Skip to main content Start of content

CC2 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. 23
 
Monday, June 12, 2006
 

The Legislative Committee on Bill C-2 met in a televised session at 6:16 p.m. this day, in Room 253-D, Centre Block, the Chair, David Tilson, presiding.

 

Members of the Committee present: Paul Dewar, Monique Guay, Hon. Marlene Jennings, Tom Lukiwski, Pat Martin, James Moore, Rob Moore, Brian Murphy, Hon. Stephen Owen, Daniel Petit, Pierre Poilievre, Benoît Sauvageau, David Tilson and Alan Tonks.

 

In attendance: House of Commons: Susan Baldwin, Legislative Clerk; Joann Garbig, Legislative Clerk; Steve Chaplin, Legal Counsel, Legal Services. Library of Parliament: Kristen Douglas, Analyst; Nancy Holmes, Analyst.

 

Witnesses: Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat: Susan M.W. Cartwright, Assistant Secretary, Accountability in Government; Daphne Meredith, Associate Secretary, Corporate Priorities and Planning Sector. Privy Council Office: James Stringham, Legal Counsel, Office of the Counsel to the Clerk of the Privy Council; Marc Chénier, Counsel, Democratic Renewal Secretariat. Department of Justice: Joe Wild, Senior Counsel, Legal Services, Treasury Board Portfolio; Michèle Hurteau, Senior Counsel.

 
Pursuant to the Order of Reference of Thursday, April 27, 2006, the Committee resumed consideration of Bill C-2, An Act providing for conflict of interest rules, restrictions on election financing and measures respecting administrative transparency, oversight and accountability.
 

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

 

The witnesses answered questions.

 

On Clause 46,

 
The Committee resumed consideration of the amendment of Pat Martin, — That Bill C-2, in Clause 46, be amended by adding after line 13 on page 58 the following:

“(1.1) Any contribution made to a candidate by a minor is considered to be made by the parent of the minor designated for that purpose by the parents of the minor.”

 

Pat Martin moved, — That the amendment be amended by adding after the words “parent of the minor” the following:

“under the age of 14”

 

After debate, the question was put on the subamendment of Pat Martin and it was negatived.

 

The question was put on the amendment of Pat Martin and it was negatived.

 

Clause 46 carried.

 

Accordingly, Clause 47 carried.

 

Clause 59 carried.

 

On New Clause 59.1,

 
Paul Dewar moved, — That Bill C-2 be amended by adding after line 9 on page 64 the following new clause:

59.1 Paragraph 534(1)(b) of the Act is replaced by the following:

(b) any measures that have been taken under subsection 17(1) or (3) or sections 509 to 513 since the issue of the writs that he or she considers should be brought to the attention of the House of Commons, including

(i) any inquiry that the Chief Electoral Officer has directed the Commissioner to make under section 510 and the results of any such inquiry,

(ii) any prosecution that the Commissioner has instituted under section 511 and the results of any such prosecution,

(iii) any injunction that the Commissioner has applied for under section 516 and the results of any such application,

(iv) any compliance agreement that the Commissioner has entered into under section 517, and

(v) any deregistration of a registered party that has taken place under section 521.1.”

 

RULING BY THE CHAIR

This amendment proposes an amendment to the Canada Elections Act relating to reporting provisions. House of Commons Procedure and Practice states at page 654 that “an amendment is inadmissible if it amends a statute that is not before the committee or a section of the parent Act unless it is being specifically amended by a clause of the bill.” Since paragraph 534(1)(b) of the Canada Elections Act is not being amended by Bill C-2, it's inadmissible to propose such an amendment.

 

On Clause 65,

 

STATEMENT BY THE CHAIR

Clause 65 amends the Lobbyists Registration Act. There are a series of other clauses related to this particular clause. I propose that we deal with all amendments that pertain to the subject matter of Clause 65 before I put the question on Clause 65. Therefore, we will first deal with the amendments to Clauses 67, 68, 69, 72, 75, 77, 78, 83, 88, and 89. Once that is done, I will put the question on Clause 65, and its results will be applied to all the consequential clauses, namely, Clauses 66 to 98. Therefore, I will stand Clause 65 to call for the first amendment, which relates to Clause 67.

 

By unanimous consent, Clauses 65 and 66 were stood.

 

On Clause 67,

Benoît Sauvageau moved, — That Bill C-2, in Clause 67, be amended by adding after line 27 on page 65 the following:

““communicate” includes to communicate by electronic means.”

