Evidence of meeting #114 for Public Safety and National Security in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was chair.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
Jennifer O'Connell Liberal Pickering—Uxbridge, ON
Thank you, Chair.
I'll follow up on that.
If a judge determines there are two potentially contradictory definitions, they could rule one in order and one not. Because of the constraints we're under in this committee, we can't go back and create matching definitions in SOIA. Is that correct?
4:25 p.m.
Senior Counsel, Department of Justice
I didn't intend to cut anyone off, Chair.
The concern is that in a subsequent interpretation of the term, a court or the lawyers involved won't have time to consult this record, which would show that the intention is to create a non-exhaustive list in both places in the act that captures leadership contests and nomination contests.
That is the risk.
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
Jennifer O'Connell Liberal Pickering—Uxbridge, ON
You feel comfortable that the language, unamended, covers the additional wording—that things like “appointments and elections within a political party, including leadership contests” are part of the existing act without defining them, so there wouldn't be confusion in not having the same defined language in the other part of the act.
4:25 p.m.
Senior Counsel, Department of Justice
The intent in the offence provision and the registry offence provision is the same, which is to create a non-exhaustive list that captures nomination and leadership contests, as well as other internal mechanisms and procedures within the democratic aspects of a political party.
The effect of this amendment would be to simply clarify that leadership contests are included in the registry portion of the bill. It would not similarly clarify it in proposed subsection 20.4(4).
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
Jennifer O'Connell Liberal Pickering—Uxbridge, ON
Thank you.
Chair, with that being said, if the intention of the bill is to include these things, which I feel confident it is, I worry that this amendment—which we then can't support—would cause confusion, because we are constrained at this committee in not being able to go back and create the same language in the rest of the bill.
I feel comforted that all of the political activities outlined in the amendment are already covered. I don't want to cause confusion in the implementation of this act, so we can't support it.
Thank you, Chair.
4:30 p.m.
NDP
Alistair MacGregor NDP Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC
Thank you, Chair.
Mr. Scrivens, these are two very different acts that serve different purposes. Part 4 of this bill is enacting a brand new act. It's setting up a registry, which I think is for the transparent foreign interference that is happening. However, these important amendments to the SOIA are attempting to go after the more clandestine, deceptive methods of foreign interference. These acts are serving different purposes.
Would they ever cross each other in any way that causes that kind of confusion, since they're going after two very different things? One is a public registry and one is for serious offences under the SOIA.
4:30 p.m.
Senior Counsel, Department of Justice
Thank you for the question.
In our view, given that the registry creates criminal offences, we cannot rule out a circumstance in which proposed subsection 20.4(4) of the SOIA would overlap with a set of circumstances that would give rise to offences under the registry proposal.
4:30 p.m.
Liberal
4:30 p.m.
Conservative
Michael Chong Conservative Wellington—Halton Hills, ON
Was the Security of Information Act definition contained in part 2 of this bill in front of us, Mr. Chair?
4:30 p.m.
Conservative
Michael Chong Conservative Wellington—Halton Hills, ON
I remember our witness referring to a particular clause—I believe it was clause 20.4. I'm trying to find it in the bill. It's page 30.
Mr. Chair, when I read that section on page 30, I don't see any reference to a leadership contest.
4:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ron McKinnon
Let's carry on this discussion after we have a vote.
Mr. Chong, as soon as you're ready, you can carry on your discussion.
4:30 p.m.
Conservative
Michael Chong Conservative Wellington—Halton Hills, ON
I just wanted to understand whether, on page 30, in the definition of “political or governmental process”, the paragraph in proposed subsection20.1(4) that refers to the “nomination of a candidate” would include the selection of a leader of a registered political party.
4:30 p.m.
Senior Counsel, Department of Justice
Thank you, Chair.
I think the best way to answer this question is to indicate that where the proposed definitions use the term “includes”, the examples that follow are intended to be examples of circumstances where the offence applies, but the intention is to indicate a non-exhaustive list of examples. The same framework was adopted for the registry as well.
4:35 p.m.
Conservative
Michael Chong Conservative Wellington—Halton Hills, ON
Mr. Chair, armed with that information—that clarification—I'm prepared to defer to officials on this and their expertise.
Thank you.
4:35 p.m.
NDP
Alistair MacGregor NDP Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC
Mr. Chair, I'm hoping I can find unanimous consent to withdraw NDP-4.
4:35 p.m.
Some hon. members
Agreed.
4:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ron McKinnon
(Amendment withdrawn)
That brings us to BQ-2. Since NDP-4 was not adopted, we can now move BQ-2.
Mr. Villemure, go ahead, if you please.