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. 21

Thursday, June 8, 2006

The Legislative Committee on Bill C-2 met in a televised session at 8:02 a.m. this day, in Room 253-D, Centre Block, the Chair, David Tilson, presiding.

Members of the Committee present: Monique Guay, Laurie Hawn, 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 ; Melanie J. Mortensen, Legal Services . Library of Parliament: Katherine Kirkwood, Director ; Kristen Douglas, Analyst.

Witnesses: Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat: Susan M.W. Cartwright, Assistant Secretary, Accountability in Government. Department of Justice: Joe Wild, Senior Counsel, Legal Services, Treasury Board Portfolio. Privy Council Office: Marc Chénier, Counsel, Democratic Renewal Secretariat; Patrick Hill, Acting Assistant Secretary, Machinery of Government. Department of Justice: Warren J. Newman, General Counsel, Constitutional and Administrative Law. Privy Council Office: James Stringham, Legal Counsel, Office of the Counsel to the Clerk of the Privy Council.

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 2,

Marlene Jennings moved, — That Bill C-2, in Clause 2, be amended by adding after line 38 on page 25 the following:

“(8.1) Where the Commissioner is of the opinion that a member of the Senate or House of Commons has failed to comply with the confidentiality provision of subsection (8), the Commissioner may refer the matter, in confidence, to the Speaker of the Senate or House of Commons.”

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

On motion of Benoît Sauvageau, it was agreed, — That Bill C-2, in Clause 2, be amended by replacing, in the French version, line 33 on page 26 with the following:

“des articles 44 et 45, le commissaire a le pouvoir”

On motion of Pierre Poilievre, it was agreed, — That Bill C-2, in Clause 2, be amended by replacing, in the French version, line 34 on page 27 with the following:

“l’étude visée aux articles 43, 44 ou 45 si, selon le”

On motion of Pierre Poilievre, it was agreed, — That Bill C-2, in Clause 2, be amended by replacing lines 7 and 8 on page 29 with the following:

“himself or herself in respect of a matter and a”

Benoît Sauvageau moved, — That Bill C-2, in Clause 2, be amended by adding after line 13 on page 30 the following:

“(2) Every public office holder who contravenes a provision that is not referred to in subsection (1) commits a violation and is liable to an administrative monetary penalty not exceeding $50,000.”

Stephen Owen moved, — That the amendment be amended by replacing the word “$50,000” with the word “$5,000.

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

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Benoît Sauvageau and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 2; NAYS: 10.

On motion of Benoît Sauvageau, it was agreed, — That Bill C-2, in Clause 2, be amended by adding after line 18 on page 33 the following:

“67. (1) Within five years after this Act receives royal assent, a comprehensive review of the provisions and operation of this Act shall be undertaken by such committee of the Senate, of the House of Commons or of both Houses of Parliament as may be designated or established by the Senate or the House of Commons, or by both Houses of Parliament, as the case may be, for that purpose.

(2) The committee referred to in subsection (1) shall, within a year after a review is undertaken pursuant to that subsection or within such further time as may be authorized by the Senate, the House of Commons or both Houses of Parliament, as the case may be, submit a report on the review to Parliament, including a statement of any changes that the committee recommends.”

On Clause 3,

Pierre Poilievre moved, — That Bill C-2, in Clause 3, be amended by

(a) replacing, in the English version, line 29 on page 34 with the following:

“and functions that the Ethics Counsellor or”

(b) replacing, in the English version, line 38 on page 34 with the following:

“person or obligation in respect of which the Ethics”

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

On motion of Pierre Poilievre, it was agreed, — That Bill C-2, in Clause 3, be amended by replacing lines 42 and 43 on page 34 with the following:

“Commons may, with respect to persons subject to and obligations established by The Conflict of Interest and”

On Clause 28

On motion of Pierre Poilievre, it was agreed, — That Bill C-2, in Clause 28, be amended by replacing, in the French version, line 36 on page 43 with the following:

“commissaire aux conflits d’intérêts et à l’éthique”

At 8:56 a.m., the sitting was suspended.

At 9:05 a.m., the sitting resumed.

Stephen Owen moved, — That Bill C-2, in Clause 28, be amended

(a) by replacing lines 1 to 4 on page 44 with the following:

“recognized party in the House of Commons and approval of the appointment by resolution of that House.”

(b) by replacing line 21 on page 44 with the following:

“(3) A resolution of the House of”

“Council on address of the House of”

(d) by replacing line 31 on page 45 with the following:

“be paid out of moneys provided by the House of Commons”

(e) by replacing lines 39 to 42 on page 45 with the following:

“shall be considered by the Speaker of the House of Commons and then transmitted to the President of the Treasury Board, who shall lay it before the”

(f) by deleting lines 7 to 33 on page 46;

(g) by deleting lines 40 to 43 on page 47;

(h) by replacing lines 6 to 9 on page 48 with the following:

“section 88 for that year to the Speaker of the House of Commons, who shall table it in that House.”

On motion of Stephen Owen, it was agreed, — That the amendment be amended by removing after the words “by resolution of that House” the following:

“(b) by relacing line 21 on page 44 with the following:

“(3) A resolution of the House of”

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

Benoît Sauvageau moved, — That Bill C-2, in Clause 28, be amended by deleting lines 5 to 20 on page 44.

Pat Martin moved, — That the amendment be amended in line 11 by adding after the word “a” the words “current or” and in lines 13 and 14 by removing the words “has demonstrated” and replacing them with “or a person who has demonstrated”.

The Chair ruled the sub-amendment out of order as it was not amending the amendment but introducing a new idea, therefore requiring a new amendment to be introduced with the required 24 hour notice.

Pat Martin moved, — That Clause 2 be stood.

