Industry Committee on Oct. 21st, 2009

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

I agree with what Mr. Masse is saying. If a company is undertaking to send commercial e-mails to people, they have a responsibility to man the unsubscribed mechanism and make sure they're responding to people who want to unsubscribe. Think of a situation where there's a limited time offer and the company is putting out e-mail after e-mail to advertise it during a short timeframe. It might get frustrating for a person. After the third or fourth e-mail, the person might send a note saying she wants to be unsubscribed. We don't want to see 30 more days of this barrage of e-mails coming at the consumer.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you, Mr. Lake.

Mr. Rota.

[Anthony Rota, Liberal, Nipissing—Timiskaming, ON]

I've heard different figures being thrown around—30 days, 30 business days, 10 business days. What is the figure we're looking at here?

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

We are currently considering the Bloc subamendment to the government's amendment, which would change the timeframe from 10 business days to 30 calendar days. The chair has ruled that this is what's under consideration. So we're currently considering the Bloc subamendment that would lengthen the time from 10 business days to 30 calendar days.

Do you have any further comment, Mr. Rota?

Madam Coady, do you have anything to add?

[Siobhan Coady, Liberal, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

It was the same point.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Okay, thank you.

Monsieur Bouchard.

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

I simply have one final comment to make.

We are proposing 30 days as a result of witnesses who have come to testify before the committee. According to the documentation I have before me, the representative of the Mouvement Desjardins talked about 31 days. The Mouvement Desjardins is a cooperative business, and its representative presented us with reasonable comments. That is why I want to make members aware of the suggestion made by that business. We thought the proposal made by the Mouvement Desjardins had merit, and we are open to that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you, Mr. Bouchard.

Mr. Blaney.

[Steven Blaney, Conservative, Lévis—Bellechasse, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I want to reassure my colleague opposite. We're talking about Yvan-Pierre Grimard, who appeared before the committee. In his brief, he indeed talked about 31 days, but I was informed that 10 business days was suitable, as the government's amendment proposes. Perhaps more was requested, but what is proposed in the initial amendment... So I will stick to the 10 business days.

It's a pleasure for me to have the largest Canadian cooperative movement in my committee, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you.

Are there any further questions or comments on the Bloc subamendment?

Seeing none, I will call the question on the Bloc subamendment to lengthen the time from 10 business days to 30 calendar days.

(Subamendment negatived)

We now go back to the consideration of government amendment G-16.1, which was moved by Mr. Lake. Is there any further debate on government amendment G-16.1?

Seeing none, I call the question.

(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

Since we have already considered the subamendment to government amendment G-16.1, as proposed by Monsieur Bouchard, Bloc amendments BQ-6 and BQ- shall not be considered at this juncture.

I call the question on clause 11 as amended by government amendment G-16.1.

(Clause 11 as amended agreed to)

(On clause 12—Contravention of section 6 or 7)

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

We have two amendments proposed for clause 12. We will begin with government amendment G-17. Do I have a mover for amendment G-17?

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

I so move.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you.

Do any members wish to speak to government amendment G-17?

Seeing none, I call the question on government amendment G-17.

(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

Since government amendment G-17 has carried, that has negated Liberal amendment L-3.

Seeing no other amendments under consideration, we will go to the consideration of clause 12 as amended.

Monsieur Bouchard.

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

I would like an explanation: was L-3 negatived?

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Yes.

If there is no further debate on clause 12 as it has been amended by government amendment G-17, I will call the question.

(Clause 12 as amended agreed to)

(Clauses 13 and 14 agreed to)

(On clause 15—Preservation demand)

On clause 15 we have one amendment. It is government amendment G-18.

Do I have a mover for government amendment G-18?

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

I so move.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Is there any debate on government amendment G-18?

Mr. Bouchard.

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

No, I have questions.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

All right, go ahead.

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

I would like to have an explanation from officials concerning paragraphs (b) and (c) of amendment motion G-18.

Could you provide the reasons for those two amendments?

[Philip Palmer]

Yes. This was proposed by the Chairman of the Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission. He noted that our biggest North American economic partner has provisions in its laws greatly encouraging and facilitating the exchange of information on offences such as those found in this bill. In this case, the Americans are ready to use their powers to obtain evidence so as to help us, and we are also ready to use our powers to obtain the evidence requested by the Americans. This is one way of facilitating the implementation of the act and the international effort to suppress spam and the other problems addressed by the bill.

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

You're talking about the Americans, but we're talking about a foreign state, and I believe we're talking about all foreign states, not just the United States. That's one example that you're citing.

[Philip Palmer]

Yes. That's one example. This is also the case of Australia, and the European Union. All have laws and bills targeting exactly these problems.

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

When the act comes into force, how many states could be affected? Have you determined what states will be a concern? Do you know the number of countries that will be concerned by this clause?

[André Leduc]

We know we are the last G8 country to introduce this kind of bill. Only three OECD countries do not have this kind of act. I don't know the exact number—I don't know the acts and bills of all the countries—but I know there are a number. We're lagging behind.