the following:

“conveyed, for five years after the end of the”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 4; NAYS: 5.

Pursuant to order adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, October 29, 2013, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 77, be amended by replacing lines 4 and 5 on page 45 with the following:

“348.19 If, during an election period, a person or group uses its internal services to make live voice calls for any purpose relating to the election, including a purpose referred to in any of paragraphs (a) to (e) of the definition “voter contact calling services” in section 348.01, the person or group”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 4; NAYS: 5.

Scott Simms moved, — That Bill C-23, in Clause 77, be amended by replacing line 13 on page 45 with the following:

“which the script was used, for five years after the”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Scott Simms and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 4; NAYS: 5.

Craig Scott moved, — That Bill C-23, in Clause 77, be amended by adding after line 14 on page 45 the following:

“348.2 Every calling service provider that is responsible for the calls made under section 348.16 shall

(a) file with the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission a list of all the telephone numbers that were called under that section, as well as a copy of each script and recording; and

(b) keep the list and copies of scripts and recordings for five years after the end of the election period.

348.3 Every person, group or third party that is a corporation or group that is responsible for calls made under section 348.18 or 348.19 shall

(a) file with the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission a list of all the telephone numbers that were called under the relevant section, as well as a copy of each script and recording;

(b) keep the list for three years after the end of the election period; and

(c) keep copies of the scripts and recordings for three years after the end of the election period or, if requested to do so by the Commissioner on the grounds that a court order related to the voter contact calling services is anticipated, for a period not exceeding five years after the end of the election period.”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Craig Scott and it was negatived on the following recorded division: YEAS: David Christopherson, Alexandrine Latendresse, Craig Scott, Scott Simms — 4; NAYS: Colin Carrie, Tom Lukiwski, Dave MacKenzie, Scott Reid, Blake Richards — 5.

Scott Simms moved, — That Bill C-23, in Clause 77, be amended by adding after line 14 on page 45 the following:

“348.2 The calling service provider, person or group — or third party that is a corporation or group — that is responsible for the calls made under section 348.16, 348.18 or 348.19, as the case may be, shall

(a) at the request of the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, file with the Commission a list of all the telephone numbers that were called under the relevant section; and

(b) keep the list for one year after the end of the election period.

348.21 Despite sections 348.16, 348.18 and 348.19, the calling service provider, person or group — or third party that is a corporation or group — that is responsible for the calls made under those sections, as the case may be, shall keep the scripts and recordings for up to five years after the end of the election period if requested to do so by the Commissioner on the grounds that a court order related to the voter contact calling services is anticipated.”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Scott Simms and it was negatived.

Pursuant to order adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, October 29, 2013, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 77, be amended by adding after line 14 on page 45 the following:

“348.2 The calling service provider, person or group — or third party that is a corporation or group — that is responsible for the calls made under section 348.16, 348.17, 348.18 or 348.19, as the case may be, shall

(a) file with the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission a list of all the telephone numbers that were called under the relevant section; and

(b) keep the list for five years after the end of the election period.

348.21 Despite sections 348.16, 348.17, 348.18 and 348.19, the calling service provider, person or group — or third party that is a corporation or group — that is responsible for the calls made under those sections, as the case may be, shall keep the scripts and recordings for such longer period as may be indicated in any preservation demand made by the Commissioner in accordance with section 348.22.

348.22 (1) The Commissioner may make a demand to an entity referred to in section 348.21 requiring them to preserve scripts and recordings that are in their possession or control when the demand is made.

(2) The Commissioner may make the demand only if he or she has reasonable grounds to suspect that

(a) an offence has been or will be committed under this or any other Act of Parliament; and (b) the scripts or recordings are in the entity’s possession or control and will assist in the investigation of the offence.

(3) A demand may not be made to an entity that is under investigation for the offence referred to in paragraph (2)(a).

(4) The Commissioner may revoke the demand by notice given to the entity at any time. Unless it is revoked earlier, the demand expires 90 days after the day on which it is made.

(5) The Commissioner may impose any conditions in the demand that he or she considers appropriate — including conditions prohibiting the disclosure of its existence or some or all of its contents — and may revoke a condition at any time by notice given to the entity.

(6) The Commissioner may not make another demand requiring the same entity to preserve the same scripts and recordings in connection with the investigation.”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 4; NAYS: 5.

Clause 77, as amended, carried on division.

On Clause 78,

Tom Lukiwski moved, — That Bill C-23, in Clause 78, be amended by

(a) replacing line 17 on page 45 with the following:

“350. (1) Subject to section 351.1, a third party shall not incur elec-”

(b) replacing line 23 on page 45 with the following:

“(4) Subject to section 351.1, a third party shall not incur election”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Tom Lukiwski and it was agreed to.

By unanimous consent, it was agreed, — That the result of the vote on the previous amendment be applied to the following two (2) amendments which are therefore also adopted:

That Bill C-23 be amended by adding after line 33 on page 45 the following new clause:

“78.1 The Act is amended by adding the following after section 351:

351.1 A third party shall not incur election advertising expenses of a total amount of $500 or more in relation to a general election or a by-election, or, if the election periods of two or more by-elections overlap with each other in whole or in part, in relation to those by-elections, unless

(a) if the third party is an individual, the individual

(i) is a Canadian citizen,

(ii) is a permanent resident as defined in subsection 2(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, or

(iii) resides in Canada;

(b) if the third party is a corporation, it carries on business in Canada; and

(i) is a Canadian citizen,

(ii) is a permanent resident as defined in subsection 2(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, or

(iii) resides in Canada.”

That Bill C-23 be amended by adding after line 33 on page 45 the following new clause:

“78.1 The Act is amended by adding the following after section 351:

351.2 For greater certainty, for the purposes of subsections 350(1), (4) and section 351.1 if election advertising is transmitted during an election period, it shall be considered an election advertising expense, regardless of when it was incurred.”

Tom Lukiwski moved, — That Bill C-23, in Clause 78, be amended by

(a) replacing line 21 on page 45 with the following:

“(2) Subsections 350(4) and (5) of the Act are replaced”

(b) adding after line 33 on page 45 the following:

“(5) The amounts referred to in subsections (1), (2) and (4) shall be multiplied by the inflation adjustment factor referred to in section 384 that is in effect on the issue of the writ or writs.

(6) If an election period is longer than 37 days, then the amounts referred to in subsections (1), (2) and (4) are increased by adding to them the product of

(a) one thirty-seventh of the amount referred to in subsection (1), (2) or (4), as the case may be, and

(b) the number of days in the election period minus 37.”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Tom Lukiwski and it was agreed to.

