How long has that section been written that way?
Evidence of meeting #45 for Justice and Human Rights in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was question.
Evidence of meeting #45 for Justice and Human Rights in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was question.
5:20 p.m.
Special Advisor and Legislative Counsel, Office of the Chief Legislative Counsel, Department of Justice
How long? I would have to look it up.
5:20 p.m.
Legislative Counsel, Legislation Section , Department of Justice
The historical note, that is, the note on the margin beside the amendment, indicates that the last change was made in 1996. That was then in 1996 or earlier.
5:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Mike Wallace
We're off to Part 2, terminology.
We're basically replacing Newfoundland with Newfoundland and Labrador. Does anybody have a problem with that?
Part 3 covers the coordinating amendments.
Are there any questions on clauses 175, 176, 177?
5:20 p.m.
NDP
Françoise Boivin NDP Gatineau, QC
I'll conclude on this one because I had two questions. Is Bill C-31 in this actual legislation?
We arrived in 2011, if I'm not mistaken. Here we are talking about the 2nd session of the 41st Parliament—
5:20 p.m.
Legislative Counsel, Legislation Section , Department of Justice
This is about a bill tabled last winter, an act to implement certain provisions of the budget.
5:20 p.m.
NDP
Françoise Boivin NDP Gatineau, QC
Okay.
Perhaps you can explain it to me then. I don't think we saw Bill C-31. This reads as follows: “Clauses 175 to 177 of these Proposals contain coordinating amendments whose purpose is to reconcile the effects of two amendments relating to the same provision.”
This affects us, and, furthermore, I would like us to appear competent as legislators. When it comes to those who came before us, that's obviously another story.
5:20 p.m.
Special Advisor and Legislative Counsel, Office of the Chief Legislative Counsel, Department of Justice
When Bill C-31 was introduced, it had the effect of changing the provision that we are changing now. Unfortunately, no one noticed this error. However, the coordinating amendment ensures that the error will be corrected. If the amendment in Bill C-31 comes into force first, the coordinating amendment will effectively correct the error. You cannot undo—
5:25 p.m.
NDP
Françoise Boivin NDP Gatineau, QC
What you are saying is that it has not been passed yet. In that case, why is the change not being made to the bill? Why is it necessary to go through us and our procedures?
5:25 p.m.
Special Advisor and Legislative Counsel, Office of the Chief Legislative Counsel, Department of Justice
Okay, I see.
5:25 p.m.
Legislative Counsel, Legislation Section , Department of Justice
Since Bill C-31 received royal assent, it can no longer be amended through a motion or any other such process.
Bill C-31 amended the same provision, making ??a change, and we are making another change. When royal assent is granted and enters into force, this provision of Bill C-31, which is now, I believe, chapter 20 of the Statutes of Canada, 2014, will amend the earlier provision. But when the time comes for us to intervene, we will not have the amendment made to Bill C-31.
In other words, when we do intervene, we will undo what Bill C-31 has done. What we are trying to do with clause 177 is to tell those people that they have already made an change and that we have made another one. To ensure that there is no conflict, they are being asked to do what is indicated here, that is, to combine these two changes, once both of these provisions come into force. That is all this means.
5:25 p.m.
NDP
Françoise Boivin NDP Gatineau, QC
I would like to have a more complete understanding of the situation.
What precisely is the error?
5:25 p.m.
Legislative Counsel, Legislation Section , Department of Justice
It is the name of the organization.
5:25 p.m.
Special Advisor and Legislative Counsel, Office of the Chief Legislative Counsel, Department of Justice
Yes, that says—
5:25 p.m.
Legislative Counsel, Legislation Section , Department of Justice
Our clause 96 amends the Financial Administration Act. This provision deals with the French-language name of the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, or Société canadienne d'hypothèques et de logement.
5:25 p.m.
Special Advisor and Legislative Counsel, Office of the Chief Legislative Counsel, Department of Justice
The error was in the name.
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Mike Wallace
Do you have it or do you want to just provide it to us in writing?
5:25 p.m.
Special Advisor and Legislative Counsel, Office of the Chief Legislative Counsel, Department of Justice
No, we have it. The correct name in French of the corporation is “Loi sur la Corporation commerciale canadienne”. The way it was written in error was “Loi sur la Corporation canadienne commerciale”.
5:25 p.m.
Legislative Counsel, Legislation Section , Department of Justice
The “Loi sur la Corporation commerciale canadienne” was written in error as the “Loi sur la Corporation canadienne commerciale”. The error was just that the terms “canadienne” and “commerciale” had been transposed.
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Mike Wallace
All right. That is the end of the clauses in all three parts. We have about a minute left, so here's my suggestion.
We are getting feedback from the Senate, the same report. We've had some questions here today that you've generously offered to respond to.
We will be hearing from the minister on Thursday. We will be starting the discussion and the review of the Victims Bill of Rights. I'll have a suggestion when we come on Thursday and after we hear from the minister about witnesses and number of meetings.
Here is a suggestion based on what we've received thus far. The next section after the break week will give us six meetings, and based on the number of witnesses provided thus far, that should be plenty of time to deal with that particular item.
We will spend maybe all six meetings on that particular item, and then when we get back, after that next break, the November 11 break, my suggestion is that it may be time for us to take that very first meeting to bring this back to the table. We will have answers by then. We will be able to deal with what stays and what goes so we can move this on and they can do their work.
That is my suggestion at this point. Are there any questions?
Yes, Madame Boivin.
5:25 p.m.
Conservative