Bill C-65

Electoral Participation Act

An Act to amend the Canada Elections Act

This enactment amends the Canada Elections Act to, among other things,
(a) provide for two additional days of advance polling;
(b) authorize returning officers to constitute polling divisions that consist of a single institution, or part of an institution, where seniors or persons with a disability reside and provide for the procedures for voting at polling stations in those polling divisions;
(c) update the process for voting by special ballot;
(d) provide for the establishment of offices for voting by special ballot at post-secondary educational institutions;
(e) provide for new requirements relating to political parties’ policies for the protection of personal information;
(f) establish new prohibitions and modify existing prohibitions, including in relation to foreign influence in the electoral process, the provision of false or misleading information respecting elections and the acceptance or use of certain contributions; and
(g) expand the scope of certain provisions relating to the administration and enforcement of that Act, including by granting the Commissioner of Canada Elections certain powers in respect of any conspiracy or attempt to commit, or being an accessory after the fact or counselling in relation to, a contravention of that Act.
The enactment also provides that the Chief Electoral Officer must make a report on the measures that need to be taken to implement a three-day polling period, a report on the measures that need to be taken to enable electors to vote at any place in their polling station, a report on the feasibility of enabling electors to vote at any polling station in their electoral district and a report proposing a process for the determination of whether a political party has as one of its fundamental purposes the promotion of hatred against an identifiable group of persons.

Democratic Institutions

[Darrell Samson, Liberal, Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, NS]

Madam Speaker, the government is committed to protecting and strengthening Canada's democracy. We look forward to the ongoing work of the Public Inquiry into Foreign Interference in Federal Electoral Processes and Democratic Institutions, including the commissioner's final report in December. The government will review the report in due course. In the meantime, the government continues to take steps to counter foreign interference. This includes proposed amendments to the Canada Elections Act, recently introduced through Bill C-65. I look forward to the ongoing engagement with members of the House as we consider potential changes to further protect and strengthen our Canadian democracy.

I want to wish my colleagues and everybody in the House happy holidays. We will see them in the new year.

[Darrell Samson, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Rural Economic Development and Minister responsible for the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency]

Madam Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise today to speak about the important issue of combatting foreign interference in our democratic institutions. It is a little ironic for my colleague to talk about political interests in matters of national security when his leader still will not get his security clearance to learn more about foreign interference taking place in his party.

Since coming to office, our government has taken a range of measures to address the threats of foreign interference, such as amending the Canada Elections Act in 2018; creating both the National Security and Intelligence Review Agency and the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians; standing up a range of initiatives to strengthen our electoral system against cyber and other threats through the plan to protect Canada's democracy in advance of the 2019 election; and building upon and further strengthening that plan in the advance of the 2021 election.

Bill C-65 would ensure key protections against foreign interference are not limited to the election period; ban intentionally false and misleading statements about election activities or the voting process to disrupt an election or its results; prohibit contributions through money orders, prepaid gift cards or cryptoassets, the source of which can be difficult to trace; and introduce new third party contribution rules to increase transparency and mitigate the so-called dark or foreign funds from entering the system. If passed, these amendments would continue the cycle of continuous improvements to Canada's electoral process. Members will have a chance to study the amendments proposed in Bill C-65 and we look forward to the discussions that will follow.

Alleged Intimidation during Proceedings of the House

[Andrew Scheer, Conservative, Regina—Qu'Appelle, SK]

Madam Speaker, I agree with you, but we find ourselves in this position because that is exactly what the NDP members have done with these outrageous and baseless accusations. I think it is only fair and just that, after making these kinds of allegations, the official opposition be allowed to not only defend ourselves and our integrity, but also put the actual facts of the matter before the Chair if the Chair is going to rule on this.

My NDP counterpart also claimed that pages were withdrawn from the opposition lobby because of what he alleged was the conduct of Conservative MPs. I was briefed by a representative of the House administration relating to the page program and was informed that the baseline issue that ultimately led to a decision being made happened earlier and was completely unrelated to behaviour in the lobby. It was an administrative issue within the page program itself.

I can also say that during the evening there were requests from one side to the other, from the NDP lobby, to turn the volume down on the television that was on. It is a request that was accommodated. This is in stark contrast to the actions of NDP members that evening.

