Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I need to put on the record that, on every occasion, I appear under the format of motions that are identical and that are passed by every committee immediately following every election. They were originally designed by the Prime Minister's office under Stephen Harper to deprive me of rights I would otherwise have to present substantive amendments at report stage. I apologize for taking a moment to explain that I'm here under rules the committee passed that make a mockery of the notion that the committee is the master of its own process, since miraculously identical motions were passed at the same time by all committees simultaneously, depriving me of rights that I have.
In this case, Mr. Chair, the amendments I'm bringing forward are exactly what was in Bill C-65, which died on the Order Paper on January 6, 2025. At one point, at least, the government approved the suggestions being made through Elections Canada. In testimony before this committee in relation to Bill C-25, I put a question to the Chief Electoral Officer about the recommendations that were previously made, and about the support of Elections Canada for changes that were previously made. I'm not a witness, so I won't say what specific impact it had on my party in the last election, but Bill C-65 and its changes died on the Order Paper.
Amendment PV-1 is very straightforward. It's saying that we support the increased integrity measures found in Bill C-25, but we don't want these measures to raise barriers to entry for candidates running as independents, candidates in smaller parties or candidates in small, remote communities. The amendment speaks for itself. It's very straightforward. In effect, it says that it should be 75 signatures on the nomination papers. With all the other rules in place, and with a witness present, it would be 75 electors from that electoral district.
Again, given that this was in previous legislation, I hope committee members will see fit to accept the amendment.
Thank you.