Evidence of meeting #127 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 elections.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Noon
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
If we have agreed to this principle already, this question between divisions and stations....
Noon
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell
We would need to change this to say “polling division”. Is that right, or is it “polling station”?
Noon
Liberal
David Graham Liberal Laurentides—Labelle, QC
In each polling division within the station....
I don't know what the language would be, but you have to be consistent.
Noon
LCdr Jean-François Morin
Exactly. In electoral law, in practice, a polling division is a geographical area. A polling station is a place. You cannot reside in a polling station, so we need to massage the language a little bit to refer to the geographical area itself.
Noon
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell
It would be the polling divisions that are included in that polling station.
Noon
LCdr Jean-François Morin
Yes.
Noon
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
Then my question specifically is, if the language then changed, the other elector resides in the polling division. Does that satisfy the “not living within the polling station” concerns?
Noon
LCdr Jean-François Morin
It would need to say “the other elector resides in a polling division associated with the polling station”. Then there was another Liberal motion related to vouching in long-term care facilities that has already amended that line.
Noon
LCdr Jean-François Morin
It was with slightly different language to accommodate for the special mechanism that was created for long-term care facilities.
Noon
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
I want the language to be clear. Perhaps, then, we're into a subamendment conversation.
Noon
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell
You can't amend your own motion, but get someone to make that subamendment.
Noon
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell
Mr. Graham, okay, the subamendment is that the elector resides in a polling division in that polling station.
Noon
LCdr Jean-François Morin
Mr. Chair, my colleague Trevor would like to say something.
Noon
Senior Counsel, Legal Services, Elections Canada
In section 120 what we talk about is a polling division "assigned" to the polling station—rattachée.
Noon
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell
Okay, then it is lives in a polling division assigned to that polling station.
Noon
Conservative
John Nater Conservative Perth—Wellington, ON
I'm going over the blues from the meeting where we dealt with NDP-8, and at that point in time the Chair said this:
We now have NDP-8. Just so you know, NDP-8 also applies to NDP-9 on page 67, NDP-11 on page 78, NDP-16 on page 114, and NDP-26 on page 352. It's to replace....
I just wonder under what provision we're able to now do this.
12:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell
Yes. Later on we said we'd put those back in when we get to them, which is now, for discussion, for that reason.
(Subamendment agreed to)
(Amendment as amended agreed to)
I will get the clerk to read the subamendment, just to make sure everyone knows what we just approved.
12:05 p.m.
Philippe Méla Legislative Clerk
I'm reading the whole amendment as it stands right now. It's that Bill C-76 in clause 372 be amended by replacing line 6 on page 229 with the following:
(a) the other elector resides in a polling division assigned to the polling station.
12:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell
That was passed.
There was also a Liberal amendment, Liberal-63, which passed consequential to Liberal-9.
(Clause 372 as amended agreed to on division)
(Clause 373 agreed to)
Clause 374 had one amendment, CPC-191, but it was defeated consequential to CPC-175.
(Clause 374 agreed to on division)
(Clause 375 agreed to)
(On clause 376)
We are now on clause 376. There is amendment CPC-192. Who will present that?