I would also point out that I have been in this place a long time, and on both sides of the House. I have been in a situation where I have shared opposition lobbies with NDP members. They are often gathered together, having a jovial time, just as Conservatives were that evening. I have heard them playing guitars and leading each other in songs. That happens from time to time on late-night sittings. Both parties usually just accommodate each other when they are doing that. We have to share the same space. We try to stay out of each other's way.

This all has come as a complete shock to Conservative staff and Conservative MPs who viewed the events of that evening as exactly that. Our MPs in our corner of the lobby enjoying the evening, knowing that we were about to come in and vote on a confidence matter, having a playful time in the House of Commons, chirping the NDP members who were voting on another side of the issue, which they do all the time. They are now just being selectively sanctimonious.

That being said, let me talk a bit about the NDP member's conduct in the House. We saw unhinged conduct directed at the Conservative lobby coordinator by the NDP member for Vancouver East. Not once, but on two occasions on Thursday night, she used profane language and likened him to a certain body part. On the second occasion, an NDP staffer had to physically come between her and the staffer in question, much like how the Deputy Sergeant-at-Arms had to direct the NDP deputy House leader away from the Conservatives she was harassing, as seen on the video that hundreds of thousands of Canadians have witnessed so far.

That interaction between the NDP member and the Conservative staff was an exercise of a position of power, to assert authority over and to bully an employee. There are witnesses to this conduct, as well as, I understand, a video, which I expect will be viewed in other forums.

Earlier in the evening, the hon. Conservative member for St. Albert—Edmonton was attempting to record a message for his constituents and Canadians about his work as our democratic reform shadow minister on Bill C-65, which proposes to delay the fixed-date election by a week in order to secure the pensions of 28 Liberal and NDP MPs.

Reference to Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs

[Branden Leslie, Conservative, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

Madam Speaker, it is always a privilege and a pleasure to rise in this place. On this particular issue, I rose last in early October to speak to the House about the Liberals' failure to turn over documents on the green slush fund as requested by the House of Commons' duly elected members and agreed to by the Speaker.

Two months later, it is pretty obvious the government is more concerned about what damage might emerge from handing over these documents and the consequences that may follow. Instead of moving ahead with its own agenda, as flawed as it may be, it is choosing to let this place live in gridlock. Then, from its ivory tower, it stands and lectures us on how our quest for transparency is impeding the business of this place.

There is a pretty easy solution to this. The Liberals could just hand over the documents, as requested by the elected members of this place. If they had done that by now, we would not be here today. I would not be speaking on this privilege debate today. They could do it today. Recognizing that my time will run short at adjournment, I will come back Monday morning to conclude my speech and take hopefully decent questions from members of the NDP-Liberal government. However, I am willing to sacrifice and cede that time if the government were to just do the right thing and hand over the documents. It is a Friday afternoon. It is a dump. The government can get rid of it. Maybe nobody will notice. The reason that it is obviously hiding the documents and refusing to do so is because it is very worried about those consequences.

I mentioned the legislative agenda of the government, if we want to call it that. Let us review where we are at to perhaps understand why it might not want to move forward with its own agenda.

Of course, the Minister of Justice has the Orwellian bill, Bill C-63, a widely panned piece of legislation that would see Canadians arrested for speech the Liberals deem impermissible, speech that they do not like. George Orwell's dystopian future is proving eerily correct under the Liberal government, with thought crime set to be added to our legal books should that bill ever pass.

Then we have Bill C-65, the electoral participation act, that is also under way in theory. Maybe we should call it by what it more appropriately would be, the “ensuring the leader of the NDP's pension act”. Since the NDP and the Liberals got together and cut some backroom deals to get another payout on the backs of hard-working Canadian taxpayers—

Democratic Institutions

[Jenica Atwin, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Indigenous Services]

Madam Speaker, it is my pleasure to rise today to speak to the paramount issue of combatting foreign interference in our democratic institutions. I certainly take this matter very seriously. I have respect for the House, and I wish the member would demonstrate the same. The allegations referenced here are misleading and defamatory, and he is simply peddling misinformation.

On this side of the House, the Prime Minister and ministers of the Crown have security clearances and have been vetted by national security. That is more than I can say for the Leader of the Opposition, who the member opposite is sitting closer and closer to. That is why I would like to turn my attention to what matters, which is what the government is doing on foreign interference.