At 10:14 a.m., the sitting was suspended.

At 10:30 a.m., the sitting resumed.

The Committee resumed consideration of the motion of Pat Martin, — That Clause 2 be stood.

The question was put on the motion and it was negatived.

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 Benoît Sauvageau, it was agreed, — That Bill C-2, in Clause 28, be amended by deleting lines 21 to 25 on page 44.

Pat Martin moved, — That Bill C-2, in Clause 28, be amended by replacing line 11 on page 47 with the following:

“secretaries acting in their capacity as ministers of the Crown, ministers of state or parliamentary secretaries.”

It was agreed, — That the Committee revert back to line 29, on page 46 in Clause 28.

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

Pat Martin moved, — That Bill C-2, in Clause 28, be amended by replacing line 29 on page 46 with the following:

“secretaries acting in their capacity as ministers of the Crown, ministers of state or parliamentary secretaries.”

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

Pat Martin moved, — That Bill C-2, in Clause 28, be amended

(a) by replacing line 33 on page 46 with the following:

“the Senate or its members, except ministers of the Crown, ministers of state or paliamentary secretaries.”

(b) by replacing line 15 on page 47 with the following:

“the House of Commons or its members, except ministers of the Crown, ministers of state or parliamentary secretaries.”

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

On Clause 38,

Marlene Jennings moved, — That Bill C-2 be amended by deleting Clause 38.

RULING BY THE CHAIR

House of Commons Procedure and Practice states, at page 656, “An amendment is out of order if it simply attempts to delete a clause, since in that case all that needs to be done is to vote against the adoption of the clause in question.”

At 11:15 a.m., the sitting was suspended.

At 11:25 a.m., the sitting resumed.

Pierre Poilievre moved, — That Clause 38 be stood.

By unanimous consent, the motion was withdrawn.

On New Clause 45.1,

Marlene Jennings moved, — That Bill C-2 be amended by adding after line 38 on page 57 the following new clause:

“45.1 The Act is amended by adding the following after section 404.4:

404.5 (1) No candidate or member may, directly or indirectly, accept any benefit or income from a trust established by reason of his or her position as a candidate or member.

(2) No candidate or member shall take any action that has as its purpose the circumvention of the prohibition referred to in subsection (1).

(3) Every person who contravenes subsection (1) or (2) is guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to a fine of not less than $500 and not more than $2,000.

404.6 (1) Every candidate or member shall disclose to the Chief Electoral Officer every trust known to the candidate or member from which he or she could, currently or in the future, either directly or indirectly, derive a benefit or income.

(2) The disclosure shall be made in accordance with the process of disclosure established by the Chief Electoral Officer.

(3) Section 126 of the Criminal Code does not apply in respect of a contravention of subsection (1).

404.7 (1) If a trust disclosed by a candidate or member was established by the candidate or member or by a person who is not a relative of the candidate or member, the Chief Electoral Officer shall

(a) if he or she is of the opinion that it is legally possible for the candidate or member to terminate the trust, order the candidate or member to terminate the trust and not to use any distribution of the assets on its termination for the purpose of financing a nomination contest, a leadership contest or an electoral campaign within the meaning of this Act; or

(b) if he or she is of the opinion that it is not legally possible for the candidate or member to terminate the trust, order the candidate or member not to derive any benefit or income from the trust for the purpose of financing a nomination contest, a leadership contest or an electoral campaign within the meaning of this Act.

(2) If a trust disclosed by a candidate or member was established by a relative of the candidate or member, the Chief Electoral Officer shall order the member not to derive any benefit or income from the trust, including any distribution of its assets on its termination, for the purpose of financing a nomination contest, a leadership contest or an electoral campaign within the meaning of this Act.

(3) Subsections (1) and (2) do not apply in respect of a trust that meets the requirements of subsection 27(4) of the Conflict of Interest Act or a trust that is governed by a registered retirement savings plan or a registered education savings plan.

(4) No order made under this section has effect after polling day at a general election or after the day on which a member to which the order relates ceases to be a member and, for the purposes of this subsection, a person who was a member immediately before the issue of a writ for the election of a new member in place of that person is deemed to continue to be a memberuntil the date of that election.

(5) Every person who contravenes an order made under this section is guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to a fine of not less than $500 and not more than $2,000.

(6) Persons who are related to a candidate or member by birth, marriage, common-law partnership, adoption or affinity are the candidate’s or member’s relatives for the purpose of this section unless the Chief Electoral Officer determines, either generally or in relation to a particular candidate or member, that it is not necessary for the purposes of this section that a person or class of persons be considered a relative of the candidate or member.

(7) For the purpose of subsection (6), “common law partnership” means the relationship between two persons who are cohabiting in a conjugal relationship, having so cohabited for a period of at least one year.”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Marlene Jennings and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 2; NAYS: 10.

By unanimous consent, it was agreed, — That the Committee revert to the consideration of Clause 38.

On Clause 38,

On motion of Pierre Poilievre, it was agreed, — That Bill C-2, in Clause 38, be amended by replacing line 36 on page 51 with the following:

“powers referred to in sections 41.1 to 41.3, 86 and”

Pierre Poilievre gave notice of the following motion:

That the Committee extend its sittings hours until Bill C-2 is finished its clause-by-clause study and reported back to the House and that the following times be added to the existing schedule of meetings: Thursdays 3:30 to 5:30 p.m.; 6:00 to 9:00 p.m. Fridays 8 to 10 a.m.; 1 to 9 p.m. Mondays: 8 a.m. to 12 p.m.

At 12:01 p.m., the Committee adjourned to the call of the Chair.

Miriam Burke
Clerk of the Committee

2006-06-30 12:00 p.m.