Thank you, Mr. Chair.
The bill before us comes directly from the witnesses, even though there were very few of them. We did not have an opportunity to hear testimony from all agents of Parliament. We nevertheless heard from two who expressed their concern over the fact that the expression "partisan manner" was not defined.
I simply want to remind the committee that Michael Ferguson emphasized in his testimony that, since the term "partisan manner" was not defined, an agent of Parliament would have to do it, which could cause problems. Mary Dawson said the same thing. These people said they were concerned about the idea that a definition of the term "partisan manner" is not included in the act. Once again, that could lead to a witch hunt that would be based on a vague and ultimately undefined notion.
I also recall the letter that came from all the agents of Parliament and that was submitted to the committee. It read as follows:
For instance, in the absence of the definition of partisan conduct, it is unclear how this notion would differ from the definition of political activity contained in the Public Service Employment Act (PSEA).
In this amendment, we are asking that the definition correspond to what appears in the Public Service Employment Act. That will therefore be a direct response to the concern expressed by those individuals. I believe that is entirely wise. I also think it is our responsibility, during clause-by-clause consideration of the bill, to consider what the witnesses expressed and to respond to their concerns. That is precisely what the amendment does. I hope that all my colleagues will support this amendment so that we can improve what is basically a bad bill.