Evidence of meeting #28 for Justice and Human Rights in the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was clause.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Marilyn Gladu Liberal Sarnia—Lambton—Bkejwanong, ON
Thank you, Chair.
I want to be clear that I want to have victims' rights be enforceable, but I don't believe that this particular amendment accomplishes that.
Thank you.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal James Maloney
Thank you.
Shall CPC-31 carry?
(Amendment negatived: nays 7; yeas 4 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
(Clause 144 agreed to)
(On clause 145)
That brings us to clause 145 and NDP-26.
Ms. Kwan is not here. It's deemed moved. There are no comments.
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
(Clauses 145 to 154 agreed to)
(On clause 155)
We're on amendment G-37.
Go ahead, Ms. Lattanzio.
Liberal
Patricia Lattanzio Liberal Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC
Mr. Chair, this is a technical amendment. It would expand the application of the sexual activity evidence regime, which prohibits the use of evidence regarding a complainant's past sexual activity to support the “twin myth” example that the complainant was more likely to have consented to the sexual activity at issue or that they are less worthy of belief in sexual offence trials to cases involving an offence under any act of Parliament that is of sexual nature or committed for a sexual purpose and not just a Criminal Code offence that is of a sexual nature or committed for sexual purpose.
This amendment would align the National Defence Act and the Criminal Code as contemplated by amendment G-8 to amend clause 31.
Conservative
Larry Brock Conservative Brantford—Brant South—Six Nations, ON
Officials, if this amendment were to pass, how would this impact Bill C-11, if at all?
Lieutenant-Colonel Matt MacMillan Director Military Justice Implementation, Office of the Judge Advocate General, Canadian Armed Forces, Department of National Defence
There would be no impact in relation to Bill C-11. This creates a regime within the National Defence Act.
Bill C-11 specifically, as tabled, dealt with the jurisdiction over Criminal Code sexual offences that were committed in Canada. It does not deal with offences that would happen outside of Canada. Therefore, there is still the potential that the Criminal Code sexual offences will be prosecuted in the military justice system, hence this entire regime is within the National Defence Act.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal James Maloney
Shall G-37 carry?
(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
We're on G-38.
Ms. Gladu, go ahead.
Liberal
Marilyn Gladu Liberal Sarnia—Lambton—Bkejwanong, ON
This is a technical amendment as well. It inserts a pinpoint reference to proposed section 180.003, which was accidentally omitted.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal James Maloney
Shall G-38 carry?
(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Now we're on G-39.
Liberal
Anthony Housefather Liberal Mount Royal, QC
This is also a technical amendment. It's similar to the G-10, which I had proposed earlier.
This one will align the National Defence Act with the Criminal Code, as we aligned it in G-10. It's to clarify that the admissibility of evidence of sexual inactivity must be determined under the sexual history evidence admissibility regime, which codifies R v. Kinamore.
Conservative
Larry Brock Conservative Brantford—Brant South—Six Nations, ON
Chair, can I make a suggestion?
With respect to G-39, G-39.1, G-40 and G-41, there are no objections at all from the Conservatives. We don't need any further explanations. Just move them.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal James Maloney
Shall G-39, G-39.1, G-40 and G-41 carry?
(Amendments agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Thank you, Mr. Brock.
That takes us to NDP-27. It is deemed moved.
I see no hands. Shall NDP-27 carry?
(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
We're now on G-42.
Liberal
Patricia Lattanzio Liberal Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC
Mr. Chair, this is a technical amendment.
Once again, this motion would expand the application with the same explanation that was furnished for the previous amendment that I read into the record. It's the exact same rationale.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal James Maloney
Shall G-42 carry?
(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
We're now on G-43.
Liberal
Patricia Lattanzio Liberal Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC
Mr. Chair, the same rationale for G-42 would be applicable for G-43.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal James Maloney
Shall G-43 carry?
(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
We're now on G-44.
Ms. Gladu.
Liberal
Marilyn Gladu Liberal Sarnia—Lambton—Bkejwanong, ON
This is the same linguistic technical amendment as before, where it would replace the word “disclose” with “produce”—that they would “produce” the listed records.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal James Maloney
Shall G-44 carry?
(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Can I make a suggestion? You don't have to listen to me if you don't want to.
They're just technical amendments. Move them and then if somebody wants more clarification—
Conservative
Larry Brock Conservative Brantford—Brant South—Six Nations, ON
Chair, G-45, G-46, G-46.1 and G-47 are deemed to be moved.
