Evidence of meeting #74 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 event.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON
I don't think there is an inherent conflict between—
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON
Am I wrong? Is it the case that there is actually a conflicting purpose?
Liberal
Andy Fillmore Liberal Halifax, NS
Mr. Chair, I could perhaps shed some light on that, if invited to do so.
Liberal
Andy Fillmore Liberal Halifax, NS
Thank you.
I think Ms. May's amendment is trying to impose the reporting requirements required at any time outside of a writ within the writ period. That would be the five-day advance notice and prompt reporting and all.
What the Liberal amendment is saying is that during the chaos of a writ—all the moving parts moving very quickly and stressed-out volunteers and everything—we would have a different regime, wherein all that reporting would happen after the fact, at the end of the writ period.
There is a difference in purpose here. We are very specifically trying to relieve the intense pressure on volunteers to do reporting when there is so much else going on in their and everyone else's lives during the writ period.
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON
That's certainly the case; there are pressures.
Let me deal with it this way. Mr. Chair, I'm going to propose an amendment to LIB-3. If you go down to paragraph (b) in proposed subsection 384.3(7), you see that it says:
Subsections (1) to (6.1) do not apply in respect of a reg-
Do you see that? We'd just delete the words ”do not” and add in “continue to”, and that would accomplish exactly what Ms. May is trying to accomplish, while not eliminating or altering any other text in the Liberal amendment.
I think that would work. I don't think there's any technical problem with that. I'll just pass that to the clerk.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell
Do people understand what Mr. Reid's proposing? Is there any discussion?
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON
Why don't I just bring it down to show Mr. Christopherson?
Liberal
Liberal
Ruby Sahota Liberal Brampton North, ON
I'm not sure I understand it still. I know that you had the benefit of seeing the visual, but....
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON
Maybe the chair can either show it or read it.
Liberal
October 19th, 2017 / 11:50 a.m.
Liberal
Liberal
Chris Bittle Liberal St. Catharines, ON
Just very quickly, and to echo Mr. Fillmore's comments, we've all been through the election, and decisions happen in—I don't want to say moments, but you can find out the next day if a particular individual is coming to your riding, be it the Prime Minister or be it a party leader, so for logistic reasons I don't think I can support this subamendment.
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON
Mr. Chair, I wonder if we could just inquire for certainty—I did just do this on the fly—from the officials whether what I am proposing would have the effect of causing both the 30-day and the five-day requirements to apply or not. Could we ask them?
Conservative
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON
It was what I was trying to do on the fly, but I'm actually not sure it accomplishes that. I just have to make sure that we all understand what's just happened, including me.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell
Mr. Reid wants to know if the amendment he just proposed will cause the reporting to be the same during an election period as outside an election period.
Policy Advisor, Democratic Institutions, Privy Council Office
Could we see what Mr. Reid has proposed?
