Procedure and House Affairs Committee on Sept. 28th, 2017

[David Graham, Liberal, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

You talked about third parties. What about parties that don't have a seat in the House, for example, the Rhinoceros Party and the Marijuana Party? Are they affected by these rules?

[Karina Gould, Liberal, Burlington, ON]

No. Small parties without a seat in the House are not affected by these rules. That's really with regard to ensuring that we're not placing an undue burden on organizations that are largely run by volunteers and perhaps are quite small.

[David Graham, Liberal, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Okay.

I want to go back to Mr. Reid's very first question and go a little bit off topic, with the chair's indulgence. Just to put this in perspective for you, we put a lot of work into the CEO report, as you know. There was one issue that we never managed to deal with, and that was recommendation A39 on the broadcasting regime.

I don't know what to do with it. It's a really big thing. It's a very difficult question. I was looking at your mandate letter, and I found that you had another comment with regard to broadcasting related to the “independent commissioner to organize political party leaders' debates”. I'm wondering if there's some way we can help you, or if you can tie these together, or if we should be looking at these together. Do you have any thoughts on that?

[Karina Gould, Liberal, Burlington, ON]

That would actually be very useful if this committee would be interested in engaging on that section of the CEO report with regard to the broadcasting regime and also with an eye to the other element of my mandate with regard to the debates commission. I think this is an important step we do need to take, but I think it would be really useful to hear PROC's input as we move forward in that area as well.

[David Graham, Liberal, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

I still have time. I'll share it with Mr. Simms.

[Scott Simms, Liberal, Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL]

I just have a quick point of clarification. According to the penalties we're talking about—and we're introducing new penalties with this, obviously—we're talking about reimbursing the cost if it's not properly advertised. Is that the full $200? It takes a certain amount of that money to do the event, but what is...? Yes, basically that's it. The $200, the full price, has to come back. So basically the expense of putting off this event falls back onto the association.

[Robert Sampson]

Thank you for the question. If you look at the way the legislation is drafted, it captures both events, where it's a contribution of $200 and an amount paid of $200. What this means is that in the event that it's an amount paid, that's not an amount paid minus the cost of running. It means that as soon as a ticket price hits more than $200, the event is captured. One of the reasons for this was that it can take some time to calculate the exact value of the benefit that's conferred upon an attendee at a fundraiser. So, because there is a 30-day limit for reporting....

[Scott Simms, Liberal, Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL]

Yes, I was asking about the payback, though, the penalty. When you have to pay back the $200 to the individual, is it minus the cost of the event and you reimburse that, or is it the full $200?

[Robert Sampson]

You pay it all back.

[Allen Sutherland, Assistant Secretary to the Cabinet, Machinery of Government, Privy Council Office]

It's whatever the amount is. So, if it's a $400 event, it's $400.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Thank you.

Now we'll go on to Mr. Nater for five minutes.

[John Nater, Conservative, Perth—Wellington, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Minister, for joining us today.

I am new to this committee, so I hope the committee will indulge me. I'm new to the procedure side of things.

[Karina Gould, Liberal, Burlington, ON]

There have been lots of indulgences today.

[John Nater, Conservative, Perth—Wellington, ON]

I appreciate that.

I did enjoy the walk down memory lane of past leadership conventions. I wonder whether there was any consideration given to renaming proposed subsection 384.3(3), which excludes minors from being publicized, in honour of Joe Volpe, from his Liberal leadership run. I wonder if there was any consideration given to that.

[Karina Gould, Liberal, Burlington, ON]

Thank you, and welcome to the committee.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[John Nater, Conservative, Perth—Wellington, ON]

I'm learning from Mr. Christopherson.

[Karina Gould, Liberal, Burlington, ON]

You will note in the legislation that conventions are actually excluded from this, because we recognize that with regard to people who have maybe made contributions...and leaders or cabinet ministers are also party members, so they are therefore going to be there. However, if there were a fundraising event that was organized while a convention was taking place, that would be captured.

[John Nater, Conservative, Perth—Wellington, ON]

For example, next year in Halifax the Liberals will be having their convention. Those who donated $1,500 to the Laurier Club would still have access to the Prime Minister in a private reception in Halifax.

[Karina Gould, Liberal, Burlington, ON]

This would also be the case for the Conservatives or the New Democrats, because the ability to actually regulate the flow at conventions, we understand, would be a considerable burden. However, as with any of the other parties that are represented in the House, if the Conservative Party were organizing their convention, and they had a fundraiser with their party leader that was separate from the actual convention itself, and where there was an additional requirement to pay, that would be captured.

[John Nater, Conservative, Perth—Wellington, ON]

So you can still advertise the Laurier Club, have the donations in advance, and have the event—

[Karina Gould, Liberal, Burlington, ON]

Well, it would be separate. Again, understand that as a convention, people are going to be milling around. That would be a very big burden for any party, including the Conservatives or the New Democrats.

[John Nater, Conservative, Perth—Wellington, ON]

I'm just stating that there is that exception. You could advertise the $1,500 donation for a private reception.

[Karina Gould, Liberal, Burlington, ON]

Yes, that was done based on consultations with all of the political parties ahead of time, really trying to balance that need for transparency and accountability, but also recognizing what's doable and reasonable when you have really large crowds.

[John Nater, Conservative, Perth—Wellington, ON]

I want to get back to the five-day notice, which a number of members have commented on. I know many members host annual events, which are long-standing events. Often RSVPs come in late. If a minister were to RSVP to attend a member's fundraising event within two or three days of the event, what would happen? Would they be permitted to attend the event, or would they be forbidden—