Evidence of meeting #113 for Justice and Human Rights in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was agreed.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:40 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Anthony Housefather
I would only mention—I'm not getting into any debate, as the chair—that as I stated at the beginning, we as a group had talked about amending certain sections. This was one of them. The instructions I received were to vote against the clause.
You've done it in a different way, which is fine and totally acceptable, but other people in other parties were also not supportive of those clauses as well, which you see clearly here.
Mr. Boissonnault.
October 24th, 2018 / 4:40 p.m.
Liberal
Randy Boissonnault Liberal Edmonton Centre, AB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
My response, with all the respect that is due Mr. Cooper, is that's hogwash and poppycock. Let's be serious. We had witnesses who came here with very compelling witness testimony. We're talking about terrorism. We're talking about very serious offences. Our side is not playing politics with the justice bill.
Let's keep going, clause by clause, through this issue.
4:40 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Anthony Housefather
The good news is that we will now go to a vote on CPC-13.
(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
(Clause 21 as amended agreed to)
(On clause 22)
On this clause we have CPC-14.
Mr. Clement.
4:40 p.m.
Parry Sound—Muskoka, CPC
This section is about advocating or promoting the commission of terrorism offences. The Conservative Party feels very strongly that this should remain solely an indictable offence, which is why I am proposing this amendment.
4:40 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Anthony Housefather
Thank you very much.
Does anyone else wish to speak on this? Seeing no one, we will move to a vote on CPC-14.
(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
(Clause 22 as amended agreed to)
(On clause 23)
We will now move to CPC-15.
Mr. Clement.
4:40 p.m.
Parry Sound—Muskoka, CPC
Thank you, Chair.
This section pertains to concealing a person who carried out a terrorist activity. It's obviously a very serious charge and a serious offence. I won't go through all the evidence we heard as to why this should remain solely an indictable offence, but that is why the Conservative Party and I are moving this amendment.
4:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Anthony Housefather
Thank you very much.
Is there any discussion? Hearing none, we will move to a vote on CPC-15.
(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
(Clause 23 as amended agreed to)
(Clause 24 agreed to)
(On clause 25)
There is an amendment to clause 25 that's called LIB-1 in your package. LIB-1 would essentially have the effect of voting down clause 25, so I rule it not receivable. The proper intent is to vote down clause 25. If you're in favour of LIB-1, you should vote against clause 25 when I call the vote on clause 25.
Does everybody understand that? This is the first time we've dealt with that.
4:45 p.m.
Liberal
4:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Anthony Housefather
I can't receive LIB-1, because LIB-1 essentially means that you should vote against the clause. The reason the Conservative amendments were receivable, instead of our voting down clauses, was that there were slight wording changes in those clauses that they retained. They retained the clause. That's why they did it that way. In these, there is nothing retained. You should just vote down the clause.
4:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Anthony Housefather
Just so everybody understands, if you want to vote down clause 25 by removing those words, vote down clause 25. Okay?
Mr. Boissonnault.
4:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Anthony Housefather
It's on clause 25. Again, LIB-1 is asking you to vote down clause 25. Do you want to speak to that?
4:45 p.m.
Liberal
Randy Boissonnault Liberal Edmonton Centre, AB
I do.
LIB-1 amends clause 25. It's a housekeeping item, a word issue in terms of “recognizance”.
If you look at clause 25, we're replacing the term “recognizance” in subsection 83.29(3) of the Criminal Code with the term “release order”. The document used to bind the witness to appear in court for an investigative hearing under subsection 83.29(3) is not part of the bail regime and should continue to be referred to as “recognizance”. The amendment would remove clause 25 to ensure continued reference to “recognizance” in subsection 83.29(3).
That's why we're putting forward LIB-1.
4:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Anthony Housefather
Is there any further discussion?
(Clause 25 negatived)
(Clauses 26 to 28 inclusive agreed to)
4:45 p.m.
Liberal
Ron McKinnon Liberal Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC
I'm just thinking we could vote on clauses 29 through 34 in one fell swoop.
4:45 p.m.
Liberal
4:45 p.m.
Parry Sound—Muskoka, CPC
No, Chair, I cannot agree to that. I think, for clarity and for the historical record, we should do it clause by clause.
4:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Anthony Housefather
Fair enough. That's fine.
We'll start at clause 29.
(Clauses 29 to 34 inclusive agreed to sequentially)
(On clause 35)
Now we move to clause 35 and we have amendment CPC-16.
Mr. Cooper.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
This is yet another amendment related to a section of Bill C-75 that reclassifies a serious indictable offence and makes it a hybridized offence, and that offence relates to frauds on the government.
