Industry Committee on Oct. 19th, 2009

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Good afternoon, members of the committee.

Welcome to the 37th meeting of the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology. We're here pursuant to the order of reference of Friday, May 8, 2009, concerning Bill C-27, the Electronic Commerce Protection Act.

We have in front of us today three witnesses from the Department of Industry: Madam Janet DiFrancesco, Mr. Philip Palmer, and Monsieur André Leduc.

Thank you all very much for coming here today.

Before we begin clause-by-clause consideration, I have two interventions, one from Mr. Lake and puis Monsieur Bouchard.

Mr. Lake.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I understand there's going to be a motion coming forward to potentially adjourn. I just wanted to address a couple of things for clarification to ensure that we're clear on where we're headed here in terms of the next meeting.

As the members of the committee know, we put forward ahead of time, in kind of an unprecedented way, a series of potential amendments based on some of the discussions and the witness testimony that we'd heard early on. We had a discussion on this just about two weeks ago today.

Since then, we've all put forward various amendments. I wanted, just for clarification, to highlight what our approach to this has been. We were taking a look at adding five amendments to the ones we had talked about and that were presented in the package we'd given to committee members. The five amendments are pretty minor in scope, but I'll just quickly go through them for the benefit of the members of the committee just to clarify in case there was some misunderstanding.

The amendments that we were taking a look at potentially adding in were fairly minor. There was one to do with PIPEDA, in clause 78, that was going to be put forward on changing PIPEDA. It was just a minor change to the way that had been proposed by the officials in the package that we'd handed out.

There was a second amendment in clause 12 to address an issue that Madam Coady brought up, to do with routing, and that had been brought up by a prominent Canadian company in concern with that issue. It would basically divide clause 12 into two sections and address that issue. I'm sure the officials will be ready to explain that.

There was a third one that would provide some consistency in the way automatic updates were treated in terms of grandfathering in comparison with e-mails.

The fourth one was to deal with clause 10, the way automatic updating would work, and give some clarification to that.

The final change was actually a series of changes having to do with the CRTC and the way they would be enabled to assist other jurisdictions.

Those are the five additional components. They're probably fairly familiar to most of the members of the committee, from testimony that we've heard.

There were three other changes that I wanted to bring to the attention of our committee members just briefly, especially for the purposes of those who might be watching the hearings, given that the meeting might adjourn. I wanted to make sure this was mentioned on the record. Those three would be to deal with subclause 6(5.1), paragraphs (g) and (h), which deal with the issues of surveys and self-governing associations. What we've decided to do is to not move those amendments, to remove those portions of the amendments that we were talking about. So just to be clear, we would not be moving any amendments to this bill in the area of surveys and self-governing organizations.

The other one was to do with referrals, so it affects three other areas. We decided, after the hearings last Wednesday and after consideration, not to move amendments having to do with referrals or to put those in. So in terms of those packages that members of the committee might have had, on any reference to referrals, we will not be moving those amendments, just to be clear.

If I can just look to the officials for a quick second, I want to make sure that I got all of that correct, because I want to make sure everybody's clear on this understanding if we go out of here, if we do wind up adjourning.

First of all, I've correctly summarized the changes from that original package you gave us?

[André Leduc, Policy Analyst, E-Commerce Policy, Department of Industry]

Yes.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

Secondly, I want to assure members, as we're considering the potential of adjourning this meeting, that ultimately most of the amendments we're talking about, most of the amendments we're moving forward, are in the government package of amendments and are amendments that were included in that original discussion we had two weeks ago and in that original package received by all members over two weeks ago. There are these minor things that I've outlined and then the three things that we are actually not going to move ahead with.

But as we're deciding whether or not to adjourn the meeting today, I want to encourage members to know that of course most of what we're talking about has been things we've already discussed, so I guess with that, I'll--

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

But never presented...[Inaudible--Editor].

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

Well, it was presented. Actually, most of it has been presented--

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

Brian will the have the floor in a second, but most of it has been presented in terms of the package that the officials originally gave.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you very much, Mr. Lake, for the clarification of the second round of government amendments. We do appreciate that.

Before we go to Monsieur Bouchard, I want to tell members of the committee that if the committee wishes to adjourn for today, at the next meeting on Wednesday of this week we will be going to clause-by-clause on this bill. So I'd ask that if we do adjourn, you come prepared on Wednesday to go to clause-by-clause.

Monsieur Bouchard.

[Robert Bouchard, Bloc, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My motion is very short: That the committee do now adjourn.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

Could we have a recorded vote, Mr. Chair?

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

There is a request for a recorded vote. I'll ask the clerk to call the vote on the motion that the meeting be now adjourned.

(Motion agreed to: yeas 6; nays 5)

The motion is adopted. The meeting is adjourned.