Bill C-21 (Historical)

Political Loans Accountability Act

An Act to amend the Canada Elections Act (accountability with respect to political loans)

This enactment amends the Canada Elections Act to enact rules concerning loans, guarantees and suretyships with respect to registered parties, registered associations, candidates, leadership contestants and nomination contestants.

Political Loans Accountability Act

[Mathieu Ravignat, NDP, Pontiac, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I know that my Liberal Party colleague is someone who has a great deal of experience and a balanced outlook on life.

It is completely normal for Canadians to question the relationship between economic power and political power, and the impact that financial institutions may have on the economy.

I would like to know a little more about what my colleague would do to ensure that these types of schemes never happen again.

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Unionville, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for his question.

We want these rules to be as transparent as possible. We agree with many items in the bill. The only thing we do not like, as I have said a number of times, is the exclusive authority for financial institutions to make loans. Yes, they can make loans, but others should also be able to do so. This is the biggest change that we would like to make in the bill, but obviously the government does not want to co-operate.

[Scott Andrews, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

Mr. Speaker, it is so important to have openness and transparency in the electoral process. Not allowing someone to get a loan from a family member would probably prevent that person from getting involved in politics.

The member is a former bank executive. Banks do not normally give loans to political parties or political individuals. It is very difficult to get a loan from a financial institution for political purposes. Maybe the member could shed some light on that.

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Unionville, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I was not lending money. My lending limit when I was working for Royal Bank was always zero, so I was not a real banker. I was a chief economist and talked about stuff like that, but I do know a bit about the process.

It is obvious that a bank is a money-making institution. It does not lend money just out of the goodness of its heart. It only lends money when it is pretty sure it will get that money back with interest, so it looks very closely at the credit ratings of individuals in determining whether to lend and how much to lend.

We can be sure that if a candidate does not have the best credit history or perhaps does not have a high-paying job, then that person would have great difficulty getting a loan of any significant amount from a bank. However, that person could perhaps get a loan from colleagues or friends or family. I do not see what is wrong with that as long as that process is transparent and clear. That is the main difference between what we are saying and what the government is saying.

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Is the House ready for the question?

[Some hon. members]

Question.

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

The question is on the motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

No.

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

All those in favour of the motion will please say yea.

[Some hon. members]

Yea.

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

All those opposed will please say nay.

[Some hon. members]

Nay.

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

In my opinion the yeas have it.

And five or more members having risen:

[Gordon O'Connor, Conservative, Carleton—Mississippi Mills, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. There have been discussions among the whips and I believe that if you seek it you will find agreement, pursuant to Standing Order 45(7), to defer the vote on the motion to the end of government orders on Tuesday, October 2.

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Is that agreed?