 

After debate, by unanimous consent, the amendment was withdrawn.

 
Benoît Sauvageau moved, — That Bill C-2, in Clause 67, be amended by adding after line 10 on page 66 the following:

““written” includes in any electronic form.”

 

After debate, by unanimous consent, the amendment was withdrawn.

 
Stephen Owen moved, — That Bill C-2, in Clause 67, be amended by adding after line 10 on page 66 the following:

d) the leader, deputy leader, house leader or whip of a party and any senior staff employed in his or her office, including any unpaid senior advisors.”

 

Stephen Owen moved, — That the amendment be amended by deleting the words “whip of a party and”

 

After debate, the question was put on the subamendment of Stephen Owen and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 4; NAYS: 8.

 

The question was put on the amendment of Stephen Owen and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 4; NAYS: 8.

 
Pierre Poilievre moved, — That Bill C-2, in Clause 67, be amended by adding after line 10 on page 66 the following:

“(3) Section 2 of the Act is amended by adding the following after subsection (2):

(3) Any person identified by the Prime Minister as having had the task of providing support and advice to him or her during the transition period leading up to the swearing in of the Prime Minister and his or her ministry is subject to this Act, except subsections 10.11(2) to (4), as if the person were a senior public office holder during that period.”

 

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Pierre Poilievre and it was agreed to, by a show of hands: YEAS: 7; NAYS: 5.

 

At 7:41 p.m., the sitting was suspended.

At 7:48 p.m., the sitting resumed.

 

On Clause 68,

 
On motion of Benoît Sauvageau, it was agreed, — That Bill C-2, in Clause 68, be amended by deleting lines 20 to 24 on page 66.

 
On motion of Pierre Poilievre, it was agreed, — That Bill C-2, in Clause 68, be amended by replacing, in the English version, line 11 on page 68 with the following:

4.4 The Commis-”

 

On Clause 69,

 
On motion of Pierre Poilievre, it was agreed, — That Bill C-2, in Clause 69, be amended by replacing lines 11 to 24 on page 69 with the following:

“month involving a senior public office holder and relating to the undertaking,

(i) the name of the senior public office holder who was the object of the communication,

(ii) the date of the communication,

(iii) particulars, including any prescribed particulars, to identify the subject-matter of the communication, and”

 
Stephen Owen moved, — That Bill C-2, in Clause 69, be amended by adding after line 37 on page 69 the following:

“(3.1) The senior public office holder referred to in subparagraph (3)(a)(i) shall file a return, in the prescribed form and manner, not later than 15 days after the end of the month in which the communication or the meeting took place, that sets out

(a) the name of the individual who was the object of the communication or with whom the meeting was arranged;

(b) the date of the communication or meeting;

(c) particulars, including any prescribed particulars, to identify the subject-matter of the communication or meeting; and

(d) any other information that is prescribed.”

 

After debate, the question was put on the amendment and the result of the vote was announced: YEAS: 6; NAYS: 6.

Whereupon, the Chair voted in the negative.

Accordingly, the amendment was negatived.

 
On motion of Pierre Poilievre, it was agreed, — That Bill C-2, in Clause 69, be amended by

(a) replacing lines 4 and 5 on page 70 with the following:

“during the period with respect to”

(b) replacing line 14 on page 70 with the following:

“nication was made as”

 

On Clause 72,

Pierre Poilievre moved, — That Bill C-2, in Clause 72, be amended by adding after line 26 on page 73 the following:

“(2) Section 9 of the Act is amended by adding the following after subsection (3):

(3.1) Every individual who is required to submit returns or other documents referred to in subsection (1), or to provide responses referred to in that subsection, shall provide in the prescribed time, manner and form any clarification or correction to them that the Commissioner requires.”

 

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

 

On Clause 75,

 
Stephen Owen moved, — That Bill C-2, in Clause 75, be amended by replacing line 21 on page 74 with the following:

“period of three years after the day on which the”

 

After debate, the question was put on the amendment and the result of the vote was announced: YEAS: 6; NAYS: 6.

Whereupon, the Chair voted in the negative.

Accordingly, the amendment was negatived.

 

On Clause 77,

Benoît Sauvageau moved, — That Bill C-2, in Clause 77, be amended by replacing line 26 on page 75 with the following:

“investigation if he or she is requested to do so by a member of the Senate or House of Commons or has reason to believe”

 

Marlene Jennings moved, — That the amendment be amended by replacing the words after “he or she” with the words “has reason to believe, including on the basis of information received from a member of the Senate or the House of Commons,”

 

After debate, the question was put on the subamendment of Marlene Jennings and it was agreed to.

