Procedure and House Affairs Committee on March 6th, 2014

[André Bellavance, Bloc, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

My understanding is that the Conservative government's Bill C-23 is putting up barriers in the way of the commissioner of elections. They will not help you in any way to root out fraud.

[Marc Mayrand]

At any rate, they do not meet the expectations expressed by the commissioner in previous reports.

[André Bellavance, Bloc, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

Over the years, you and your predecessors have always made recommendations to improve the Elections Act. The political parties also participate in this exercise.

To your knowledge, have you previously heard of a government conducting an exercise like this, imposing its view of the Elections Act without you or your predecessors—

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Thank you, Mr. Bellavance.

[André Bellavance, Bloc, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

My time is already up? I don't often come here and I would like—

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Time flies when you're having fun.

If you would give a quick answer, Mr. Mayrand, and then we'll finish up and go to committee business.

[Marc Mayrand]

I think the most important aspect is that this committee conducts a full review of the legislation and provides possible amendments to the bill.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

That's our role.

Thank you for coming today, Mr. Mayrand. Thank you for putting up with the break for votes, and thank you for putting up with all of us today. We will allow you to go.

I'd like to spend just a couple of minutes on committee business, please, if we could. I think I can make this reasonably quick.

The witness lists that we talked about for the study, we asked for them to come in and we'll ask for them to keep coming in as you get ideas for more.

We will move on trying to put together some scheduled times. Obviously, we try to put witnesses at the table who are complementary to each other, at least some multiples. If you'll allow, as we have in the past, the clerk and I will look at the witness lists as they come in and attempt to do that.

Mr. Christopherson, we spoke the other night that if we needed extended meetings or alternate meetings, we wouldn't hold ourselves just to the Tuesday and Thursday, 11:00 a.m. until 1:00 p.m. timeframe, and it's not my intention to do so. Based on what we have, we'll make sure that that happens.

Please, keep your lists coming in so that we can get that done. We'll also make it a habit of sending you briefs as we receive them, too, so you're getting all that information as it happens.

Mr. Christopherson, you talked about a motion. I think we can get away with doing exactly what we did today. If someone was to surrender their spot when it's wanted, then that works.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

No.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Okay.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

There's a little difference. If you don't mind, Chair, I'd prefer to go through them all.

Thanks.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Let's have it then.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Mr. Chair, I move that members of Parliament, in relation to the study of Bill C-23, who are not members of a recognized party, designate a participant for the questioning of witnesses; that the routine motion with regard to the questioning of witnesses be modified for this study only in the third round in order to allow the designate member the possibility to ask questions; and that the motion, as follows, in the third round, 'For the third round, four minutes be allocated in the following order: members of Parliament who are not members of a recognized party have the first spot, second the NDP, and third, the Conservative'”.

This is consistent with the process that we used when this committee studied BOIE. To the best of my knowledge, it's word for word, other than situation specific.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

The third round is a Conservative, a New Democrat, and then Conservative. Are you asking to add an independent at the start to that?

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Yes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Not eliminate one other, but add that to that spot.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Correct. As we did with the other study.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

If that's what we're asking, are we all clear on the motion? Are there comments on the motion, and kind of quickly, please?

[Tom Lukiwski, Conservative, Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, SK]

Quickly, I'm not prepared to say yea or nay yet, because this is the first time I've heard of it. I would like to deal with it immediately when we come back after the break.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

I'll make it the first thing for the meeting when we come back.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Yes, I can live with that, Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Okay. Is there anything else from a committee business point of view?

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Very quickly, Mr. Chair, correct me if I'm wrong, but the motion that passed the other night said that we would complete clause-by-clause study on May 1, and yet my understanding is that a notice has gone out saying that we're going to start it on May 1. That leaves the impression that we're going to start and end clause-by-clause study in one day.

I'm assuming that can't possibly be true, so I'm just seeking clarification, Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

My understanding of the motion was that we would complete it by May 1, so obviously, with some anticipation—

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

But was there a notice sent out that said we would start clause-by-clause study also on May 1? This would suggest there's one day to do the whole bill.