Public Safety Committee on Nov. 5th, 2009

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

Is that the case, Mr. Holland?

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

Yes. Mr. MacKenzie does speak for me on this occasion.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

We work together so well at this committee.

Mr. Davies, are you willing to resubmit the amendment with some minor alterations?

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

I am, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

Could you please do that right now?

Just to make sure that our procedure is all right, do we have unanimous consent to proceed?

I see there are no objections. Go ahead, sir.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I believe the amendment has been passed around. It's subclause 33(2).

For the benefit of all members, at our last meeting I was hoping to amend the bill to require that registrants have to provide, within seven days, information relating to a change of employer. But through errors in drafting, it purported to be much wider than that, which was never the intention. So the drafting has been redone to make it clear that we are adding only the change of employer to the requirement of name and address that has to be reported within seven days.

I'd like to thank all of my colleagues and this committee for their kind cooperation in this regard.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

Mr. Davies has moved that motion. You've had a chance to hear the explanation.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Mr. Chairman, I might also say, just quickly, that there is a consequential amendment by Mr. MacKenzie that accompanies this bill. I think it is simply required to conform with this one.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

Mr. MacKenzie is indicating that's in fact so.

Is there any more discussion on this before we vote on it?

The legislative counsel has just told me that we can also apply the vote on this to clause 34.1.

(Amendment agreed to) [See Minutes of Proceedings]

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Mr. Chairman, can the record reflect that I won one?

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

I'm teasing.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

You somehow feel that we don't appreciate you at this committee. That's not the case, Mr. Davies; you are making a valuable contribution. You are making us think through all of these things very carefully, so that's appreciated. Thank you.

(Clause 33 as amended agreed to)

(On clause 34--Notification of absence)

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

I believe the government has amendment G-3 on clause 34 that they would like to move.

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Oxford, ON]

Mr. Chair, I'd like to move that clause 34 be amended by replacing lines 11 to 17 on page 28 with the following:

their address or location--if they decide, after departure, not to be at their main residence or any of their secondary residence for a period of seven or more consecutive days or if they have not given a notification required under paragraph (a)

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

Is there any more explanation that you wish to offer?

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Oxford, ON]

I read you the amendment, and the explanation is that Bill C-34 would require registered sex offenders to notify registry officials in advance of any absence of seven days or more from their main or secondary residence.

This amendment would correct a gap in the legislation to ensure that registered sex offenders still have a legal obligation to notify registry officials about an absence, even if they did not do so before they departed.

The amendment would also ensure concordance between the English and French provisions.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

Is there any discussion?

(Amendment agreed to)

(Clause 34 as amended agreed to)

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

We have another amendment, G-4, which would create a new clause, 34.1.

Mr. MacKenzie, could you please move that and give us the explanation?

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Oxford, ON]

Chair, I would move that the portion of section 8 of the act before paragraph (a) be replaced by the following:

8. When a police service or the Commissioner of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police receives a copy of an order sent in accordance with paragraph 490.018(1)(d) of the Criminal Code, either a person who registers information for the police service or one who registers it for the Commissioner shall

And the rationale is that this, I believe, is a consequential amendment that would be required if the first proposed amendment were made where we did the new clause 10.1, and it would ensure that the RCMP officials at the national sex offender registry are authorized to enter information from registration orders into the database. So it goes back to our original 10.1 and it's consequential to that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

Mr. Holland, do you have a comment?

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

Were there reasons that these items were not included in the original bill? Were these oversights?

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Oxford, ON]

I believe there was an oversight in the original drafting of the bill.

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

Can you confirm that, Ms. Campbell?

[Mary Campbell, Director General, Corrections and Criminal Justice Directorate, Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness]

Yes, it was just a simple oversight.