Scott Simms moved, — That Bill C-23, in Clause 78, be amended by adding after line 33 on page 45 the following:

“(4.2) A third party that is unable to provide the information referred to in paragraph 353(2)(a), (b) or (b.1) and, as a result, is not entitled to be registered under section 353, shall not incur election advertising expenses of a total amount of more than $500.”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Scott Simms and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 4; NAYS: 5.

Clause 78, as amended, carried on division.

On Clause 79,

Tom Lukiwski moved, — That Bill C-23, in Clause 79, be amended by replacing line 34 on page 45 with the following:

“79. (1) Subsection 353(1) of the Act is replaced by the following:

353. (1) Subject to section 351.1, a third party shall register immediately after having incurred election advertising expenses of a total amount of $500 and may not register before the issue of the writ.

(2) Paragraphs 353(2)(a) and (b) of the”

The question was put on the amendment of Tom Lukiwski and it was agreed to.

Clause 79, as amended, carried on division.

On Clause 80,

Craig Scott moved, — That Bill C-23, in Clause 80, be amended

(a) by replacing line 19 on page 46 with the following:

“(a) $1,200 in total in any calendar year to a”

(b) by replacing line 21 on page 46 with the following:

“(a.1) $1,200 in total in any calendar year to”

“(b) $1,200 in total to a candidate for a”

(d) by replacing line 28 on page 46 with the following:

“(c) $1,200 in total to the leadership contest-”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Craig Scott and it was negatived on the following recorded division: YEAS: David Christopherson, Alexandrine Latendresse, Craig Scott, Scott Simms — 4; NAYS: Colin Carrie, Tom Lukiwski, Dave MacKenzie, Scott Reid, Blake Richards — 5.

Pursuant to order adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, October 29, 2013, the following amendment, submitted by André Bellavance for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 80, be amended by replacing lines 19 to 27 on page 46 with the following:

“(a) $100 in total in any calendar year to a particular registered party, the said contribution not constituting a monetary contribution under subsection 127(3) of the Income Tax Act;

(a.1) $100 in total in any calendar year to the registered associations, nomination contestants and candidates of a particular registered party, the said contribution not constituting a monetary contribution under subsection 127(3) of the Income Tax Act;

(b) $100 in total to a candidate for a particular election who is not the candidate of a registered party, the said contribution not constituting a monetary contribution under subsection 127(3) of the Income Tax Act; and”

The question was put on the amendment of André Bellavance and it was negatived.

Pursuant to order adopted by the Committee on Tuesday, October 29, 2013, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 80, be amended by deleting lines 7 to 35 on page 47.

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 4; NAYS: 5.

At 5:00 p.m., the sitting was suspended.

At 5:07 p.m., the sitting resumed.

At 5:00 p.m., pursuant to the motion adopted on Tuesday, March 4, 2014, all the amendments submitted to the clerk for inclusion in the package of amendments for clause-by-clause consideration as well as every question necessary to dispose of clause-by-clause consideration of the Bill and to report the Bill to the House were deemed proposed and disposed of as follows:

The following amendment, submitted by Craig Scott for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 80, be amended by replacing line 22 on page 47 with the following:

“(a) contributions that do not exceed the amount referred to in subsection 405(1)”

The question was put on the amendment of Craig Scott and it was negatived on the following recorded division: YEAS: Nathan Cullen, Fin Donnelly, Peter Julian, Kevin Lamoureux — 4; NAYS: Colin Carrie, Tom Lukiwski, Dave MacKenzie, Scott Reid, Blake Richards — 5.

The following amendment, submitted by Craig Scott for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 80, be amended

(a) by replacing line 22 on page 47 with the following:

“(a) contributions that do not exceed $1,200”

(b) by replacing line 26 on page 47 with the following:

“(b) contributions that do not exceed $1,200”

The following amendment, submitted by Craig Scott for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 80, be amended

(a) by replacing line 22 on page 47 with the following:

“(a) contributions that do not exceed $1,500”

(b) by replacing line 26 on page 47 with the following:

“(b) contributions that do not exceed $1,500”

The following amendment, submitted by Craig Scott for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 80, be amended by replacing line 24 on page 47 with the following:

“out of their own funds to their own campaign, including any donation to the electoral district association;”

Clause 80 carried on the following recorded division: YEAS: Colin Carrie, Tom Lukiwski, Dave MacKenzie, Scott Reid, Blake Richards — 5; NAYS: Nathan Cullen, Fin Donnelly, Peter Julian, Kevin Lamoureux — 4.

Clause 81 carried on the following recorded division: YEAS: Colin Carrie, Kevin Lamoureux, Tom Lukiwski, Dave MacKenzie, Scott Reid, Blake Richards — 6; NAYS: Nathan Cullen, Fin Donnelly, Peter Julian — 3.

Clause 82 carried on the following recorded division: YEAS: Colin Carrie, Kevin Lamoureux, Tom Lukiwski, Dave MacKenzie, Scott Reid, Blake Richards — 6; NAYS: Nathan Cullen, Fin Donnelly, Peter Julian — 3.

Clause 83 carried on the following recorded division: YEAS: Colin Carrie, Tom Lukiwski, Dave MacKenzie, Scott Reid, Blake Richards — 5; NAYS: Nathan Cullen, Fin Donnelly, Peter Julian, Kevin Lamoureux — 4.

Clause 84 carried on the following recorded division: YEAS: Colin Carrie, Kevin Lamoureux, Tom Lukiwski, Dave MacKenzie, Scott Reid, Blake Richards — 6; NAYS: Nathan Cullen, Fin Donnelly, Peter Julian — 3.

On Clause 85,

The following amendment, submitted by André Bellavance for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23 be amended by adding after line 6 on page 49 the following new clause:

“84.1 Subsection 435.01(2) of the Act is replaced by the following:

(2) The total allowance fund for a quarter is the product obtained by multiplying:

(a) $0.44 multiplied by the number of valid votes cast in the election referred to in subsection (1); and

(b) the inflation adjustment factor established under subsection 405.1(1) in effect for the quarter in question.”

The question was put on the amendment of André Bellavance and it was negatived on the following recorded division: YEAS: — 0; NAYS: Colin Carrie, Nathan Cullen, Fin Donnelly, Peter Julian, Kevin Lamoureux, Tom Lukiwski, Dave MacKenzie, Scott Reid, Blake Richards — 9.

Clause 85 carried on the following recorded division: YEAS: Colin Carrie, Kevin Lamoureux, Tom Lukiwski, Dave MacKenzie, Scott Reid, Blake Richards — 6; NAYS: Nathan Cullen, Fin Donnelly, Peter Julian — 3.

