Are there further comments?
Evidence of meeting #9 for Procedure and House Affairs in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was list.
Evidence of meeting #9 for Procedure and House Affairs in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was list.
12:45 p.m.
Executive Director, Conservative Party of Canada
I was asked that question in committee this morning.
The new Accountability Act sets up some strict criteria for merit appointment. I would trust Mr. Kingsley and the Canada Elections Act people to do that. An open, public competition, I suppose.... I think being a returning officer is a particularly unique job, and the act, if it becomes law, will bring enough protection.
12:45 p.m.
Conservative
12:45 p.m.
NDP
Yvon Godin NDP Acadie—Bathurst, NB
I want to go back to the youth issue. It troubles me a bit.
You didn't say this, but I believe it would be almost discrimination against young people to prevent them from taking part in the life of a political party. However, the act allows a parent to use the name of a one-year-old child, which is contrary to the spirit of the act. There is indeed no age limit. It was said that you need to be at least 14 to become a member of a political party and that, consequently, young people can give money from the age of 14. We won't start playing around with three or four-year-old children.
The government is currently very serious about children not having sexual relations before the age of 16. I believe that's discrimination in that regard. It wants the age of consent to be set at 16, but there's no problem when it comes to a 14-year-old who wants to give money to a political party. That was just a comment.
The other problem concerns signatures in order to become a candidate. We have to be careful. The number can be lowered to 50, but, if it's lowered to zero, anyone on the street can become a candidate. There would be no control. Someone has to be able to support a person who wants to run as a candidate. If the person who wants to run as a candidate can't gather 50 signatures, in the public's view, that person should not be a candidate because he or she doesn't have enough support. There wouldn't be all these people giving $1,000. On the other hand, if a person who wants to run as a candidate doesn't need 50 signatures, anyone can give him $5,000 because he wants that person to run.
So signatures are a form of protection, and I think we have to be careful about that.
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Goodyear
Are there comments from the panellists on that? I didn't hear a question in that. Are there any comments? We have exactly one minute and sixteen seconds.
12:50 p.m.
NDP
Yvon Godin NDP Acadie—Bathurst, NB
If there are no questions, I would like to hear the comments on what I have said.
12:50 p.m.
General Director, Bloc Québécois
We agree on the idea of keeping the number of registered voters per candidate at 100 so that a person can run as an official candidate. This practice exists. It's not a problem for us, and it guarantees a minimum degree of serious intent in candidates appearing on the list. There shouldn't be any homonyms simply to undermine the conduct of the vote.
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
12:50 p.m.
Legal Counsel, Conservative Fund of Canada, Conservative Party of Canada
I want to emphasize that the act is clear: a parent cannot make a donation on behalf of his one-year-old child. It is very clear that the child's own funds must be used to make donations. That's already provided by the act. I don't know whether that addresses your concerns.
12:50 p.m.
NDP
Yvon Godin NDP Acadie—Bathurst, NB
We should conduct a survey on the way cheques are written. You're dreaming in technicolor if you think a five-year-old child has $5,000 in the bank and wants to give it to a political party. Let's not dream in technicolor. Shouldn't we add a form of protection in the act to prevent these things from occurring and to prevent abuses?
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Gary Goodyear
We'll take that under review.
Right now we have finished our third round, and I must thank everybody, members and witnesses alike. We've got through a lot of business today.
I would like to take a special moment to thank all the witnesses from the Conservative Party, the Liberal Party, the Bloc, and the NDP. I must say that you came very well prepared. You answered our questions directly. I suspect that our clerk will make sure that we have copies of your reports distributed to all members in both official languages.
I would also request that maybe if some of the members have other questions, they may get a hold of you in the next few days to seek answers, or if you think of things that you would like the committee to know about that you did not have a chance to get out today, please feel free to submit them to me. I will make sure that all members get a copy.
And finally, in closing, I just want to express our sincerest thank you. I know it was a busy day and a short time period. We appreciate you showing up before the committee.
Before the members leave, I'd like to just cover some reminders to the committee members. Next Tuesday we will be dealing with private members' business. The following meeting we will not have the Chief Electoral Officer or the commissioner here. We will continue with our conversation about this the meeting after that, when they will be available. There was a conflict in their schedules.
Is there any further business?
Thank you very much. The meeting is adjourned.
