Evidence of meeting #38 for Industry, Science and Technology in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was clause.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB
I would just agree with my colleague, Mr. Blaney.
Ultimately, given what was being asked for by the witnesses before the committee, this is a very minor compromise, I think, to go from 18 months to 24 months. I don't believe it compromises the legislation. So I'll be supporting it.
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
Okay.
Is there any further debate on Bloc amendment 2?
(Amendment agreed to)
We're now considering government amendment 13. Do I have a mover for government amendment 13?
That's moved by Mr. Lake.
Is there any debate on government amendment 13?
(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
We are now going to consider Bloc amendment 3.
I would like to tell members of the committee that the chair is ruling that the vote on Bloc amendment 3 will apply to Bloc amendments 4 and 5. If Bloc amendment 3 does not carry, it will negate Bloc amendments 4 and 5.
Do I have a mover for Bloc amendment 3?
Mr. Bouchard, thank you very much.
Mr. Masse.
4:05 p.m.
NDP
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
For the record, there wasn't a request asking who was opposed to the earlier motion. I am opposed to that earlier motion. I just want it on the record.
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
Thank you.
Does anyone want to speak to Bloc amendment 3?
Monsieur Bouchard.
4:05 p.m.
Bloc
Robert Bouchard Bloc Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC
If I correctly understand your statement, clauses 3 and 4 are considered automatically agreed to since we've agreed to clause 10. Is that in fact the case?
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
The vote on amendment BQ-2 is separate from the vote on amendment BQ-3. However, if amendment BQ-3 is negatived, amendments BQ-4 and BQ-5 will be rejected as well. All right?
4:10 p.m.
Bloc
Robert Bouchard Bloc Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC
The period of two years that appears here is consistent with clause 10, which we voted on earlier and which appears in amendment BQ-2.
The arguments presented earlier are still valid. For that reason, it would be logical for the committee as a whole to accept and approve that amendment.
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB
I'll just take one second with the officials to clarify.
Bloc amendments 3, 4, and 5 basically need to be consistent with number 2 anyway, right? So it would be silly for us to vote against this one and vote in favour of the other one?
4:10 p.m.
NDP
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
I just want to be clear, for the record as well, that I believe this bill is supposed to be for consumers and their rights. I think this additional time is not necessary, given the types of issues that we have with spam. In another half a year, to allow a very simple process to take place for consumers I think is wrong.
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
Thank you very much, Mr. Masse.
Is there any further comment or question on Bloc amendment 3?
Seeing none, I'm going to call the question on Bloc amendment 3. Members, please note that the vote on Bloc amendment 3 applies to Bloc amendments 4 and 5 as well.
(Amendments agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Thank you very much.
We're now going to go to the consideration of government amendment 14. Do I have a mover?
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB
I so move.
(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
We will now go to the consideration of government amendment 15.
Do I have a mover? It's moved by Mr. Lake.
(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
We have considered all the amendments to clause 10, so I will call the question on clause 10.
(Clause 10 as amended agreed to)
(On clause 11--Unsubscribe mechanism—section 6)
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
We have three amendments proposed to clause 11. We will begin with the consideration of government amendment 16.1.
Do I have a mover for government amendment 16.1?
It's moved by Mr. Lake.
Are there any questions or comments on government amendment 16.1?
Monsieur Bouchard.
4:10 p.m.
An hon. member
Yes.
4:10 p.m.
Bloc
Robert Bouchard Bloc Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC
All right.
I'm moving two subamendments to that amendment. First, paragraph (c) states: "no later than 10 business days". I'm moving: "no later than 30 business days". Then, paragraph (f) states: "no later than 10 business days". I'm moving: "no later than 30 business days". In both cases, "10 days" is replaced by "30 days".
I'd like to point something out to committee members. It is not unusual for a worker to have one month's vacation. In that case, that easily amounts to 30 calendar days. A person may also take three weeks' vacation. That's why we think that 10 business days, that is to say 2 weeks, is much too short a timeframe.
We think that a 30-day timeframe would really be in the interests of citizens. I'm speaking to my colleagues from the Conservative Party and the other parties. In my opinion, this measure would be in the interests of the citizens we represent. We could take up their defence in this matter.
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
Merci, Monsieur Bouchard.
Just to be clear, we are now considering a subamendment to the government amendment 16.1. Monsieur Bouchard has moved a subamendment to the government amendment. That subamendment would modify the government amendment by moving the length of time from 10 business days to 30 days.
So that we're all clear and we're all on the same page, we're not considering the government amendment; we're considering the subamendment as moved by Monsieur Bouchard.
Mr. Masse.
4:15 p.m.
NDP
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
I won't be supporting the motion to amend this. I thought putting 10 business days was a reasonable compromise, because it was 10 days before that. The consequence of this, unfortunately, is that it would probably take around 40 days to unsubscribe someone, and I find that very difficult.
Once again, we're talking about a personal computer, a computer people pay for. They maintain it by providing the software and by making sure that it operates right. They buy the Internet service as well. When you permit an advertisement to come into your memory, they'll do that in a matter of hours.
I think 10 business days, when you request to get off the system, is reasonable. If not, you're going to have to live with additional spam and consequential e-mails for a frustrating period of time, especially if you've been offended by an ad that's come into your mailbox. You'll have to live with ads that are consequential to the actual campaign.
So to me, it's important that it stays the same. I appreciate the Bloc's intent, but I think this change would operate at the expense of consumers.