On Clause 86,

The following amendment, submitted by Kevin Lamoureux for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 86, be amended by adding after line 6 on page 51 the following:

“363.1 For the purposes of this Part, and with such modifications as the circumstances may require, an independent candidate shall be deemed to enjoy the same rights as a candidate of a registered party including, without limiting the generality of the foregoing, rights related to fundraising, surplus electoral funds and the issuing of tax receipts.”

The question was put on the amendment of Kevin Lamoureux and it was negatived on the following recorded division: YEAS: Nathan Cullen, Fin Donnelly, Peter Julian, Kevin Lamoureux — 4; NAYS: Colin Carrie, Tom Lukiwski, Dave MacKenzie, Scott Reid, Blake Richards — 5.

The following amendment, submitted by Craig Scott for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 86, be amended by adding after line 11 on page 54 the following:

“(3) For greater certainty, any expenses incurred for meetings or fundraising events referred to in subsection (2) relating to the hosting of persons in attendance at those functions are not election expenses for the purposes of subsection 376(3).”

The question was put on the amendment of Craig Scott and it was negatived on the following recorded division: YEAS: Nathan Cullen, Fin Donnelly, Peter Julian — 3; NAYS: Colin Carrie, Kevin Lamoureux, Tom Lukiwski, Dave MacKenzie, Scott Reid, Blake Richards — 6.

The following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 86, be amended by deleting lines 14 to 40 on page 55.

The question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division: YEAS: Nathan Cullen, Fin Donnelly, Peter Julian, Kevin Lamoureux — 4; NAYS: Colin Carrie, Tom Lukiwski, Dave MacKenzie, Scott Reid, Blake Richards — 5.

The following amendment, submitted by Craig Scott for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 86, be amended by replacing line 27 on page 55 with the following:

“(a) contributions that do not exceed $1,200”

The following amendment, submitted by Craig Scott for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 86, be amended by replacing line 27 on page 55 with the following:

“(a) contributions that do not exceed the amount referred to in subsection 367(1)”

The following amendment, submitted by Craig Scott for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 86, be amended by replacing lines 29 and 30 on page 55 with the following:

“out of their own funds to their own campaign, including any donation to the electoral district association;”

The following amendment, submitted by Craig Scott for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 86, be amended by replacing line 31 on page 55 with the following:

“(b) contributions that do not exceed $1,200”

The following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 86, be amended by deleting lines 1 to 10 on page 57.

The question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division: YEAS: Nathan Cullen, Fin Donnelly, Peter Julian — 3; NAYS: Colin Carrie, Kevin Lamoureux, Tom Lukiwski, Dave MacKenzie, Scott Reid, Blake Richards — 6.

The following amendment, submitted by Craig Scott for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 86, be amended by replacing lines 22 to 31 on page 58 with the following:

“(b) the amounts of the individual’s loans made in the relevant contribution period; and

(c) the amounts that the individual had to pay the lender as a guarantee under subsection 4.1 because of non-payment by the borrower.

(4.1) The total of the amounts guaranteed by the individual referred to in subsection 4 in the relevant contribution period shall not at any time exceed the limit set out in paragraphs 367(1)(a) to (d), subsection 367(5) and paragraphs 367(7) (a) and (b), not including any amounts for which the individual has ceased to be liable in the calendar year in which the guarantee was given.”

The question was put on the amendment of Craig Scott and it was negatived on the following recorded division: YEAS: Nathan Cullen, Fin Donnelly, Peter Julian — 3; NAYS: Colin Carrie, Tom Lukiwski, Dave MacKenzie, Scott Reid, Blake Richards — 5.

The following amendment, submitted by Tom Lukiwski for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 86, be amended by

(a) replacing line 38 on page 59 with the following:

“expenses referred to in paragraphs (3)(a) and (b)”

(b) replacing line 42 on page 59 to line 11 on page 60 with the following:

“(3) An election expense referred to in sub-”

“(4) In subsection (1), “cost incurred” means”

The question was put on the amendment of Tom Lukiwski and it was agreed to on the following recorded division: YEAS: Colin Carrie, Nathan Cullen, Fin Donnelly, Peter Julian, Kevin Lamoureux, Tom Lukiwski, Dave MacKenzie, Scott Reid, Blake Richards — 9; NAYS: — 0.

The following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 86, be amended by adding after line 31 on page 71 the following:

“(3) The auditor for a registered party or an eligible party is to be appointed by the Chief Electoral Officer.”

The following amendment, submitted by Craig Scott for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 86, be amended

(a) by replacing line 1 on page 83 with the following:

“(2) If an election period is longer than 37”

(b) by replacing line 5 on page 83 with the following:

“(a) one thirty-seventh of the maximum amount”

“minus 37.”

The question was put on the amendment of Craig Scott and it was agreed to on the following recorded division: YEAS: Colin Carrie, Nathan Cullen, Fin Donnelly, Peter Julian, Kevin Lamoureux, Tom Lukiwski, Dave MacKenzie, Scott Reid, Blake Richards — 9; NAYS: — 0.

The following amendment, submitted by Craig Scott for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 86, be amended by adding after line 13 on page 93 the following:

“(1.1) The Chief Electoral Officer may require a registered party and its chief agent to provide him or her with documents and any other information that the Chief Electoral Officer believes are necessary to exercise or perform his or her powers, duties and functions under this subdivision in respect of election expenses returns.”

The following amendment, submitted by Kevin Lamoureux for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 86, be amended by adding after line 13 on page 93 the following:

“(1.1) The Chief Electoral Officer may request a registered party and its chief agent to provide him or her with documents and any other information that the Chief Electoral Officer believes are necessary to exercise or perform his or her powers, duties and functions under this subdivision in respect of election expenses returns.

(1.2) A registered party that receives a request under subsection (1.1) shall, within 60 days after receiving the request, comply with it or apply to a judge for an order to relieve the party from the obligation to comply with the request on the grounds that it would be unreasonable to do so for reasons set out in the application.”

The following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 86, be amended by adding after line 25 on page 99 the following:

“(3) The auditor for a registered association is to be appointed by the Chief Electoral Officer.”

The question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May Lukiwski and it was negatived on the following recorded division: YEAS: Nathan Cullen, Fin Donnelly, Peter Julian — 3; NAYS: Colin Carrie, Kevin Lamoureux, Tom Lukiwski, Dave MacKenzie, Scott Reid, Blake Richards — 6.

