That sounded like a potentially good distinction, not that I think the government would buy it.
Basically, it's replacing the sentence that reads, “Such a process may not be used for an official vote” with “Such a process, if undertaken during a general election, may not be used for an official vote”. The rest of the sentence reads “without the prior approval of the committees of the Senate and of the House of Commons that normally consider electoral matters or, in the case of an alternative electronic voting process, without the prior approval of the Senate and the House of Commons”.
I'm not sure. It's getting late and I know you're brilliant, so it looks like it makes sense.