In September 2023, the government announced the establishment of the public inquiry into foreign interference in federal processes and democratic processes following extensive consultations with all recognized parties in the House of Commons. All parties agreed to the terms of reference and the appointment of the commissioner, Justice Marie-Josée Hogue, a judge of the Court of Appeal of Quebec. The commissioner is mandated to examine and assess interference from China, Russia and other foreign state or non-state actors, including any potential impacts, to confirm the integrity of and any impacts on the 2019 and 2021 federal general elections at the national and electoral district levels.

As members of the House know, the commissioner's interim report was delivered on May 3, 2024. Some of the key findings from this initial report were that foreign interference did not affect the overall outcomes of the 2019 and 2021 elections, and the administration of these elections were sound. Foreign interference did not undermine the integrity of Canada's electoral system.

The commission's initial report did not make any recommendations for the government or other stakeholders. These will be included in the commission's final report. The government looks forward to reviewing the final report and any recommendations the commissioner may have for better protecting federal democratic processes from foreign interference. These will help inform future measures. In the meantime, the government continues its work to counter the evolving threat of foreign interference in Canada's democratic institutions.

Since the commissioner was appointed, the government has taken a number of steps. In September 2023, the Prime Minister made a statement in the House of Commons that there were credible allegations of a potential link between agents of the Government of India and the killing of a Canadian citizen in British Columbia. In October 2023, the government issued a second public statement on a probable Chinese government's “spamouflage” disinformation campaign targeting dozens of Canadian parliamentarians and issued letters to those parliamentarians who were targeted.

In December 2023, Canada joined the United Kingdom's attribution of malicious cyber activity in Russia that targeted U.K. politics and democratic processes. In January 2024, early preparations for the critical election incident public protocol panel began with individual briefings to panel members. Also in January 2024, the government published and shared a tool kit to resist disinformation and foreign interference and “Countering Disinformation: A Guidebook for Public Servants”.

In March 2024, the government introduced Bill C-65 which proposes amendments to the Canada Elections Act, including measures to further strengthen federal electoral processes against foreign interference. This bill has passed second reading in the House and is currently being studied in committee. In June 2024, unclassified briefings on foreign interference were provided to members of Parliament. On June 20, 2024, Bill C-70, the Countering Foreign Interference Act, received royal assent.

The Government of Canada has taken a range of measures to address the evolving threat of foreign interference in Canada's democratic processes. We look forward to reviewing any recommendations that Commissioner Hogue may have in her final report. In the meantime, the government continues to take steps to protect Canada's democracy.

Reference to Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Madam Speaker, before I begin my comments about the Sustainable Development Technology Canada scandal, knowing that we are coming into Remembrance Week, I want to share with the House a poem. It is called We Remain, and it was written by T.S. Bedford:

We remain.
We stand between the living and the lost;
Between memory and tomorrow.
We give voice to the silent;
Presence to the missed.
We share yesterday with the parted
And today with the loved.
No one knows the shape of the future
Or where the path will lead.
But the lost will always walk with us;
So long as
We remain.

I have to say, at the start of this speech today, that I cannot believe we are still here. I cannot believe that we talked about this topic in September and for all of October, and that it is November and we are still talking about it. For those at home who do not know what this privilege motion is about, it all started with Sustainable Development Technology Canada, a fund that was supposed to support sustainable technology development. The fund was created in 2001 and worked fine under both Liberal and Conservative governments until the current corrupt Liberal government.

Basically, it appointed people to the committee that was going to decide who got the money, and all its members gave it to their own companies. The Auditor General found 186 conflicts of interest, a whistle-blower implied that there was criminality involved and Parliament voted to have the documents related to this scandal produced. Of course, the Liberals did what they always do: They delayed and then produced the documents all blacked out without anything useful. The Speaker has correctly ruled that they need to produce the documents unredacted and that no government business or private member's business is going to take place in the House until that happens. We have been waiting for five weeks for the Liberals to produce the documents.