The following amendment, submitted by Tom Lukiwski for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 86, be amended by replacing lines 21 and 22 on page 120 with the following:

“goods or services provided to the nomination contestant by a”

The question was put on the amendment of Tom Lukiwski and it was agreed to on the following recorded division: YEAS: Colin Carrie, David Christopherson, Peter Julian, Kevin Lamoureux, Tom Lukiwski, Dave MacKenzie, Scott Reid, Blake Richards, Craig Scott — 9; NAYS: — 0.

The following amendment, submitted by Craig Scott for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 86, be amended

(a) by replacing line 26 on page 136 with the following:

“(2) If an election period is longer than 37”

(b) by replacing line 30 on page 136 with the following:

“(a) one thirty-seventh of the election expenses”

“minus 37.”

The question was put on the amendment of Craig Scott and it was agreed to on the following recorded division: YEAS: Colin Carrie, David Christopherson, Peter Julian, Kevin Lamoureux, Tom Lukiwski, Dave MacKenzie, Scott Reid, Blake Richards, Craig Scott — 9; NAYS: — 0.

The following amendment, submitted by Tom Lukiwski for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 86, be amended by replacing, in the English version, line 15 on page 150 with the following:

“477.65(2) or within the two weeks after the end”

The question was put on the amendment of Tom Lukiwski and it was agreed to.

The following amendment, submitted by Craig Scott for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 86, be amended by replacing, in the English version, lines 27 to 30 on page 178 with the following:

“contestant who attains the threshold for contributions or expenses as described in subsection (1) after the period referred to in that subsection”

Clause 86, as amended, carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 4.

On Clause 87,

The following amendment, submitted by André Bellavance for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 87, be amended by replacing line 45 on page 185 to line 7 on page 186 with the following:

“(a) $100 in total in any calendar year to a particular registered party, the said contribution not constituting a monetary contribution under subsection 127(3) of the Income Tax Act;

(b) $100 in total in any calendar year to the registered associations, nomination contestants and candidates of a particular registered party, the said contribution not constituting a monetary contribution under subsection 127(3) of the Income Tax Act;

(c) $100 in total to a candidate for a particular election who is not the candidate of a registered party, the said contribution not constituting a monetary contribution under subsection 127(3) of the Income Tax Act; and”

The question was put on the amendment of André Bellavance and it was negatived.

The following amendment, submitted by André Bellavance for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 87, be amended by replacing lines 13 and 14 on page 186 with the following:

“(1.1) The contribution limit set out in paragraph (1)(d) increases by $25 on January 1 in”

The question was put on the amendment of André Bellavance and it was negatived.

Clause 87 carried on division.

On Clause 88,

The following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 88, be amended by adding after line 36 on page 186 the following:

“480.2 Every person is guilty of an offence who, with intent to influence the political preferences of electors or the outcome of an election, contacts electors during the election period from any place outside Canada, whether by live voice calls, voter contact calling services or mail.”

The question was put on the amendment of Elzabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division: YEAS: David Christopherson, Alexandrine Latendresse, Craig Scott — 3; NAYS: Tom Lukiwski, Dave MacKenzie, Scott Reid, Blake Richards, Scott Simms, David Wilks — 6.

Clause 88 carried on division.

On Clause 89,

The following amendment, submitted by Craig Scott for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 89, be amended by replacing line 40 on page 186 to line 6 on page 187 with the following:

“who obstructs or hinders, in the performance of his or her duties — or knowingly makes a false statement, either orally or in writing to — the Commissioner of Canada Elections or any person acting under his or her direction.”

The question was put on the amendment of Craig Scott and it was negatived on the following recorded division: YEAS: David Christopherson, Alexandrine Latendresse, Craig Scott, Scott Simms — 4; NAYS: Tom Lukiwski, Dave MacKenzie, Scott Reid, Blake Richards, David Wilks — 5.

The following amendment, submitted by Tom Lukiwski for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 89, be amended by

(a) replacing line 40 on page 186 to line 1 on page 187 with the following:

“who obstructs or hinders — or knowingly makes, either orally or in writing, a false or misleading statement to — the Commissioner of Canada”

(b) replacing lines 3 to 6 on page 187 with the following:

“direction while the Commissioner or the person acting under his or her direction is exercising or performing powers, duties or functions conferred or imposed on the Commissioner under this Act.”

The question was put on the amendment of Tom Lukiwski and it was agreed to on the following recorded division: YEAS: David Christopherson, Alexandrine Latendresse, Tom Lukiwski, Dave MacKenzie, Scott Reid, Blake Richards, Craig Scott, Scott Simms, David Wilks — 9; NAYS: — 0.

Clause 89, as amended, carried on division.

Clause 90 carried on division.

Clause 91 carried on division.

Clause 92 carried on division.

On Clause 93,

The following amendment, submitted by Tom Lukiwski for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 93, be amended by

(a) replacing line 27 on page 187 with the following:

“the Act are replaced by the following:

(a) contravenes subsection 143(5) (attesting to residence of more than one elector);

(a.1) contravenes subsection 143(6) (attesting to residence when own residence attested to);”

(b) replacing lines 29 to 33 on page 187 with the following:

“Act are replaced by the following:

(a.3) contravenes subsection 161(6) (attesting to residence of more than one elector);

(a.4) contravenes subsection 161(7) (attesting to residence when own residence attested to);

(3) Paragraphs 489(2)(d) and (e) of the Act are replaced by the following:

(d) contravenes subsection 169(5) (attesting to residence of more than one elector); or

(e) contravenes subsection 169(6) (attesting to residence when own residence attested to).”

(b) replacing lines 29 to 33 on page 187 with the following:

“Act are replaced by the following:

(a.3) contravenes subsection 161(6) (attesting to residence of more than one elector);

(a.4) contravenes subsection 161(7) (attesting to residence when own residence attested to);

(3) Paragraphs 489(2)(d) and (e) of the Act are replaced by the following:

(d) contravenes subsection 169(5) (attesting to residence of more than one elector); or

(e) contravenes subsection 169(6) (attesting to residence when own residence attested to).”

Clause 93, as amended, carried on division.

Clause 94 carried.

On new Article 94.1,

The following amendment, submitted by Tom Lukiwski for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23 be amended by adding after line 6 on page 188 the following new clause:

“94.1 Subsection 491(2) of the Act is replaced by the following:

(2) Every person is guilty of an offence who

(a) contravenes subsection 237.1(3.1) (attesting to residence of more than one elector);

(b) contravenes subsection 237.1(3.2) (attesting to residence when own residence attested to); or

The question was put on the amendment of Tom Lukiwski and it was agreed to.

Clause 95 carried.

