Skip to main content Start of content

JUST 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. 60
 
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
 

The Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights met at 9:04 a.m. this day, in Room 308, West Block, the Chair, Art Hanger, presiding.

 

Members of the Committee present: Hon. Larry Bagnell, Joe Comartin, Rick Dykstra, Carole Freeman, Art Hanger, Hon. Marlene Jennings, Derek Lee, Réal Ménard, Rob Moore, Brian Murphy and Daniel Petit.

 

Acting Members present: Harold Albrecht for Myron Thompson and Joy Smith for Myron Thompson.

 

In attendance: Library of Parliament: Robin MacKay, Analyst; Dominique Valiquet, Analyst. House of Commons: Joann Garbig, Legislative Clerk.

 

Witnesses: Department of Justice: Carole Morency, Acting General Counsel.

 
Pursuant to the Order of Reference of Monday, October 30, 2006, the Committee resumed consideration of Bill C-22, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (age of protection) and to make consequential amendments to the Criminal Records Act.
 

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

 

The Chair called Clause 1.

 

The witness answered questions.

 

By unanimous consent, Clause 1 was allowed to stand.

 

On new Clause 1.1

 
Marlene Jennings moved, — That Bill C-22 be amended by adding after line 5 on page 3 the following new clause:

“1.1 Section 159 of the Act is repealed.”

Debate arose thereon.

 

The Chair ruled the proposed amendment inadmissible because it sought to amend sections of the parent Act not amended by the Bill, as provided on page 654 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice.

 

Whereupon, Marlene Jennings appealed the decision of the Chair.

The question: "Shall the decision of the Chair be sustained?" was put and the decision was sustained on the following recorded division: YEAS: Harold Albrecht, Larry Bagnell, Rick Dykstra, Derek Lee, Rob Moore, Daniel Petit — 6; NAYS: Joe Comartin, Carole Freeman, Marlene Jennings, Réal Ménard, Brian Murphy — 5.

 
Joe Comartin moved, — That Bill C-22 be amended by adding after line 5 on page 3 the following new clause:

“1.1 Paragraph 159(2)(b) of the Act is replaced by the following:

(b) any two persons, each of whom is sixteen years of age or more,”

Debate arose thereon.

 

The Chair ruled the proposed amendment inadmissible because it sought to amend sections of the parent Act not amended by the Bill, as provided on page 654 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice.

 

Whereupon, Joe Comartin appealed the decision of the Chair.

The question: "Shall the decision of the Chair be sustained?" was put and the decision was sustained on the following recorded division: YEAS: Harold Albrecht, Larry Bagnell, Rick Dykstra, Derek Lee, Rob Moore, Daniel Petit — 6; NAYS: Joe Comartin, Carole Freeman, Marlene Jennings, Réal Ménard, Brian Murphy — 5.

 

By unanimous consent, the Committee reverted to Clause 1 previously stood.

 
Joe Comartin moved, — That Bill C-22, in Clause 1, be amended by replacing lines 23 and 24 on page 2 with the following:

“matter of the charge if, on the day on which the alleged offence took place,”

Debate arose thereon.

 

Réal Ménard moved, — That the sitting be suspended for a period of five minutes.

 

The question was put on the motion and it was agreed to, by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 4.

 

At 10:36 a.m., the sitting was suspended.

At 10:44 a.m., the sitting resumed.

 
The Committee resumed consideration of the amendment of Joe Comartin, — That Bill C-22, in Clause 1, be amended by replacing lines 23 and 24 on page 2 with the following:

“matter of the charge if, on the day on which the alleged offence took place,”

 

By unanimous consent, Clause 1 was allowed to stand.

 

Clause 2 carried.

 

Clause 3 carried.

 

On new Clause 3.1,

Joe Comartin moved, — That Bill C-22 be amended by adding after line 33 on page 3 the following new clause:

“CANADA EVIDENCE ACT

3.1 The Canada Evidence Act is amended by adding the following after section 4:

4.1 (1) Notwithstanding section 4, no person who is the victim of an alleged offence under the Criminal Code may be compelled to testify in respect of the circumstances of the alleged offence.

(2) Any evidence that is derived from any statement of a person referred to in subsection (1) in respect of the circumstances of an alleged offence is not admissible in a prosecution for that offence without the consent of that person.”

 

The Chair ruled the proposed amendment inadmissible because it sought to amend a statute that was not before the Committee, as provided on page 654 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice.

 

Whereupon, Joe Comartin appealed the decision of the Chair.

The question: "Shall the decision of the Chair be sustained?" was put and the decision was sustained on the following recorded division: YEAS: Rick Dykstra, Derek Lee, Rob Moore, Daniel Petit, Joy Smith — 5; NAYS: Larry Bagnell, Joe Comartin, Carole Freeman, Réal Ménard — 4.

 

Clause 4 carried.

 

At 11:02 a.m., the Committee adjourned to the call of the Chair.

 



Carmen DePape
Committee Clerk

 
 
2007/04/19 9:33 a.m.