Yes, Mr. Chairman, I would, if I may.
These amendments address sections 86 and 87 as proposed in the Parliament of Canada Act. Proposed sections 86 and 87 are patterned exactly on existing provisions in the Parliament of Canada Act with respect to the role of the Senate Ethics Officer and the role of the Ethics Commissioner. You can find those in sections 20.5 of the Parliament of Canada Act and sections 72.05 of the Parliament of Canada Act. Proposed sections 86, 87 and 88 set out, in essence, three discrete roles for the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner. Proposed section 86 speaks to his or her role with respect to the Senate. Proposed section 87 deals with his or her role with respect to the House. Proposed section 88 deals with his or her role with respect to administering the Conflict of Interest Act.
The provisions that would be amended, proposed subsections (4) and (5) of both proposed sections 86 and 87, are there for greater certainty. In changing and adding language, it may be that inadvertently you might be suggesting something that you didn't intend. For example, let me take proposed subsections (5) of both proposed sections 86 and 87, which both say “For greater certainty”--just in case anybody has any questions--this scheme that we set out in proposed section 86, for example, is meant to be a self-contained unit and is not meant to affect the privileges of the Senate. By adding the words “except with respect to ministers”, the interpreter would be forced to grapple with the question of whether then he intends, for greater certainty, to tell me that in fact section 86 does affect privileges with respect to ministers.
Is that what you intend? Likewise, with respect to proposed section 87, the proposed amendment with respect to proposed subsection (5) would perhaps drive the interpreter to the conclusion that you're intending to suggest there is some effect with respect to their privileges.