Bills are not coming forward, but there are some bills that I am glad are not coming forward, like the online harms bill, Bill C-63, which would do absolutely nothing to help children being sexually exploited online. Everybody wants that to be dealt with, but it would create a parallel system with no criminal consequences, and that would not help anyone. It would also put a person in jail for life if someone thinks they might commit a hate crime in the future. That is a chill on freedom of speech in this country. I am also happy that we do not have Bill C-65 coming forward, the bill that would give all Liberal and NDP members who are going to lose their seat in the next election their pensions by moving the election date out a week.

One of the bills that I would like to see come forward is unfortunately not happening. As part of the federal redistribution process, my riding was renamed Sarnia—Lambton—Bkejwanong. The new chief of Bkejwanong, which is Walpole Island, objects to the use of that name. As soon as I heard that he objected to it, I asked it to be part of a bill to alter riding names that need to be changed, which is done regularly in the House. I am very disappointed that this bill is not coming forward, because now I am not able to do what the chief asked me to do and what I said I would do, which is bring it forward here.

The reason we are here is that the Liberals continue to block us by not producing the documents. Let us talk about some of the arguments that have been made.

The Liberals are saying they do not want to give the documents to the RCMP because that would be a violation of people's charter rights. I want to be clear that the RCMP gets tips all the time, like from Crime Stoppers. It follows up on them. Nothing is a violation of anybody's charter rights with respect to that. What would happen is that RCMP members would look into the documents, especially if we give some indication of where they should be looking, and if they found evidence of criminality and wanted to pursue criminal charges, they would go to a judge and order those documents to be produced so they could be officially used in a criminal trial. That is where we are at today.

I just want to recap a bit of the history of how this fund went so wrong.

[Eric Duncan, Conservative, Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON]

Mr. Speaker, we learned last week at the House and procedural affairs committee that the NDP was given special secret briefings by the Prime Minister's Office and the Privy Council Office, which have said, in fact for months now, that Bill C-65 was an important part of the changes to the Election Act. The reason it was important was that, to the member's point, there are dozens of NDP and Liberal MPs who stand to lose the election next year, whenever it may be called, or if it is called right now, and they are refusing to do that.

Bill C-65 is a pension protection bill to secure the votes of the NDP for longer. I am very confident, as I was in 2019 and 2021, that I have the pulse of what the good people of Stormont, Dundas and South Glengarry think. I am looking forward to being on the ballot and asking for their support again. I am ready to do so right now in a carbon tax election. What I am not looking for, and what Canadians are sick of, are the insider deals between Liberal and NDP MPs, protecting their pensions. It is exactly why after nine years they are not worth the cost or the corruption.

Electoral Reform

[Paul Chiang, Liberal, Markham—Unionville, ON]

Madam Speaker, our government recognizes that a healthy democracy requires youth engagement. Parliament has continued to support the current voting age of 18 for a variety of reasons. At the same time, important actions have been taken to further foster youth participation by the government and stakeholders, as well as youth-led organizations and initiatives. However, I would note that voters aged 18 to 24 continue to have much lower turnout than the national average. Our government believes more can be done to make voting easier for these electors, many of whom are post-secondary students. That is why the government's proposal to make voting on campus permanent through Bill C-65 is so important.

I want to thank Canadian youth for their continued engagement in our democratic institutions.

[Paul Chiang, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Immigration]

Madam Speaker, I am honoured to rise today in the chamber to talk about the opportunities for youth engagement in our democracy, particularly voting in federal elections. I would like to thank the member for Saanich—Gulf Islands for raising the important issue of Canada's voting age.

Section 3 of the Charter of Rights and Freedom states, “Every citizen of Canada has the right to vote”, and all citizens do eventually. The Canada Elections Act qualifies this right by adding the age requirement that citizens must be 18 years old. This is consistent with the voting age for provincial and territorial elections and most jurisdictions around the world.

The federal voting age has not always been set at 18. In 1970, it was lowered from age 21, which had been the voting age since Confederation. Since then, Parliament has often reflected on the voting age. Indeed, this very Parliament debated the idea of lowering the voting age to 16 a few years ago. While Parliament did not agree to lower the voting age, our government and the Prime Minister in particular have made very significant efforts to ensure young people continue to have a voice in our parliamentary democracy.

I would like to highlight a few of the many opportunities available to youth for engaging in democratic life at all levels of government. For example, they can become an active member of political parties, and they can join or even launch social movements on issues of importance to them, as well as advocate for public policies.