Clause 96 carried.

On Clause 97,

The following amendment, submitted by Kevin Lamoureux for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 97, be amended by replacing line 35 on page 188 with the following:

“(a) any of subsections 350(1) to (4) and (4.2) (exceed-”

The question was put on the amendment of Kevin Lamoureux and it was negatived on the following recorded division: YEAS: David Christopherson, Alexandrine Latendresse, Craig Scott, Scott Simms — 4; NAYS: Tom Lukiwski, Dave MacKenzie, Scott Reid, Blake Richards, David Wilks — 5.

The following amendment, submitted by Tom Lukiwski for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 97, be amended by

(a) adding after line 36 on page 188 the following:

“(1.1) Subsection 496(1) of the Act is amended by adding the following after paragraph (a):

(a.1) section 351.1 (foreign third party exceeding election advertising expense limit);”

(b) adding after line 3 on page 189 the following:

“(3) Subsection 496(2) of the Act is amended by adding the following after paragraph (a):

(a.1) section 351.1 (foreign third party exceeding election advertising expense limit);”

The question was put on the amendment of Tom Lukiwski and it was agreed to.

Clause 97, as amended, carried on division.

Clause 98 carried on division.

Clause 99 carried on division.

On Clause 100,

The following amendment, submitted by Craig Scott for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 100, be amended by replacing lines 12 to 17 on page 213 with the following:

“(a) on summary conviction, to a fine of up to a maximum of $50,000 or to imprisonment for a maximum of two years, or to both; or

(b) on conviction on indictment, to a fine of up to a maximum of $250,000 or to imprisonment for a maximum of five years, or to both.”

At 5:44 p.m., the sitting was suspended.

At 5:56 p.m., the sitting resumed.

Clause 100 carried on division.

Clause 101 carried on division.

Clause 102 carried on division.

Clause 103 carried on division.

Clause 104 carried on division.

Clause 105 carried on division.

Clause 106 carried on division.

On Clause 107,

The following amendment, submitted by Scott Simms for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 107, be amended by replacing line 35 on page 217 with the following:

“497.1(3)(i), (k), (m), (o) and (p) is guilty of an”

The question was put on the amendment of Scott Simms and it was agreed to on division.

Clause 107, as amended, carried on division.

On Clause 108,

The following amendment, submitted by Kevin Lamoureux for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 108, be amended by replacing lines 2 to 9 on page 218 with the following:

“tions shall be appointed by the Chief Electoral Officer to hold office during good behaviour for a term of 10 years and may be removed by the Chief Electoral Officer for cause.”

The question was put on the amendment of Kevin Lamoureux and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 4; NAYS: 5.

The following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 108, be amended by replacing lines 4 to 8 on page 218 with the following:

“behaviour for a term of 10 years and may be removed by the Director of Public Prosecutions for cause.

(2) The Director of Public Prosecutions shall consult Elections Canada with”

The question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 4; NAYS: 5.

The following amendment, submitted by Craig Scott for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 108, be amended by replacing lines 5 and 6 on page 218 with the following:

“removed for cause by the Governor General on address of the Senate and House of Commons.”

The following amendment, submitted by Craig Scott for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 108, be amended by deleting lines 7 to 9 on page 218.

The following amendment, submitted by Craig Scott for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 108, be amended by deleting lines 22 to 24 on page 218.

The following amendment, submitted by Kevin Lamoureux for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 108, be amended by deleting line 30 on page 218 to line 3 on page 219.

The question was put on the amendment of Kevin Lamoureux and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 4; NAYS: 5.

The following amendment, submitted by Kevin Lamoureux for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 108, be amended by replacing lines 27 to 29 on page 219 with the following:

“powers, duties and functions, subject”

The following amendment, submitted by Kevin Lamoureux for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 108, be amended by replacing lines 34 and 35 on page 219 with the following:

“Consolidated Revenue Fund:”

The following amendment, submitted by Tom Lukiwski for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 108, be amended by

(a) replacing lines 9 to 11 on page 220 with the following:

“may conduct an investigation.”

(b) replacing line 9 on page 221 with the following:

“closed under any other Act of Parliament;”

“renegotiate a compliance agreement; and

(g) information whose disclosure is, in the Commissioner’s opinion, in the public interest.

(3) For the purposes of paragraph (2)(g), the Commissioner shall take into consideration the effects of disclosure on

(a) the privacy rights of any person who is the subject of the disclosure;

(b) the right of the person under investigation to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law; and

The question was put on the amendment of Tom Lukiwski and it was agreed to.

The following amendment, submitted by Craig Scott for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 108, be amended by deleting lines 12 to 18 on page 220.

The question was put on the amendment of Craig Scott and it was negatived on the following recorded division: YEAS: David Christopherson, Alexandrine Latendresse, Craig Scott — 3; NAYS: Tom Lukiwski, Dave MacKenzie, Scott Reid, Blake Richards, Scott Simms, David Wilks — 6.

The following amendment, submitted by Kevinn Lamoureux for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 108, be amended by adding after line 21 on page 220 the following:

“510.01 (1) If, on the ex parte application of the Commissioner or his or her authorized representative, a judge of a superior or county court is satisfied by information on oath or solemn affirmation that an investigation is being conducted under section 510 and that a person has or is likely to have information that is relevant to the investigation, the judge may order the person to

(a) attend as specified in the order and be examined on oath or solemn affirmation by the Commissioner or the authorized representative of the Commissioner on any matter that is relevant to the investigation before a person designated in the order;

(b) produce to the Commissioner or the authorized representative of the Commissioner within a time and at a place specified in the order, a record, a copy of a record certified by affidavit to be a true copy, or any other thing, specified in the order; or

(c) make and deliver to the Commissioner or the authorized representative of the Commissioner, within a time specified in the order, a written return under oath or solemn affirmation showing in detail such information as is required by the order.

(2) Where the person against whom an order is sought under paragraph (1)(b) in relation to an investigation is a corporation and the judge to whom the application is made under subsection (1) is satisfied by information on oath or solemn affirmation that an affiliate of the corporation, whether the affiliate is located in or outside Canada, has records that are relevant to the investigation, the judge may order the corporation to produce the records.

(3) No person shall be excused from complying with an order under subsection (1) or (2) on the ground that the testimony, record or other thing or return required of the person may tend to criminate the person or subject him or her to any proceeding or penalty, but no testimony given by an individual pursuant to an order made under paragraph (1)(a), or return made by an individual pursuant to an order made under paragraph (1)(c), shall be used or received against that individual in any criminal proceedings thereafter instituted against him or her, other than a prosecution under section 132 or 136 of the Criminal Code.

