Mr. Boulerice.
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.
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.
October 17th, 2018 / 3:45 p.m.
NDP
Alexandre Boulerice NDP Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC
I would like to ask Mr. Morin a question.
Based on your understanding of this proposal by the Conservative Party, what would happen if organizations with a common objective, such as protecting green spaces or endangered species, wanted to establish a pre-election or election coalition to bring pressure to bear or to conduct public information and awareness activities in order to promote their issue during an election campaign?
Would that constitute collusion? I call it a coalition, and that's part of everyday life.
3:50 p.m.
LCdr Jean-François Morin
Thank you very much for your question, Mr. Boulerice.
For the purposes of this debate, I would note that the aim of Conservative amendment CPC-100 is limited to the election period. The proposed changes concern part 17 of the Canada Elections Act, which addresses the activities of third parties during the election period.
Amendment CPC-100 concerns two separate subjects. Paragraphs (a) and (b) of the amendment address situations in which a third party and a registered party, or a third party and a candidate act in collusion with each other.
The only place where the bill refers to third parties that act in coordination with each other is paragraph (c) of the amendment, which provides for the new subsection (4), which reads as follows:
(4) No third party shall act in collusion with any other third party - including by sharing information - in order to influence either third party in its partisan activities that it carries out..., its election advertising or its election surveys...
The particular feature of a third party as set forth in the Canada Elections Act is that a third party can really be anyone except a candidate or a political party. The Canada Elections Act already provides that third parties may associate with each other. A third party may be a person, a business or a corporation, but it is also possible for a number of persons, corporations or associations to combine to form a third party.
Where the term "third party" is used in the Canada Elections Act, it refers to all third parties.
3:50 p.m.
NDP
Alexandre Boulerice NDP Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC
In other words, a coalition can be a third party.
3:50 p.m.
LCdr Jean-François Morin
Yes, absolutely.
Where we want to single out certain third parties more specifically, we will refer to registered third parties, for example, which must file certain expense reports.
I don't mean to suggest what action the committee should take, but the prohibition is so broad that it would be difficult to enforce, given the very definition of "third party", which is equally broad.
3:50 p.m.
Liberal
David Graham Liberal Laurentides—Labelle, QC
I think I've already made our position fairly clear on this. I don't think we need to beat this to death.
Just to be clear, as this amendment, especially proposed subclause (4) suggests, for the sake of argument, if the director of the Sierra Club sends a message on Facebook to the director of Greenpeace that influences the message they post on the next Facebook post, that would count as collusion of information for purposes of influencing the election. I think that's a very dangerous precedent to be setting. I think on that basis this cannot be supported in any way. Thank you for that.
3:50 p.m.
Conservative
John Nater Conservative Perth—Wellington, ON
If a third party is effectively campaigning on issue x, which directly benefits a registered political party determining the fair market value of that campaigning services, would that be considered non-monetary contribution to a political party?
3:50 p.m.
LCdr Jean-François Morin
During the pre-election period, which we discussed yesterday, only partisan advertising, partisan activities and election surveys are covered. During the election period we are including everything, including issue advertising. To the extent that a third party supports a registered party and does so in a manner that does not bring the third party to exceed its spending limit, that's fine. That is already within the scope of part 17 of the act.
No, it does not constitute a non-monetary contribution.
3:50 p.m.
Calgary Midnapore, CPC
In closing, in many of these amendments we are putting forward, I foresee infinite hypothetical situations, which we couldn't possibly anticipate here in this committee at this moment. Yet I feel they will come to pass in 2019 and we will look back and say that CPC-99 would have addressed something like this.
I feel very strongly about that. It's for those reasons I think we continue to push for stronger, clearer definitions of these things such as collusion.
Thank you.
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
3:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell
Amendment CPC-101 was a victim of CPC-98. We'll go to CPC-101.1.
Could the Conservatives present that, please.
3:55 p.m.
Conservative
John Nater Conservative Perth—Wellington, ON
I have a good feeling about this amendment.
This makes a relatively minor change on page 127 of the bill at line 20. It replaces the words “only activity carried on in Canada during an election period” with “primary purpose in Canada during an election period is to influence”, and then there's the remainder of the clause.
I think this is eminently supportable. I have a sense that it might be supported.
3:55 p.m.
Conservative
John Nater Conservative Perth—Wellington, ON
It's not quite as strong as I would like to see it, but I think it's....
3:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell
Perhaps I could test if there's support.
(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
There's great co-operation in this committee. It's the presentation that did it, I think.
We'll now go to one of the new amendments that were tabled later, reference 10008289.
Could the Conservatives present this amendment, please.
3:55 p.m.
Calgary Midnapore, CPC
I'm not confident it will be met with support, considering it returns to treating as foreign third parties those entities incorporated in Canada but with foreign directing minds whose primary purpose is political activity. I believe my colleagues and I have tried to emphasize what we believe is the necessity of this clause relative to things such as the primary purpose of political activity, further clarifying, as we see, foreign directing minds. I am slightly comforted in that I feel CPC-101.1, this higher threshold, provides some coverage for that but not nearly what we believe is necessary. Unless my colleague Mr. Nater has anything to add, I will leave it at that and save us some time as well this evening.
3:55 p.m.
Liberal
3:55 p.m.
Some hon. members
Oh, oh!
3:55 p.m.
Liberal
David Graham Liberal Laurentides—Labelle, QC
I was just going to say that I think we dealt with this topic yesterday.
3:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell
Okay, we'll vote on the new CPC amendment, reference number 10008289.
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
We're now going to amendment CPC-102. If it is adopted, amendment LIB-31 cannot be moved, as both amend the same line.
Would the Conservatives introduce amendment CPC-102.
3:55 p.m.
Calgary Midnapore, CPC
I believe, relevant to yesterday, that this is something that was recommended by the commissioner of Canada elections.
I feel there is some consensus in regard to this from the government. I will leave it at that, Mr. Chair.