 

The question was put on the amendment of Benoît Sauvageau, as amended, and it was agreed to.

 
Pierre Poilievre moved, — That Bill C-2, in Clause 77, be amended by replacing, in the English version, line 38 on page 75 with the following:

“(c) dealing with the matter would serve”

 

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

 

On Clause 78,

 
On motion of Marlene Jennings, it was agreed, — That Bill C-2, in Clause 78, be amended by replacing line 29 on page 77 with the following:

“conclusions, and submit it to the Speaker of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Commons, who shall each table the report in the House over which he or she presides forthwith after receiving it or, if that House is not then sitting, on any of the first fifteen days on which that House is sitting after the Speaker receives it.”

 
On motion of Marlene Jennings, it was agreed, — That Bill C-2, in Clause 78, be amended

(a) by replacing lines 5 to 7 on page 78 with the following:

“to the Speaker of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Commons, who shall each table the report in the House over which he or she presides forthwith after receiving it or, if that House is not then sitting, on any of the first fifteen days on which that House is sitting after the Speaker receives it.

11.1 (1) The Commissioner may, at any time, prepare a special report concerning”

(b) by adding after line 13 on page 78 the following:

“(2) The Commissioner shall submit the special report to the Speaker of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Commons, who shall each table the report in the House over which he or she presides forthwith after receiving it or, if that House is not then sitting, on any of the first fifteen days on which that House is sitting after the Speaker receives it.”

 
Paul Dewar moved, — That Bill C-2, in Clause 78, be amended by adding after line 13 on page 78 the following:

11.2 Each special report of the Commissioner made under section 11.1 shall be submitted to the Speakers of both Houses of Parliament and shall be laid before each House by the Speaker of that House immediately after its receipt or, if that House is not then sitting, on the first day next thereafter that that House is sitting.”

 

After debate, by unanimous consent, the amendment was withdrawn.

 
On motion of Pierre Poilievre, it was agreed, — That Bill C-2, in Clause 78, be amended by adding after line 13 on page 78 the following:

11.2 Every report to Parliament made by the Commissioner shall be made by being transmitted to the Speaker of the Senate and to the Speaker of the House of Commons for tabling in those Houses.”

 

On Clause 83,

Pierre Poilievre moved, — That Bill C-2, in Clause 83, be amended by replacing line 7 on page 80 with the following:

83. In sections 84 to 88.2 of this Act, the”

 

By unanimous consent, the amendment was allowed to stand.

 

On Clause 88,

 
On motion of Pierre Poilievre, it was agreed, — That Bill C-2, in Clause 88, be amended by replacing, in the French version, lines 26 to 30 on page 81 with the following:

88. (1) Il est entendu que l’article 10.11 de l’autre loi, édicté par l’article 75 de la présente loi, ne s’applique pas aux personnes visées par cet article 10.11 qui ont cessé d’exercer leurs fonctions avant la date”

 

On Clause 89,

Paul Dewar moved, — That Bill C-2, in Clause 89, be amended by replacing lines 4 to 10 on page 82 with the following:

16.2 (1) The Commissioner of Lobbying shall refuse to disclose any record requested under this Act that contains information that was obtained or created by the Commissioner or on the Commissioner’s behalf in the course of an investigation conducted by or under the authority of the Commissioner.

(2) However, the Commissioner may not refuse to disclose any record that was created by the Commissioner or on the Commissioner’s behalf in the course of an investigation conducted by the Commissioner or under the Commissioner’s authority once the investigation is complete and all related proceedings, if any, are final.”

Debate arose thereon.

 

Pierre Poilievre moved, — That the amendment be amended by substituting the following for the proposed text:

16.2 (1) The Commissioner of Lobbying shall refuse to disclose any record requested under this Act that contains information that was obtained or created by the Commissioner or on the Commissioner’s behalf in the course of an investigation conducted by, or under the authority of, the Commissioner.

(2) However, the Commissioner shall not refuse under subsection (1) to disclose any record that contains information that was created by the Commissioner or on the Commissioner’s behalf in the course of an investigation conducted by, or under the authority of, the Commissioner once the investigation and all related proceedings, if any, are finally concluded.”

 

At 9:01 p.m., the Committee adjourned to the call of the Chair.

 



Miriam Burke
Clerk of the Committee

 
 
2006/06/30 1:33 p.m.