(4) An order made under this section has effect anywhere in Canada.”

The following amendment, submitted by Craig Scott for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 108, be amended by adding after line 21 on page 220 the following:

“510.01 (1) On the ex parte application of a person involved in an investigation being conducted under section 510, a judge of the superior court or county court may, at any time on the request of the person, assign counsel to act on behalf of that person if, in the opinion of the judge, it appears desirable in the interests of justice that the person should have legal assistance and if it appears that the person does not have the means to obtain that assistance. (2) If counsel is assigned pursuant to subsection (1) and legal aid is not granted to the person pursuant to a provincial legal aid program, the fees and disbursements of the counsel shall be paid by Elections Canada at a rate that is 150% of the rate currently used by the provincial legal aid program.”

The following amendment, submitted by Craig Scott for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 108, be amended by adding after line 21 on page 220 the following:

“510.01 (1) The Chief Electoral Officer may refer to the Commissioner information relating to the commission of an offence against a law of Canada or a province by an individual if, in the Chief Electoral Officer’s opinion, there is evidence of such an offence.

(2) If the Chief Electoral Officer refers information concerning evidence of an offence as described in subsection (1), he or she shall include with the referral any information, including personal information, that is relevant to the matter.

(3) The Chief Electoral Officer shall, on the request of the Commissioner, disclose to the Commissioner any document or information that he or she obtained in the performance of his or her functions that the Commissioner considers necessary for the purpose of ensuring compliance with and enforcement of this Act.”

The following amendment, submitted by Craig Scott for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 108, be amended by replacing line 22 on page 220 to line 12 on page 221 with the following:

“510.1 Any information that is obtained by the Commissioner or any person acting under his or her direction in the course of an investigation is confidential and may only be disclosed by them if the Commissioner is of the opinion that disclosure is necessary in the exercise of their powers or the performance of their duties and functions under this Act.”

The following amendment, submitted by Craig Scott for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 108, be amended by deleting line 22 on page 220 to line 12 on page 221.

The following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 108, be amended by replacing line 22 on page 220 to line 12 on page 221 with the following:

“510.1 The Commissioner and the Director of Public Prosecutions shall disclose the results of every investigation, subject to any requirements under another Act of Parliament, such as the Privacy Act, and, if no prosecution results from the investigation, the Director shall disclose his or her reasons for not prosecuting.”

The question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 4; NAYS: 5.

The following amendment, submitted by Craig Scott for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 108, be amended by adding after line 43 on page 220 the following:

“(b.1) information about the results of an investigation that, in the Commissioner’s opinion, should be disclosed to the public in the interests of the integrity of the electoral system and of public trust in the administration of justice;”

The following amendment, submitted by Craig Scott for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 108, be amended by adding after line 12 on page 221 the following:

“REPORT TO SPEAKER

510.2 (1) Despite any other provision in this Act, the Commissioner may, at any time, make a report to the Speaker of the House of Commons respecting any matter or event that the Commissioner considers should be brought to the attention of the House of Commons and the Canadian public and may publish such reports by any means the Commissioner deems expedient, without the need for approval by the Director of Public Prosecutions or any other person.

(2) For greater certainty, the Commissioner may establish and maintain a website for the purpose of publishing reports made under subsection (1) and providing information to the Canadian public.”

The following amendment, submitted by Craig Scott for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 108, be amended by adding after line 12 on page 221 the following:

“(3) For greater certainty, nothing in this Act shall affect the rules or their application, with respect to public disclosure, through the court system, of applications for information, sworn affidavits and similar court documents.

(4) The provisions of this Act may not be relied on to apply to a court for an order to seal court documents.”

Clause 108, as amended, carried on division.

On Clause 109,

The following amendment, submitted by Kevin Lamoureux for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 109, be amended by replacing line 16 on page 221 with the following:

“under a provision set out in subsection 500(1), (2), (3), (4) or (5)”

The following amendment, submitted by Tom Lukiwski for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 109, be amended by adding after line 24 on page 221 the following:

“(3) Proceedings in respect of an offence under a provision set out in any of subsections 500(2) to (5) may be commenced at any time.”

The question was put on the amendment of Tom Lukiwski and it was agreed to.

Clause 109, as amended, carried on division.

Clause 110 carried on division.

New Clause 110.1,

The following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23 be amended by adding after line 32 on page 221 the following new clause:

“110.1 (1) The portion of subsection 524(1) of the Act before paragraph (a) is replaced by the following:

524.(1) Any elector who was eligible to vote in an electoral district, and any candidate in an electoral district, may, by application to or action in a competent court, contest the election in that electoral district on the grounds that

(2) The Act is amended by adding the following after subsection 524(2):

(3) Under an application or action brought under subsection (1), the elector may name as a respondent any person or entity, including a political party, whose actions may have given rise to the irregularities, fraud or corrupt or illegal practices.”

The question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on division.

Clause 111,

The following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 111, be amended by adding after line 43 on page 221 the following:

“(3) Subsection 525(3) of the Act is replaced by the following:

(3) An application or action shall be dealt with without delay and in a summary way. The court may, however, allow oral evidence to be given at the hearing of the application or action in specific circumstances.”

The question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on division.

Clause 111 carried on division.

New Clause 111.1,

The following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23 be amended by adding after line 43 on page 221 the following new clause:

“111.1 Subsection 526(1) of the Act is replaced by the following:

526. (1) An application or action must be accompanied by security for costs in the amount of $1,000, and must be served on the Attorney General of Canada, the Chief Electoral Officer, the returning officer of the electoral district in question and all the candidates in that electoral district.”

The question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on division.

The following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23 be amended by adding after line 43 on page 221 the following new clause:

“111.1 The portion of section 527 of the Act before paragraph (a) is replaced by the following:

527. An application or action based on a ground set out in paragraph 524(1)(b) must be filed within one year after the later of

The question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on division.

The following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23 be amended by adding after line 43 on page 221 the following new clause:

“111.1 Subsections 531(1) and (2) of the Act are replaced by the following:

531. (1) The court may at any time dismiss an application or action if it considers it to be vexatious, frivolous or not made in good faith.

(2) After hearing the application or action, the court may dismiss it if the grounds referred to in paragraph 524(1)(a) or (b), as the case may be, are not established and, where they are established, shall declare the election null and void or may annul the election, respectively.

(2.1) The court may award the elector referred to in subsection 524(1) costs of the hearing of the application or action if the grounds of the contestation are fraud and if the court considers the grounds to be established.”

The question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on division.

