Industry Committee on Oct. 26th, 2009

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Good afternoon, everyone. Welcome to the 39th meeting of the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology.

We're here to review Bill C-27, the Electronic Commerce Protection Act, clause by clause. This is a continuation of the clause-by-clause consideration of our last meeting. We will begin today by considering clause 63.

(On clause 63--Regulations--Governor in Council)

I understand that we have two amendments to clause 63, government amendments 49.1 and 50.

You all should have in front of you a package of amendments that are listed in order.

Go ahead, Madam Coady.

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

When are we going to go back and deal with clause 51?

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

At the end.

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

At the very end, okay. Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

You'll note in your orders of the day that clause 51 is second to last, just before clause 2.

We'll begin with government amendment 49.1, moved by Mr. Lake. Is there any discussion of this amendment?

Mr. Lake, do you want to speak to it?

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

No.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Seeing no further debate on government amendment 49.1, I'm going to call the question.

(Amendment agreed to) [See Minutes of Proceedings]

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

We will now move to government amendment 50, moved by Mr. Lake. Is there any discussion of G-50?

(Amendment agreed to) [See Minutes of Proceedings]

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Are there any further amendments to clause 63?

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

Just to speak to it for a second, I have an amendment that's coming for clause 63.1, which we haven't dealt with yet. So is it okay to move clause 63 without moving on to 63.1?

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

That's right.

(Clause 63 as amended agreed to)

(Clause 63.1)

Now we are discussing a new clause, clause 63.1

Right now we are discussing new clause 63.1, for which we have three motions. The first one is a motion to establish the new clause, and the second two are amendments to modify the clause. It's actually a series of three new clauses to create 63.1.

[Wayne Cole, Legislative Clerk, Committees Directorate, House of Commons]

We will number them if they're adopted.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

We'll begin in the order in which they were received, beginning with NDP-1. It's moved by Mr. Masse.

Is there any discussion on NDP-1?

Mr. Lake.

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

I'd just like to move what I think is a friendly amendment to this. Can we just strike the word “every” at the beginning?

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

That's friendly.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Okay, so NDP-1 has been moved by Mr. Masse, with the removal of the word “every” at the beginning of the sentence.

Is there any discussion on NDP-1, as moved by Mr. Masse, together with Mr. Lake's friendly amendment? I think it's fairly clear. Seeing no further discussion on NDP-1, which calls for a three-year review of the act, I will call the question.

(Amendment agreed to) [See Minutes of Proceedings]

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you very much, Mr. Masse.

We'll now consider government amendment 51.1. This is moved by Mr. Lake.

Is there any discussion on G-51.1?

I just want to point out to members of the committee that government amendment 51.1 will be renumbered so it reflects all of the changes to the bill. The numbers in G-51.1 will be renumbered from 63.1 to whatever is sequential in the document.

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

It would be clauses 63.2 and 63.3. Is that right?

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Yes.

(Amendment agreed to) [See Minutes of Proceedings]

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Now I understand we have an amendment from Monsieur Garneau, as moved by him.

Mr. Garneau, would you care to speak to this amendment?

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC]

It's a reintroduction, Mr. Chair, of an amendment the government withdrew. The rationale is that without this amendment, legitimate professionals will be impeded from following up on third-party referrals by e-mail. We think there are enough safeguards in here to ensure this is not going to constitute spam. It's certainly very, very important for organizations like realtors.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you, Mr. Garneau.

The legislative clerk has just informed me that in his view—and it's mine as well—this amendment is out of order because, according to Marleau-Montpetit on page 656,

An amendment is also out of order if it is moved at the wrong place in the bill, if it is tendered in a spirit of mockery, or if it is vague or trifling. As well, an amendment is out of order if it refers to...subsequent amendments or schedules of which notice has not been given, or if it is otherwise incomplete.

Because this amendment refers to an earlier clause that has been adopted by the committee, clause 10, and because it modifies that earlier adopted clause, it is out of order.

Now, if there is unanimous consent on the part of the committee to reopen clause 10, we can proceed with this amendment. But if there isn't unanimous consent in this committee to reopen clause 10, which has already been adopted, then I cannot allow this amendment to stand.

Mr. Garneau, do you have any questions about that?

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC]

May we ask to see if there is unanimous consent?

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Is there unanimous consent to reopen clause 10 of this bill?

[Some hon. members]

No.