Procedure and House Affairs Committee on Dec. 6th, 2007

[Pauline Picard, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

That Bill C-16, in Clause 7, be amended by replacing line 32 on page 4 with the following:

on each of the four days of advance polling,

This amendment deletes the reference to the Sunday preceding polling day.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

Thank you very much.

As such, my ruling is again the same. It's not that I expect the outcome to be any different, but I have to rule this out of order because it has intentions of deleting the Sunday before.

Is there a challenger on my ruling?

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Of course.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

Mr. Angus had his hand up first, but I do appreciate the enthusiasm over there.

Mr. Angus is asking for a challenge. Can we have a vote on that, please. I'll ask the clerk to read it into the record.

[The Clerk]

Shall the chair's ruling that the amendment is out of order be sustained?

(Ruling of the chair overturned)

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

We'll open debate on the amendment. Does anyone wish to debate the amendment? I'm looking for hands.

[An hon. member]

Call the question.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

(Amendment agreed to)

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

I believe amendment LIB-6 is identical, so we can move past that.

Colleagues, I'll call the question on clause 7.

(Clause 7 as amended agreed to)

(On clause 8)

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

Colleagues, there are two suggested amendments to clause 8, both from the Bloc. May I have someone put amendment BQ-8 on the table?

Yes, Madam Redman.

[Karen Redman, Liberal, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Thank you.

I'm going to ask the experts to help me walk through this one. When we were doing our amendments—

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

Could I just interrupt you? Is this on amendment BQ-8?

[Karen Redman, Liberal, Kitchener Centre, ON]

It is.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

Could I ask Madame Picard to put the amendment on the table first?

[Karen Redman, Liberal, Kitchener Centre, ON]

I would ask that you not, just because it involves the entire clause. My understanding is that if you go line by line, it may preclude what I'm going to say.

I think Madame Picard's suggestion of a pilot project is worthy of debate, so I'm not trying in any way to pre-empt what she's trying to do with this. However, it was the Liberal intention to actually vote down all of clause 8, because that is the only way it would be consistent with the other changes we have effected to this bill.

I would ask, through you to the clerks or the experts at the end of the table, if there is a way we can accommodate this without creating inconsistencies within the body of the bill. Again, this is not meant to pre-empt what the Bloc is trying to do, but we had seen this as just deleting this whole clause and making it a consistent piece of legislation.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

I'm not sure I agree with that, but we'll ask for opinions. Perhaps we should have the Bloc comment on what you've said, and then the experts.

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON]

Chair, are you referring to the amendments in this pack? Are there Liberal amendments in here, in the package?

[Karen Redman, Liberal, Kitchener Centre, ON]

For clarification to Mr. Reid—

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

Madame Redman.

[Karen Redman, Liberal, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. It was our intention to speak against the entire clause 8 and have it deleted, which wouldn't require a notice of motion. I want to put that on the table, recognizing the Bloc have something they want to add to that clause. So it's basically trying to square the circle.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

Okay. I should say that the way we would simply do that is to vote against the clause itself. But we have an amendment here now.

I understand the Bloc are listening. We'll ask them for a comment.

Monsieur Paquette, please.

[Pierre Paquette, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

I don't want to reread the amendment in its entirety, but what it does is replace part of a section, the first paragraph, section 176.1, proposed, by the idea of a "pilot project providing for an additional day of advance polling on the day before polling day" in the case of by-elections.

So the rest of the section is left as is because there have to be modalities provided for holding that election as part of a pilot project. That is why it was not struck out, and at the end, another amendment is added that you have on the next page, which is section 176.11, to make the whole thing consistent.

It is clear that if our amendment were rejected, we would be voting against clause 8 as a whole. What have been retained in clause 8 are the modalities needed so that the pilot project can be conducted.

I agree with Ms. Redman that if our amendment were not passed, the entire clause would have to be deleted. But if we agree on the idea of a pilot project, we also have to provide for the modalities of holding these advance polling stations on the Sunday, the day before polling day, in by-elections.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

I would like a bit more discussion on this before I make a ruling.

Mr. Angus, you had your hand up, then Monsieur Lemieux.

If any of our expert panellists want to jump in here, please identify yourself and I'll let you speak.

Mr. Angus, please.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

My concern, Mr. Chair, is that we're actually looking to codify into law an experiment when we haven't had any recommendations on it. A byelection is very different from a federal election. This is the kind of thing we could have talked about, but I'm not seeing how realistic it is to put into law something that gives the Chief Electoral Officer the ability to “may”--he “may” implement. I mean, laws are very clear. They're yes or they're no; you do this or you don't. That he “may” implement an experiment, to me, is beyond the purview of this bill.

[The Chair, Conservative, Gary Goodyear]

I am wondering if we should half jump ahead here, but I can't make a ruling on something that's not on the floor. So we're kind of going around a little bit.

I don't want to disrespect people who have had their hands up. Mr. Lemieux, you were next, Mr. Preston was after you, and we still haven't heard from our experts. So if you feel we should move to that, then be brief in your comments.

Mr. Lemieux.