On Clause 112,

The following amendment, submitted by Tom Lukiwski for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 112, be amended by replacing line 10 on page 222 with the following:

“on polling day;

(a.2) the conclusions of the report made by the auditor engaged under section 164.1 for that general election or by-election; and”

The question was put on the amendment of Tom Lukiwski and it was agreed to.

Clause 112, as amended, carried on division.

Clause 113 carried on division.

Clause 114 carried on division.

On Clause 115,

The following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 115, be amended by adding after line 13 on page 223 the following:

“535.4 (1) Within two years after the coming into force of this section, the committee of the Senate and the committee of the House of Commons that normally consider electoral matters shall each undertake a comprehensive review of the provisions and operation of this Act, that includes a consideration of the matters referred to in subsection (3).

(2) Within one year after undertaking the comprehensive review referred to in subsection (1), each committee referred to in that subsection shall submit a report on that review to its House containing any recommendations in respect of the provisions and operation of this Act.

(3) The review referred to in subsection (1) shall include a consideration of the feasibility of adopting existing proportional electoral systems to replace the current first-past-the-post system, with a view to providing electors with equal, effective votes and representation in the House of Commons that reflects closely the distribution of votes cast, to the extent that such systems are consistent with the Constitution of Canada.”

The question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived on the following recorded division: YEAS: David Christopherson, Alexandrine Latendresse, Craig Scott — 3; NAYS: Tom Lukiwski, Dave MacKenzie, Scott Reid, Blake Richards, Scott Simms, David Wilks — 6.

The following amendment, submitted by Craig Scott for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 115, be amended by adding after line 13 on page 223 the following:

“535.4 The Chief Electoral Officer shall, within one year after a general election, make a report to the Speaker of the House of Commons that sets out any amendments to this Act that, in his or her opinion, are desirable for allowing independent candidates to form electoral district associations and raise funds for their campaigns and that, among other things, take into account the testimony presented before the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs regarding Bill C-23, tabled during the second session of the 41st Parliament.”

The question was put on the amendment of Craig Scott and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 4; NAYS: 5.

Clause 115 carried on division.

Clause 116 carried on division.

On Clause 117,

The following amendment, submitted by Tom Lukiwski for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 117, be amended by replacing lines 24 to 33 on page 223 with the following:

“Electoral Officer or any authorized member of his or her staff from inspecting the documents referred to in that subsection.

(4.1) The Chief Electoral Officer may also disclose any of the documents referred to in subsection (3) to the Commissioner for the purposes of the exercise or performance of the Commissioner’s powers, duties and functions under this Act and the Commissioner may, in turn, disclose any of those documents to the Director of Public Prosecutions, who may produce them for the purpose of a prosecution — or possible prosecution — by the Director for an offence under this Act.”

Clause 117, as amended, carried on division.

Clause 118 carried on division.

Clause 119 carried on division.

Clause 120 carried on division.

Clause 121 carried on division.

Clause 122 carried on division.

Clause 123 carried on division.

Clause 124 carried on division.

Clause 125 carried on division.

Clause 126 carried on division.

Clause 127 carried on division.

On Clause 128,

The following amendment, submitted by Craig Scott for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 128, be amended by replacing line 8 on page 226 with the following:

“that election, except that the Chief Electoral Officer

(a) may refer to the Commissioner information relating to the commission of an offence against a law of Canada or a province by an individual if, in the Chief Electoral Officer’s opinion, there is evidence of such an offence, and shall include with the referral any information, including personal information, that is relevant to the matter;

(b) shall, on the request of the Commissioner, disclose to the Commissioner any document or information that he or she obtained in the performance of his or her functions that the Commissioner considers necessary for the purpose of ensuring compliance with and enforcement of this Act; and

(c) may require a registered party and its chief agent to provide him or her with documents and any other information that the Chief Electoral Officer believes are necessary to exercise or perform his or her powers, duties and functions in respect of election expenses returns.”

Clause 128 carried on division.

Clause 129 carried on division.

Clause 130 carried on division.

Clause 131 carried on division.

Clause 132 carried on division.

Clause 133 carried on division.

New Clause 133.1,

The following amendment, submitted by Craig Scott for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23 be amended by adding after line 14 on page 227 the following new clause:

“133.1 If section 108 comes into force during an election period, all obligations and rights arising out of any election that took place before the day on which section 108 comes into force and that are still outstanding on that day are subject to the Canada Elections Act as it read at the time of that election, except that

(a) on an ex parte application of the Commissioner or his or her representative, if a judge of a superior or county court is satisfied by information on oath or solemn affirmation that an investigation is being conducted under section 510 and that a person has or is likely to have information that is relevant to the investigation, the judge may order the person to

(i) attend as specified in the order and be examined on oath or solemn affirmation by the Commissioner or the authorized representative of the Commissioner on any matter that is relevant to the investigation before a person designated in the order,

(ii) produce to the Commissioner or the authorized representative of the Commissioner within a time and at a place specified in the order, a record, a copy of a record certified by affidavit to be a true copy, or any other thing, specified in the order, or

(iii) make and deliver to the Commissioner or the authorized representative of the Commissioner, within a time specified in the order, a written return under oath or solemn affirmation showing in detail such information as is required by the order;

(b) where the person against whom an order is sought under subparagraph (a)(ii) in relation to an investigation is a corporation and the judge to whom the application is made under paragraph (a) is satisfied by information on oath or solemn affirmation that an affiliate of the corporation, whether the affiliate is located in or outside Canada, has records that are relevant to the investigation, the judge may order the corporation to produce the records;

(c) no person shall be excused from complying with an order under paragraph (a) or (b) on the ground that the testimony, record or other thing or return required of the person may tend to criminate the person or subject him or her to any proceeding or penalty, but no testimony given by an individual pursuant to an order made under subparagraph (a)(i), or return made by an individual pursuant to an order made under subparagraph (a)(iii), shall be used or received against that individual in any criminal proceedings thereafter instituted against him or her, other than a prosecution under section 132 or 136 of the Criminal Code; and

(d) an order made under this section has effect anywhere in Canada.”

Clause 134 carried on division.

On Clause 135,

The following amendment, submitted by Kevin Lamoureux for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 135, be amended

(a) by deleting lines 8 to 19 on page 228;

(b) by deleting lines 30 to 37 on page 228.

Clause 135 carried on division.

New Clause 135.1,

The following amendment, submitted by Craig Scott for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23 be amended by adding after line 37 on page 228 the following new clause:

“135.1 (1) Within one year after the first election held on or after the date this section comes into force, the Chief Electoral Officer shall prepare and present a report to the Speaker of the House of Commons on the operation of the bank loan provisions proposed in this Act.

