Evidence of meeting #23 for Bill C-2 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was amendment.
6:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Tilson
This is the Legislative Committee on Bill C-2, meeting 23.
Our order of the day is Bill C-2, an act providing for conflict of interest rules, restrictions on election financing, and measures respecting administrative transparency, oversight, and accountability.
We are into clause-by-clause. When we broke before, Mr. Martin had the floor. I will give the floor back to Mr. Martin.
6:15 p.m.
NDP
Pat Martin NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I appreciate the opportunity to conclude my remarks regarding motion NDP-4, found on page 53. As you know, we are seeking to change the Elections Act so that donations by minors would be curtailed or curbed.
6:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Tilson
Order, please. Mr. Martin is trying to explain things to the committee.
Mr. Martin.
6:15 p.m.
NDP
Pat Martin NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
Thank you.
Without going any further, I sensed there wasn't a broad agreement with the amendment as I had argued for it in the last session of this committee. With a new session, I will concede I was moved by the arguments of Ms. Jennings when she raised the concern that it may be that a minor may in fact donate so much under my contemplated model that the adult would be unable to donate to their own political party. It's something I hadn't contemplated, but I can see. I suppose it's an extreme example.
What I would like to put forward as a subamendment to my own amendment is to add the words “under the age 14” after the word “minor”. It would now read:
Any contribution made to a candidate by a minor under the age of 14 is to be considered to be made by the parent of the minor designated for that purpose by the parents of the minor.
In other words, the parents would decide which parent or guardian would have that amount deducted from their donation limit. The only change I'm suggesting is adding the words “under the age of 14” after the first “minor”.
6:15 p.m.
Bloc
Benoît Sauvageau Bloc Repentigny, QC
I simply wish to understand Mr. Martin's explanation.
I have four daughters, one of whom is five and another nine years old. Can both of them contribute? If I had yet another daughter, could she contribute as well?
I believe the member is jumping ahead a little too quickly here.
6:15 p.m.
NDP
Pat Martin NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
To answer Mr. Sauvageau's question, if a minor child under the age of 14 made a contribution, that contribution would be considered to have been made by the parent because the parent, we believe, still has direction and control over a child of that age.
In other words, we assume that a person that young is not really acting of their own free will. You're still under the direction of your parent.
6:15 p.m.
Liberal
Marlene Jennings Liberal Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC
I'm astounded. I do not believe that ordinary Canadians believe that a minor under the age of 14 should be providing political donations, period. I do believe that most Canadians would want to see an age limit to have the legal capacity to donate. I understand that my colleagues around the table, the majority of them, did not believe that the age limit that I had proposed of 18 was reasonable and fair. But I definitely think that.... We don't want to see children, definitely under the age of 14, donating. That's circumventing the law as far as I'm concerned.
The day after the legislation with this amendment and subamendment that Mr. Martin is proposing came into force, a child could be born and that parent would be able to donate under the child's name. Already under our Electoral Financing Act, no person is permitted to donate money in someone else's name. It's already an illegal act, and I don't see why we would want to make it legal. I don't believe children under the age of 16, at least, should be making political donations to any party.
With the explanations we've been given as to what is a contribution, the dollar amount that's considered an actual contribution, that does not preclude our young people under the age of 16 from participating in political parties, from becoming members of political parties, etc.
Perhaps my suggestion of age 18 was seen as unreasonable, but I really don't believe that children under the age of 14 should be making a donation.
6:20 p.m.
Liberal
Marlene Jennings Liberal Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC
Mr. Martin, what I find interesting is that you've gotten a lot of press, a lot of media coverage of your outrage about what happened with Mr. Volpe's campaign, and you yourself are proposing an amendment that would actually make it legal.
6:20 p.m.
Some voices
Oh, oh!
6:20 p.m.
Conservative
6:20 p.m.
Liberal
Marlene Jennings Liberal Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC
It would make it legal for a child to donate. The only difference is that the tax donation would not be in the name of the child, it would be in the name of the parent.
The point is that children should not be donating. That's the point, and I think that's what most Canadians get from this. I think the outrage that you displayed is where you've captured the hearts and minds. And I don't think that most Canadians would agree that it's okay for a child to donate as long as that donation is ticked off in the parent's name. No, I simply cannot support this.
If members of this committee are worried that should this amendment and subamendment be defeated then there is absolutely no age limit, I'm sure we could get consent to revisit my amendment and possibly amend it so that there is an age limit--possibly 16--that would make members more comfortable. I'm sure most Canadians would agree that was reasonable.
6:20 p.m.
Liberal
Brian Murphy Liberal Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB
Yes, I'm just trying to follow the thread. The golden thread here seems to be that there was much ado about stealing and taking lunch money from kids and knocking off kids in school programs for money. Now it's okay, I guess, if the parents do that. We have the parents going to get the lunch money of the kids--that's okay.
It seems to me quite a volte-face, quite a turnaround, quite a display of how what looks good at question period in front of the cameras is actually not what the mainstream governing party believes any more. They probably had lots of donations to their last campaign that were made by people under 18.
It confounds me why, again, the NDP, as well, which has been front and centre on this issue, would accept anything less than the person of legal age--and I submit that in most provinces that is 18--making a contribution to a campaign or a political party.
I wonder what debate we're having that's serious. If there's a serious debate about taking money from children, about not taking their school money and their milk money and all that hyperbole, if that's serious, then Ms. Jennings' amendment was the one to back, not this one. So I can't support it.
6:20 p.m.
Conservative
6:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Tilson
I want to caution members. We're starting to bait each other again, and I don't want that to happen. Everybody has been doing it, and I'm going to start telling members they can't do that.
Mr. Martin.
6:25 p.m.
NDP
Pat Martin NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
Notwithstanding the barbs from two of the Liberals, I'm going to try to rise above that, Mr. Chairman, and simply point out that if we vote this amendment down, and this subamendment, we as a group should commit ourselves to press for better enforcement of the Canada Elections Act, which already makes it a crime to knowingly use a third party's bank account to exceed the donation limits.
That's to answer Mr. Murphy's question. What we're really trying to address is that nobody should be able to donate more than the donation limit by using their children or their aunt or their uncle or their dog or their chipmunk or their squirrel. It's just not allowed. So I think this is a reasonable compromise.
When we did look at Ms. Jennings' proposal to simply ban contributions by anyone under the age of 18, you have to take into consideration that there are youth who are active in our political parties and there are even children--my own children--who may want to donate $10 to their dad's election campaign. I don't think they should be able to do that if they're under the age of 14, but if they're 14, 15, or 16 and they have a paper route, and they want to get involved now instead of waiting until they're 18 years old.... We let them drive a car at age 16; I think we should let them participate over the age of 14.
All of the labour laws in the country contemplate kids of that age being legally of age to work. Why can't they be of a legal age to use some of their paper route money or lunch money that they earned at the corner store for whatever purpose they want? What if it's my nephew and my niece and they want to make that donation?
I would urge you to support this reasonable amendment that any contribution made to a candidate by a minor under the age of 14 is considered to be made by the parent and deducted from their total donation limit.
6:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Tilson
We have a subamendment, “under the age of 14”.
(Subamendment negatived)
(Amendment negatived)
6:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Tilson
We now vote on clause 46. I again remind you this applies to clause 47.
(Clauses 46 and 47 agreed to)
(Clause 59 agreed to)
6:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Tilson
New clause 59.1 is NDP-4.1.
Mr. Martin, that is your amendment.
Oh, sorry, we have a new player here.
Mr. Dewar.
6:25 p.m.
Conservative
