PROC Committee Meeting

The Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs met at 11:09 a.m. this day, in Room 112-N, Centre Block, the Chair, Gary Goodyear, presiding.

Joe Preston presented the First Report from the Subcommittee on Private Members' Business which read as follows:

Pursuant to Standing Order 92(1)(a), the Subcommittee has agreed that Bill C-482, An Act to amend the Official Languages Act (Charter of the French Language) and to make consequential amendments to other Acts, should be designated as non-votable, on the basis that it contravenes the criterion that Bills and motions must not clearly violate the Constitution Acts, 1867 to 1982, including the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

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

The Chair called Clause 1.

Clause 1 carried.

Clause 2 was negatived on the following recorded division: YEAS: Pierre Lemieux, Tom Lukiwski, Joe Preston, Scott Reid — 4; NAYS: Charlie Angus, Dominic LeBlanc, Pierre A. Paquette, Pauline Picard, Marcel Proulx, Karen Redman, Lucienne Robillard — 7.

On new Clause 2.1,

“2.1 The Act is amended by adding the following after section 98:

98.1 The returning officer shall open an office for the revision of the preliminary lists of electors in every post-secondary educational institution in his or her electoral district.”

The Chair ruled the proposed amendment inadmissible because it was beyond the scope of the Bill, as provided on page 654 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice.

On Clause 3,

“polling division for use on polling day.”

The Chair ruled the proposed amendment inadmissible because it was beyond the scope of the Bill, as provided on page 654 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice.

Whereupon, Pierre A. Paquette appealed the decision of the Chair.

The question: "Shall the decision of the Chair be sustained?" was put and the decision was overturned on the following recorded division: YEAS: Pierre Lemieux, Tom Lukiwski, Joe Preston, Scott Reid — 4; NAYS: Charlie Angus, Dominic LeBlanc, Pierre A. Paquette, Pauline Picard, Marcel Proulx, Karen Redman, Lucienne Robillard — 7.

Accordingly, after debate, the question was put on the amendment of Pauline Picard and it was agreed to on the following recorded division: YEAS: Charlie Angus, Dominic LeBlanc, Pierre A. Paquette, Pauline Picard, Marcel Proulx, Karen Redman, Lucienne Robillard — 7; NAYS: Pierre Lemieux, Tom Lukiwski, Joe Preston, Scott Reid — 4.

Clause 3, as amended, carried.

Clause 4 was negatived.

On Clause 5,

(a) by replacing lines 11 and 12 on page 3 with the following:

“polling day. ”

(b) by deleting lines 23 to 25 on page 3.

The Chair ruled the proposed amendment inadmissible because it was beyond the scope of the Bill, as provided on page 654 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice.

Whereupon, Charlie Angus appealed the decision of the Chair.

The question: "Shall the decision of the Chair be sustained?" was put and the decision was overturned on the following recorded division: YEAS: Pierre Lemieux, Tom Lukiwski, Joe Preston — 3; NAYS: Charlie Angus, Dominic LeBlanc, Pierre A. Paquette, Pauline Picard, Marcel Proulx, Karen Redman, Lucienne Robillard — 7.

Accordingly, debate arose on the amendment of Charlie Angus.

Pierre A. Paquette moved, — That the amendment be amended by deleting the words “(b) by deleting lines 23 to 25 on page 3. ”

After debate, the question was put on the subamendment of Pierre A. Paquette and it was agreed to.

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Charlie Angus, as amended, and it was agreed to.

“established by the returning officer,

(ii) the address of each advance polling station,

(iii) the place where the deputy returning officer for each advance polling station is to count the number of votes cast at the advance polling station, and

(iv) the fact that the counting of the votes”

The Chair ruled the proposed amendment inadmissible because it was beyond the scope of the Bill, as provided on page 654 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice.

Whereupon, Karen Redman appealed the decision of the Chair.

The question: "Shall the decision of the Chair be sustained?" was put and the decision was overturned.

Accordingly, the question was put on the motion of Pauline Picard and it was agreed to.

Clause 5, as amended, carried.

On new Clause 5.1,

“5.1 Section 168 of the Act is amended by adding the following after subsection (1):

(1.1) The returning officer shall establish an advance polling station in the student residences of every post-secondary educational institution in his or her electoral district.”

By unanimous consent, the amendment was withdrawn.

On Clause 6,

ADVANCE POLLING

The Chair ruled the proposed amendment inadmissible because it sought to alter a heading, that, as provided on pages 624 and 657 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice, is not considered to be part of the bill and therefore cannot be amended.

Clause 6 carried.

On Clause 7,

“station at 8:00 p.m. on each of the”

The question was put on the amendment of Charlie Angus and it was agreed to on division.

“on each of the four days of advance polling,”

The Chair ruled the proposed amendment inadmissible because it was beyond the scope of the Bill, as provided on page 654 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice.

Whereupon, Charlie Angus appealed the decision of the Chair.

The question: "Shall the decision of the Chair be sustained?" was put and the decision was overturned.

Accordingly, the question was put on the motion of Pauline Picard and it was agreed to.

Clause 7, as amended, carried.

On Clause 8,

“PILOT PROJECT

176.1 (1) Despite any other provision of this Act, in any by-election held before the fortieth general election, the Chief Electoral Officer may implement a pilot project providing for an additional day of advance polling on the day before polling day.

(2) On the additional day of advance polling referred to in subsection (1), every polling station established for polling day shall be open as an advance polling station.

(3) Within 90 days after the day on which the pilot project is implemented, the Chief Electoral Officer shall report the results of the pilot project to the House of Commons.”

The Chair ruled the proposed amendment inadmissible because it was beyond the scope of the Bill, as provided on page 654 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice.

Clause 8 was negatived.

On Clause 9,

The Chair ruled that the following amendment was consequential to a previous amendment and therefore it was also adopted:

“poll in subparagraph 167.2(a)(iii) to count the”

Clause 9, as amended, carried.

Clause 10 was negatived.

On Clause 11,

The Chair ruled the proposed amendment inadmissible because it proposed the deletion of the clause, as provided on page 656 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice.

Clause 11 was negatived.

Clause 12 was negatived.

On Clause 13,

“13. This Act comes”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Pierre A. Paquette and it was agreed to.

Clause 13, as amended, carried.

On Title,

An Act to amend the Canada Elections Act (expanded voting opportunities)

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

The Title, as amended, carried.

The Bill, as amended, carried.

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

ORDERED, — That Bill C-16, as amended, be reprinted for the use of the House at report stage.

At 1:09 p.m., the Committee adjourned to the call of the Chair.