(2) The report shall, among other things, itemize the candidates receiving loans, the amounts lent, and the guarantee or collateral used to secure the bank loans.

(3) In preparing the report, the Chief Electoral Officer may authorize researchers to contact candidates in the election who did not record loans in order to determine if loans were sought but denied, and may include the results in the report.”

The following amendment, submitted by Craig Scott for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23 be amended by adding after line 37 on page 228 the following new clause:

“135.1 Nothing in this Act is to be construed as affecting the power of the Chief Electoral Officer to consult the Advisory Committee of Political Parties on or after the day this section comes into force for the purpose of producing a report to Parliament on how the Canada Elections Act may be amended to make his or her office solely responsible for the appointments of all elections officers on the basis of merit and in accordance with a fair and transparent process.”

Clause 136 carried on division.

Clause 137 carried on division.

Clause 138 carried on division.

Clause 139 carried on division.

Clause 140 carried on division.

Clause 141 carried on division.

Clause 142 carried on division.

Clause 143 carried on division.

Clause 144 carried on division.

Clause 145 carried on division.

On Clause 146,

The following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 146, be amended by replacing line 23 on page 232 with the following:

“tions may not refuse to disclose any record”

The question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived.

Clause 146 carried on division.

Clause 147 carried on division.

Clause 148 carried on division.

Clause 149 carried on division.

Clause 150 carried on division.

Clause 151 carried on division.

On Clause 152,

The following amendment, submitted by Tom Lukiwski for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 152, be amended by replacing, in the English version, lines 15 and 16 on page 234 with the following:

“June 30 of each year, provide a report to the Attorney General on the activities of the office”

The question was put on the amendment of Tom Lukiwski and it was agreed to.

The following amendment, submitted by Tom Lukiwski for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 152, be amended by replacing lines 17 to 21 on page 234 with the following:

“of the Director in the immediately preceding fiscal year.

(1.1) In addition, the report shall include a section, provided by the Commissioner of Canada Elections, on his or her activities under the Canada Elections Act in that fiscal year. The Commissioner shall not include the details of any investigation.”

Clause 152, as amended, carried on division.

Clause 153 carried on division.

Clause 154 carried on division.

On Clause 155,

The following amendment, submitted by Craig Scott for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 155, be amended

(a) by replacing line 30 on page 235 with the following:

“(2) Subject to section 348.02, no person or”

(b) by replacing line 36 on page 235 with the following:

“(2) Subject to section 348.02, no person or”

“(5) Subject to section 348.02, no person or”

(d) by replacing line 7 on page 236 with the following:

“(5) Subject to section 348.02, no person or”

The question was put on the amendment of Craig Scott and it was negatived.

The following amendment, submitted by Tom Lukiwski for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 155, be amended by

(a) replacing line 30 on page 235 with the following:

“(2) Subject to section 348.02, no person or”

(b) replacing line 36 on page 235 with the following:

“(2) Subject to section 348.02, no person or”

“(5) Subject to section 348.02, no person or”

(d) deleting lines 5 to 11 on page 236.

The question was put on the amendment of Tom Lukiwski and it was agreed to.

Clause 155, as amended, carried.

On Clause 156,

The following amendment, submitted by André Bellavance for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 156, be amended by replacing lines 25 to 33 on page 236 with the following:

“(a) $100 in total in any calendar year to a particular registered party, the said contribution not constituting a monetary contribution under subsection 127(3) of the Income Tax Act;

The question was put on the amendment of André Bellavance and it was negatived on division.

Clause 156 carried on division.

Clause 157 carried on division.

On Clause 158,

The following amendment, submitted by Kevin Lamoureux for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 158, be amended

(a) by replacing lines 19 to 24 on page 237 with the following:

“53(3) and (4) and 56(2) and (3), sections 72, 74 and 76, subsections 80(2) and (3), sections 82 to 85, 88, 89 and 92, subsection 93(4), sections 94, 95, 97 and 98, subsections 100(1), 101(2) and 102(3), sections 104, 106, 109 to 111, 124, 125, 127, 136 to 145 and 153 to 157 come into”

(b) by replacing lines 8 to 12 on page 238 with the following:

“(4) Section 4 comes into force on the day on which Parliament is next dissolved or, if that day occurs less than six months after the day on which this Act receives royal assent, that section comes into”

The following amendment, submitted by Tom Lukiwski for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 158, be amended by

(a) replacing line 22 on page 237 with the following:

“94 and 95, subsections 97(1) and (2), section 98, subsections 100(1), 101(2)”

(b) replacing line 39 on page 237 with the following:

“93(1) to (3), sections 94.1 and 96, subsections 97(1.1) and (3), section 99, subsections”

The question was put on the amendment of Tom Lukiwski and it was agreed to.

The following amendment, submitted by Tom Lukiwski for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 158, be amended by replacing line 27 on page 237 with the following:

“(2) Subsection 2(1), sections 5.1, 108, 114 and”

The question was put on the amendment of Tom Lukiwski and it was agreed to.

The following amendment, submitted by Tom Lukiwski for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 158, be amended by replacing lines 36 and 37 on page 237 with the following:

“subsections 53(1) to (2) and (5), sections 54 to 55.1, subsections 56(1) to (1.2) and (4), sections 57 to”

The question was put on the amendment of Tom Lukiwski and it was agreed to.

The following amendment, submitted by Tom Lukiwski for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-23, in Clause 158, be amended by replacing line 38 on page 237 with the following:

“71, 73, 74.1, 77 to 79, 86, 90 and 91, subsections”

The question was put on the amendment of Tom Lukiwski and it was agreed to.

Clause 158, as amended, carried on division.

The Schedule carried on division.

Clause 1, Short Title, carried on the following recorded division: YEAS: Tom Lukiwski, Dave MacKenzie, Scott Reid, Blake Richards, David Wilks — 5; NAYS: David Christopherson, Alexandrine Latendresse, Craig Scott, Scott Simms — 4.

The Title carried.

The Bill, as amended, carried on the following recorded division: YEAS: Tom Lukiwski, Dave MacKenzie, Scott Reid, Blake Richards, David Wilks — 5; NAYS: David Christopherson, Alexandrine Latendresse, Craig Scott, Scott Simms — 4.

ORDERED, — That the Chair report the Bill, as amended, to the House.

ORDERED, — That Bill C-23, as amended, be reprinted for the use of the House at report stage.

At 6:29 p.m., the Committee adjourned to the call of the Chair.

Marie-France Renaud
Clerk of the Committee

2014/05/28 5:06 p.m.