Evidence of meeting #95 for Finance in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was pbo.
A video is available from Parliament.
8:45 p.m.
NDP
Pierre-Luc Dusseault NDP Sherbrooke, QC
If we vote against this amendment, if we keep paragraphs (a) and (c), what is the effect of that, as (a) “the information has been made available to the public”?
8:45 p.m.
Assistant Secretary, Machinery of Government, Privy Council Office
If you were to keep things as they were, the three elements are as follows: the information the PBO could reveal, if it's already made public; if the DM has consented in the context of an election, as we've just discussed; and, the PBO is now getting a larger array of information. This provides a check to ensure that sensitive information isn't being inadvertently released into the public sphere. If this were to remain, that would still be in place.
8:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Are you saying it is only with a party's permission that the PBO would do this?
8:45 p.m.
Assistant Secretary, Machinery of Government, Privy Council Office
Referring to 79.5(b) as it currently is, this is only referring to when there's an election costing mandate request, which is at the request of a party. That's all I'm saying.
8:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Seeing no further discussion, we'll vote on LIB-9.
(Amendment agreed to on division [See Minutes of Proceedings])
LIB-9 has been passed and NDP-15 is in conflict, so it will not be dealt with.
On PV-18, is Ms. May around? I know it's deemed moved. Does anybody want to make a point on PV-18?
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
On LIB-10, Ms. O'Connell.
8:45 p.m.
Liberal
Jennifer O'Connell Liberal Pickering—Uxbridge, ON
Mr. Chair, this would ensure that the amendment would require that a one-time review of the legislation be undertaken by a committee of the Senate, of the House of Commons, or both Houses of Parliament that may be designated or established for the purpose, five years after coming into force. This addresses some of the concerns in regard to a review of these changes.
8:45 p.m.
Liberal
8:45 p.m.
Liberal
Jennifer O'Connell Liberal Pickering—Uxbridge, ON
I'll ask for a recorded vote.
(Amendment agreed to: yeas 5; nays 3 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
(Clause 128 as amended agreed to on division)
8:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
We said we'd go until 9 p.m.
There are no amendments to clauses 129 to 158. Are we okay to treat those as a block?
(Clauses 129 to 158 inclusive agreed to on division)
(On clause 159)
We have LIB-11.
8:50 p.m.
Liberal
Jennifer O'Connell Liberal Pickering—Uxbridge, ON
Mr. Chair, I'll move this amendment.
This amendment proposes that the parliamentary budget officer be considered “a federal board, commission or other tribunal” for the specific purpose of subsection 18.3(1) of the Federal Courts Act. This would allow the PBO to seek an opinion from the court on “any question or issue of law, of jurisdiction or of practice and procedure”.
I think this would deal with some of the concerns and amendments in terms of information which Ms. May raised earlier.
8:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Is there any discussion on amendment LIB-11?
(Amendment agreed to on division [See Minutes of Proceedings])
(Clause 159 as amended agreed to on division)
We have no amendments from clause 160 to clause 172. Are we okay to group them?
(Clauses 160 to 172 inclusive agreed to on division)
We'll move on to LIB-12. Who will be speaking to this?
Mr. Fergus, go ahead.
8:50 p.m.
Liberal
Greg Fergus Liberal Hull—Aylmer, QC
Mr. Chair, we are addressing a drafting issue where we want to renumber the act to address the discrepancy between the Parliament of Canada Act and the RCMP Act.
8:50 p.m.
Conservative
Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC
Was this part of the budget originally?
8:50 p.m.
Liberal
Greg Fergus Liberal Hull—Aylmer, QC
This is a consequential amendment after we had drafted the.... The amendment is to the Parliament of Canada Act, and it's really a housekeeping issue, just to make sure that the numbering is correct.
8:50 p.m.
Liberal
8:50 p.m.
Director, Strategic Policy, Privy Council Office
Let me just clarify. It's an amendment to the RCMP Act. There is a clause in the RCMP Act that makes an explicit reference back to the Parliament of Canada Act, and the numbers in the Parliament of Canada Act have changed, so it's just to make the link-up between the RCMP Act and this.
8:50 p.m.
Conservative
Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC
Was there originally a budget measure in the budget document that was related to this, or is this just a housekeeping amendment?
8:50 p.m.
Conservative
Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC
Really? Are you saying it has nothing to do with the economic advancement of the country? I will vote against it.