Evidence of meeting #126 for Procedure and House Affairs in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was agreed.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell
Yes, that's what I meant to say.
(On clause 271)
Amendment CPC-128 has ramifications because it also applies to CPC-131, which is on page 242.
Mr. Nater.
Conservative
John Nater Conservative Perth—Wellington, ON
Chair, this would defer the pre-election spending limits on political parties until after the 2019 election.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell
Oh, I see that this will be popular.
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Since CPC-128 is defeated, CPC-131 is defeated as a consequence.
Now we're going to CPC-129.
There are consequences to this one too. It applies to CPC-159, on page 301, as they both deal with partisan advertising expenses.
Mr. Nater, would you introduce CPC-129, please.
Conservative
John Nater Conservative Perth—Wellington, ON
I would love to, Chair.
This would revert us to the status quo for spending limits in the pre-election period.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell
I can imagine that this will be popular.
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
One person in favour, and four opposed.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
You know you're going to lose, but he makes it worse on them.
NDP
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell
Amendment CPC-129 was just defeated, so CPC-159 is also defeated.
Amendment CPC-130 was withdrawn by the Conservatives.
CPC-131, I think was—
Liberal
Liberal
Conservative
John Nater Conservative Perth—Wellington, ON
This deals with the riding associations and their ability to run pre-election advertisements. It allows them to do so during the pre-writ period.
Liberal
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell
We're on LIB-39.
This has a ramification. Whatever the result of this vote is, it applies to LIB-54, as they are linked by reference.
Could a Liberal propose this amendment, please.
Liberal
David Graham Liberal Laurentides—Labelle, QC
Sure.
This one would allow electoral district associations, EDAs, to “incur partisan advertising expenses” when such expenses are incurred for messages intended “to be transmitted solely, or substantially solely, within the association's electoral district”.
They'd also be allowed to “transmit or cause to be transmitted partisan advertising messages”...“solely, or substantially solely, within the association's electoral district” in the pre-writ period.
Liberal
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
This brings it down to the EDA level in terms of being able to do political advertising.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
Within the district, yes. But if the intention is to clamp down on pre-election spending overall, if you have 338 ridings, especially if there were a coordinated effort, does that not get around the thing that the bill is trying to—?