Refine by MP, party, committee, province, or result type.

Results 106-120 of 139544
Sorted by relevance | Sort by date: newest first / oldest first

Industry committee  I appreciate this. To be clear, there wouldn't be an extra step that those persons would have to take. They wouldn't have to go to court. They wouldn't have to prove that they're independent. How would that happen? Could there be a legal contestation of that from a parent

April 17th, 2024Committee meeting

Brian MasseNDP

Industry committee   that someone has.... The law is clear that minors capable of exercising their own authority have the capacity to make those instructions to those in possession of their personal information. It would only be if the receiving institution, the commercial entity, was somehow unconvinced

April 17th, 2024Committee meeting

Mark Schaan

Industry committee   to have a clear obligation as it relates to that. There were initial concerns and conceptions about whether or not federal and provincial competence was potentially at issue here. The view is that this is in a zone in which this can be established in a federal statute regarding its

April 17th, 2024Committee meeting

Mark Schaan

Industry committee   an individual under 18 years of age”. I have been debating this one for a bit, personally. Before I go on, is that clear for everyone? In my amendment, I'm changing the age of a minor from 14 to 18.

April 17th, 2024Committee meeting

Brad VisConservative

Industry committee   on this. The testimony is very clear that we do need to have a discussion on defining what a minor is, largely for businesses' purposes. I would contend as well that it's for future amendments that will be put into this law, and my hope is that it will safeguard children from online harms. Thank you

April 17th, 2024Committee meeting

Brad VisConservative

Industry committee  From my perspective, these are not sections that grant lawful authority. If that clarity is needed, I don't see any legal issue with that. I think what needs to be clear is that proposed sections 44, 43 and 33 and proposed subsection 47(1) don't actually grant authority

April 17th, 2024Committee meeting

Runa Angus

Carbon Pricing  . With this approach, we are sending a clear message: Pollution has a price. Putting a price on carbon pollution encourages reduction across the economy while giving households and businesses the flexibility to decide when and how to make changes. To achieve this, we need to maintain the price

April 17th, 2024House debate

Élisabeth BrièreLiberal

Carbon Pricing  , but during this process and at the clear and obvious behest of the Prime Minister and his government, the Senate gutted the bill by removing heating fuels for barns from the bill. They wanted to kill the bill altogether, but the government's extraordinary lobbying efforts succeeded

April 17th, 2024House debate

Pat KellyConservative

Industry committee   the Spencer test in that it has three criteria and those criteria are not cumulative. The way that I read the Privacy Commissioner's submission, there's a clear “or” in there, which is not there in CPC-3. Therefore, this would be a significantly narrower test for organizations.

April 17th, 2024Committee meeting

Runa Angus

Industry committee  ” and the criterion of “prescribed circumstances”, which are the three criteria in the Spencer decision. What I want to make clear is that these are three separate criteria, so they are either-or. It can be exigent circumstances, or reasonable law, or prescribed circumstances. Actually

April 17th, 2024Committee meeting

Runa Angus

Protection Against Extortion Act  -381 would ensure that extortion crime means mandatory jail time. It would go after the criminals, their gang leaders and anyone who participates in threatening our community members with arson or violence. With Bill C-381, common-sense Conservatives would send a clear message

April 17th, 2024House debate

Tim UppalConservative

House of Commons  Mr. Speaker, I would like, in the last few moments we have here with the witness, to put myself in the position of a Canadian watching this on television, and wondering how this could happen. I think it is clear on a factual basis, and respecting this place and everyone

April 17th, 2024House debate

Elizabeth MayGreen

Industry committee  Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Mr. Pécresse, for appearing before the committee. Mr. Pécresse, my initial question is one that's been asked, but I want to give you a chance to be very clear about this. There was $60 million invested in 2018, and there was $20 million

April 17th, 2024Committee meeting

Iqwinder GaheerLiberal

House of Commons  Mr. Speaker, just to be clear, Mr. Firth has not had any private conversations, at any point, with any member of Parliament over the period of the committee hearings. I am not talking about at the committees themselves; I am talking about private conversations, hallway

April 17th, 2024House debate

Peter JulianNDP

Industry committee  You are talking about a specific part of the equipment. I want to be clear, Mr. Simard. Regarding the AP60 technology, I looked into the issue again recently and I can tell you that for a very large majority, we are working with suppliers from Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean and Quebec

April 17th, 2024Committee meeting

Jérôme Pécresse