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

Results 61-75 of 129
Sorted by relevance | Sort by date: newest first / oldest first

Industry committee  We did read the comments of the witnesses who appeared. They decided to propose a transition period of 6 years in their requests to help businesses, not to change the 18-month timeframe.

October 21st, 2009Committee meeting

André Leduc

October 21st, 2009Committee meeting

André Leduc

Industry committee  It is possible that consumers may say that two years have elapsed since the discussion and transaction and ask why the business waited 24 months before sending the e-mail, when it could have done so in the first 18 months. In our view, a year and a half should be enough for busin

October 21st, 2009Committee meeting

André Leduc

Industry committee  From what I understand, BQ-2 extends the 18-month period to a two-year period. We proposed the 18-month period to be consistent with what is pre-existing in “do not call” to simplify regulations for enterprises in Canada. So that's why we went with the 18 months originally.

October 21st, 2009Committee meeting

André Leduc

Industry committee  The confusion for us is that we don't have the amendments by the government number. We don't have that package. We were going by the clause number rather than the government amendment number.

October 21st, 2009Committee meeting

André Leduc

Industry committee  I'll run through what this entire section's intention is. In the first instance, where a software company or otherwise is intending on seeking express consent for a download of a computer program onto a user's computer, they have to seek the requirements that are under subclaus

October 21st, 2009Committee meeting

André Leduc

Industry committee  We wanted a functional consent system for clause 8. We considered what is currently being used and what will function well in terms of the consent required to install computer programs. We considered the lists in amendment L-2, and the government's suggestions, in other words, ar

October 21st, 2009Committee meeting

André Leduc

Industry committee  No, purely and simply. If the party is not selling products, such as tickets for a dinner or t-shirts, but is conducting voting polls, it doesn't apply. That's not business.

October 21st, 2009Committee meeting

André Leduc

Industry committee  That's correct.

October 21st, 2009Committee meeting

André Leduc

Industry committee  That applies only when the political party engages in commercial activities. Otherwise, it doesn't apply.

October 21st, 2009Committee meeting

André Leduc

Industry committee  No. The fund-raisers of a political party are not commercial activities.

October 21st, 2009Committee meeting

André Leduc

Industry committee  If a political party wants to engage in electronic commerce, it must follow a process if, for example, it sends e-mails to its members in the context of a dinner. Subclause 10(6) of the bill states that, in the context of a relationship with a member of a party, that person can a

October 21st, 2009Committee meeting

André Leduc

Industry committee  I think the clause may be somewhat redundant insofar as the act only applies to commercial activity, and it would not be a regular course of business for a political party to engage in commercial activity.

October 21st, 2009Committee meeting

André Leduc

Industry committee  That depends on the party's interpretation. If it's a party fund-raiser, then there's no profit, no commercial activity; it doesn't apply.

October 21st, 2009Committee meeting

André Leduc

Industry committee  They aren't completely excluded. If they engage in commercial activities, the provision applies, but if they're involved in fund-raisers for the party or a charity, it doesn't apply.

October 21st, 2009Committee meeting

André Leduc