Our government recognizes that youth participation in our democracy, which is not limited to voting, makes it healthier. This is why we have taken important steps to provide youth opportunities to participate in our democracy in recent years. For example, in 2018, the government passed Bill C-76, the Elections Modernization Act, which created a voluntary register of future electors, providing Canadians between the ages of 14 to 17 who wish to vote with the option to register early with Elections Canada. If they choose to sign up early, these youth are automatically included in the National Register of Electors upon turning 18, as well as the list of electors, so they are registered to vote and will receive their voter information card. The Elections Modernization Act also facilitated the ability of Elections Canada to hire 16- and 17-year-olds to work as election officers, giving young people an opportunity to be at the front lines of Canada's electoral process.

Our youth can and do participate in our democracy and continue to make a valuable contribution in a variety of ways. At the same time, our government recognizes that it is important that we continue to support ways to encourage participation. All of us here can and should do more to encourage the turnout of all electors. We need to be an example for our youth.

In March of this year, our government introduced Bill C-65, the electoral participation act, which seeks to enhance voter participation for all electors, including youth and students—

Democratic Institutions

[Tako Van Popta, Conservative, Langley—Aldergrove, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I rise to present e-petition 4938, which has gathered more than 9,500 signatures from people across the country. The petitioners call on the House to oppose the portion of the Liberal Bill C-65 that would move the election date to one week later.

This seemingly innocent change would guarantee pensions for current members of Parliament who were first elected in 2019 and who are still serving, even if they choose not to run again or if they run and do not win the next election. The petitioners think that this is an irresponsible use of taxpayer dollars. I agree with that. I congratulate them for working on this petition, and I am happy to present it.

Canada Labour Code

[Chris Bittle, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Housing]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis for her work on this file. The government supports this legislation, and I would like to take a few moments to explain why.

Everyone deserves a healthy workplace where they feel safe. It is a basic right, yet one that many workers are denied. Harassment and violence at work still happen and no workplace is immune to them. No one should face this on the job or anywhere else. The Government of Canada must set an example, and we are. In 2021, we put in place stronger protections against workplace violence and harassment under the Canada Labour Code and its regulations. This historic piece of legislation, Bill C-65, is now better protecting workers from these harmful behaviours, which disproportionately impact women.

To continue improving protections for workers, an important part of this work is monitoring the progress of these new measures. Last year, we published our first annual report on taking action against harassment and violence in workplaces under Canadian federal jurisdiction, which covers harassment and violence reported to employers in 2021. The first report showed that not all workers experience harassment and violence in the same way or to the same degree. This information is critical. With each annual report's findings, we are able to evaluate what is working and identify improvements that will ensure workplaces are safe and healthy across the country.

When occurrences of workplace harassment and violence are reported, it is important that the investigations are truly independent. In 2021, the government set up a registry of workplace harassment and violence investigators to make it easy for employers to identify qualified investigators and better protect federally regulated employees. We currently have 75 qualified investigators listed who can be contracted by employers to lead independent investigations and make a positive difference in the workplace. In March, we launched a selection process to expand our registry of qualified investigators. These additional resources are expected to be made available by June of next year.

We are also investing in partner organization-led initiatives that will help drive culture change in federally regulated workplaces and protect workers from harm. With the workplace harassment and violence prevention fund, we are currently funding seven new multi-year projects and have funded 14 overall since 2019. The three new projects will receive $10.7 million in total funding over three years.

For instance, let us take the project from the Centre for Research and Education on Violence Against Women and Children at Western University. The project will see the creation of specialized resources and training for unions to inform employees of their rights and build workplaces free of harassment and violence. All of the following groups are coming together to make it happen: the subject-matter experts at the Canadian Labour Congress; francophone representatives from Quebec; and FETCO, an employers' organization comprising federally regulated firms within the transportation and communications sector.

We are also providing funding through the “workplace opportunities: removing barriers to equity” program, or WORBE, to help break down employment barriers experienced by women, indigenous people, persons with disabilities and members of visible minorities. Currently, WORBE has a funding envelope of $3 million every year with 11 multi-year projects.

