Evidence of meeting #58 for Industry, Science and Technology in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was mandatory.
A recording is available from Parliament.
9:10 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Dan Ruimy
The first step is that he has to move it and put it in.
They are very similar, so the ruling would apply to both.
9:10 a.m.
Conservative
Alex Nuttall Conservative Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, ON
The amendment is:
That Bill C-36, in Clause 5, be amended by replacing line 19 on page 5 with the following:
Statistician, not more than 20 other members appointed
Throughout this process, one of the things that our team on this side of the aisle has been asking about has been the number of members for the committee, the reduction of the number of members, and the effects this would have on the job that's getting done. You can look at some of the witnesses and some of the information that was brought forward in terms of what was being recommended, and compare it with that of some other countries around the world. New Zealand was one that came up repeatedly. This is a country that is very small compared to Canada, and it has 20 members on its advisory committee. Obviously, we're going to a much smaller place with less diversity and fewer persons around the table. The thought on this was essentially to allow us to at least match what New Zealand has and go from there, and also to be in line with other OECD countries on this subject.
9:15 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Dan Ruimy
Thank you.
I have a ruling from the chair. Bill C-36 seeks to amend the Statistics Act by creating the Canadian statistics advisory council, composed of not more than 10 members. The amendment attempts to increase the number of members on the council. As House of Commons Procedure and Practice, Second Edition, states on pages 767 and 768:
Since an amendment may not infringe upon the financial initiative of the Crown, it is inadmissible if it imposes a charge on the public treasury, or if it extends the objects or purposes or relaxes the conditions and qualifications specified in the royal recommendation.
In the opinion of the chair, since the amendment proposes to increase the number of members on the council, it imposes a charge on the public treasury; therefore, I rule the amendment inadmissible. That would apply to amendment NDP-4 as well.
For the record, Mr. Masse, did you want to move yours or not?
9:15 a.m.
NDP
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
For the record, I am going to move it, yes, because there is a difference.
I won't ask you to read your decision, but our amendment is that Bill C-36 in clause 5 be amended by replacing line 19 on page 5 with the following:
Statistician, at least 19 other members
This is the difference.
who represent a broad range of disciplines, skill sets and regions of Canada who are appointed
9:15 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Dan Ruimy
Thank you.
Again, for the reasons stated prior, that is ruled inadmissible.
We're going to move to amendment PV-3.
Ms. May, you have the floor again.
9:15 a.m.
Green
Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC
Mr. Chair, we have a theme on the question of the numbers of people on the advisory panel. To refresh your memories as to evidence from experts and from former chief statisticians, Wayne Smith recommended a 24-member council; Professor Thomas recommended 20; and, Munir Sheikh confirmed that he thought 10, as is currently in the act, was too few, and 40 was too many, and that somewhere in there we could have something else. The expert evidence before this committee was unanimous that 10 committee members were not enough.
My third amendment again attempts—in the same section as the Conservative and NDP amendments have attempted to do it—to replace the number of people. I'm suggesting, at line 19 on page 5, replacing that with “not more than 20” other members appointed. The same issue occurs in terms of the royal recommendation issue, then, but I'm happy, if anyone wanted to amend this from the government side to adopt the different number of members, to remove my subsection related to remuneration. That's the purpose of my amendment: to be reflecting the expert evidence that the committee has heard. I think it would be a shame to see the bill going through the committee without a single additional reflection of the evidence you heard, as it appears to be doing.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
9:15 a.m.
Liberal
Chandra Arya Liberal Nepean, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
The number of advisers available to the chief statistician is quite huge. We have seven federal-provincial committees and 13 advisory committees. We have about 200 members in these committees who are available to advise the chief statistician.
We have this council of 10 to provide strategic advice. None of the witnesses had any reason for why it has to be 15, say, why it has to be 20, or why it can be as low as 10. There is no hard and fast rule. In my experience at a board level, especially when strategic advice is the main factor, a smaller board is always good. I would have preferred six to eight, but 10 seems to be reasonable. That allows the chief statistician to have one-to-one conversations and keep that personal relationship with every member of the council. I feel that we should stick to 10.
9:20 a.m.
NDP
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
On hearing that from Mr. Arya, would he be interested, then, in making an amendment that he prefers the number to be from six to eight?
9:20 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Dan Ruimy
Is there further debate on PV-3? Seeing no further debate, shall PV-3 carry?
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
(Clauses 5 to 9 inclusive agreed to on division)
(On clause 10)
9:20 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Dan Ruimy
Thank you.
We're going to move to clause 10, and we're at CPC-2.
Mr. Nuttall.
9:20 a.m.
Conservative
Alex Nuttall Conservative Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, ON
Mr. Chair, the amendment reads:
That Bill C-36, in Clause 10, be amended by replacing line 7 on page 8 with the following:
taken, but only if the person to whom the information relates consents, at the time of the census, to the release of the information ninety-two years later.
This is an amendment that was put forward by Mr. Dreeshen, which I'm proposing on his behalf. I'd like to read some of his notes that he passed on to me.
“Bill C-36 proposes that starting with 2021, census records be automatically made available with no provision or consent if they want their information public or not. This amendment will change the original text of the bill to include a provision that will respect privacy by default. Canadians expect us to respect their right to have their information kept private should they choose to do so.”
“We can't compromise on privacy, and for an average Canadian to hear about this bill and this provision on census data will create questions about how secure the information really is in the hands of the government.”
The general message that Mr. Dreeshen is trying to get across, and certainly I share it as well, is that as we're going through this process, first of all, Canadians need to know what the changes are going to be. We need to ensure that it's properly communicated to them, but also that we get feedback from them through the process so that they understand their personal information could eventually end up out there. Certainly the general statement is to protect privacy at all costs.
I will leave that on the floor and certainly welcome any questions or debate.
9:20 a.m.
Liberal
Frank Baylis Liberal Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC
I think it's commendable to try to find the right balance between the need for information and protecting the privacy of Canadians.
The challenge here is that it also becomes a cost analysis, and it becomes extremely onerous if every single person has to be contacted. We end up really digging into the treasury. For this reason, I oppose this.
9:20 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Dan Ruimy
Thank you.
Seeing no further debate, we will vote on CPC-2.
(Amendment negatived)
Shall clause 10 carry?
9:20 a.m.
Liberal
9:25 a.m.
NDP
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
The amendment is as follows:
That Bill C-36 be amended by adding after line 15 on page 8 the following new clause:
10.1 (1) Subsection 21(1) of the Act is replaced by the following:
21 (1) The Chief Statistician shall, by order, determine the questions to be asked in any census taken by Statistics Canada under section 19 or 20.
(2) Subsection 21(2) of the French version of the Act is replaced by the following:
I won't read the French because I do not want to offend the French language. I take lessons, but I have not mastered French in many years here in the House of Commons. I have the deepest respect for the francophone language—
9:25 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Dan Ruimy
I could attempt to say this in French, but that's why we have translators.
9:25 a.m.
NDP