Canada also participates actively in the global effort to cultivate workplaces that are free from fear and intimidation. Earlier this year, the groundbreaking International Labour Organization convention 190 came into force in Canada. Canada played a strong leadership role in the development, adoption and advancement of this convention. It is the first-ever global agreement on ending violence and harassment at work. We joined countries around the world to protect workers and make sure that every workplace is safe and respectful. It is not just a Canadian value that we have promoted. Now it is a protected right.

We have also made progress in supporting the mental and physical health of women at work. We are improving the well-being of nearly half a million workers who may require menstrual products during their workdays by making sure these products are treated like the basic necessities they are. Since December 15, federally regulated employers are now required to provide access to free menstrual products to their employees. This is a big step toward creating a healthier and more inclusive workplace, and we are on our way to accomplishing much more.

In December 2021, we passed a bill to give workers in federally regulated private sector workplaces 10 days of paid sick leave. That bill passed with unanimous consent, because no one should ever have to choose between getting paid and getting better.

Through Bill C-59, we are proposing changes to the Canada Labour Code to create a new three-day leave for federally regulated private sector workers following a pregnancy loss. In the event of a stillbirth, employees would be entitled to take eight weeks off. For most employees, the first three days of this leave would be paid. Dealing with pregnancy loss is hard for employees who experience it and they need support. This new leave would provide employees with greater job security while they recover. It would be available to the individual who is pregnant, the spouse or common-law partner and any person who is intended to be the legal parent of the child.

As everyone can see, we have been working on many fronts to protect workers and make sure that every workplace is safe, healthy and respectful. We have made great progress, but a lot more remains to be done, whether it be through training programs, efforts to eliminate the stigma that prevents workers from speaking up or better resolution processes.

We are all in this together: employers, unions, labour experts and different levels of government. We will continue to work hand in hand to confront, prevent and eradicate harassment and violence in the workplace. When workplaces are safe, it is a win for all of us. Workers can be at their best, employers thrive and the economy benefits.

Bill C-65—Time Allocation Motion

[Damien Kurek, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

Madam Speaker, Bill C-65 is filled with nothing but rank hypocrisy. First the Liberals talk about giving voters access to voting, yet it was the Prime Minister and the minister who sat around the cabinet table and chose to call an election when they promised not to disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of Canadians, including students by not allowing campus voting in the last election. That is on the Prime Minister and the minister. The rank hypocrisy is simply stunning.

When it comes to misinformation and disinformation, the Deputy Prime Minister had a video flagged on Twitter. Also, the member for Calgary Skyview stole his Conservative opponent's election literature. There are many other examples where we have seen the Liberals stop at nothing to try to gain a political advantage.

My question is very simple. This is not an elections bill but truly a pension bill. At any point in time, did the minister get feedback from his caucus, his department officials or anybody within the Liberal Party about the consequences of adjusting the election date so that losing Liberal MPs would qualify for a pension? I have heard from many constituents who want a clear answer from the minister about the pension bill.

Bill C‑65—Time Allocation Motion

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Madam Speaker, I would like to ask my colleague a question. Bill C-65 contains interesting elements, but it would require that Elections Canada offer online registration. However, we know that Canada has experienced foreign cyber-attacks, and that there have been interference and attempts at fraud. Those actors are trying to sow chaos. Russia has been particularly active on this front.

Would online registration not make us more vulnerable? Have special measures been considered to protect Canadians' data? I think that, in today's context, we are taking a risk. I would like to hear more from the minister on this.

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

moved:

That, in relation to Bill C-65, An Act to amend the Canada Elections Act, not more than five further hours shall be allotted to the consideration at second reading stage of the bill; and

That, at the expiry of the five hours provided for the consideration at second reading stage of the said bill, any proceedings before the House shall be interrupted, if required for the purpose of this order, and, in turn, every question necessary for the disposal of the said stage of the bill shall be put forthwith and successively, without further debate or amendment.

Bill C‑65—Notice of Time Allocation Motion

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, an agreement could not be reached under the provisions of Standing Order 78(1) or 78(2) with respect to second reading stage of Bill C-65, an act to amend the Canada Elections Act.

Under the provisions of Standing Order 78(3), I give notice that a minister of the Crown will propose at the next sitting a motion to allot a specific number of days or hours for the consideration and disposal of proceedings at the said stage of the bill.