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.
Liberal
Jennifer O'Connell Liberal Pickering—Uxbridge, ON
I'm sorry. I want you to finish the vote call, and then....
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ron McKinnon
Shall clause 61 as amended carry?
(Clause 61 as amended agreed to)
Go ahead, Ms. O'Connell.
Liberal
Jennifer O'Connell Liberal Pickering—Uxbridge, ON
Thanks, Mr. Chair.
I apologize for being late. I had to finish question period in the House.
I want to quickly apologize and retract my comments about Mr. Villemure at the last meeting. I really look forward to working with him on this committee and on this important bill.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ron McKinnon
Thank you, Ms. O'Connell.
There are no amendments submitted to clauses 62 through—
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ron McKinnon
Colleagues, there are no amendments submitted for clauses 62 through 112. Do we have unanimous consent to group them?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ron McKinnon
Shall clauses 62 to 112 carry?
(Clauses 62 to 112 inclusive agreed to)
(On clause 113)
Next is NDP-4.
Go ahead, Mr. MacGregor.
NDP
NDP
Alistair MacGregor NDP Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC
This is an amendment to the bill that was brought forward by my colleague Jenny Kwan, the member of Parliament for Vancouver East. It amends line 25 on page 75. It's just further clarification in paragraph (f) of the definition of “political or governmental process”.
Although the director general who appeared from Public Safety Canada said that it was their interpretation that leadership contests could be or would be included, Ms. Kwan felt it was appropriate to further clarify this just for a little bit more specificity in the law.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ron McKinnon
Thank you, Mr. MacGregor.
If NDP-4 is adopted, BQ-2 cannot be moved due to a line conflict. Is there any discussion on NDP-4?
Go ahead, Mr. Gaheer.
Liberal
Iqwinder Gaheer Liberal Mississauga—Malton, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'd like to ask the officials something. Even without this amendment itself, would foreign efforts aimed at influencing the appointment and elections within a political party, including leadership contests, be captured under this bill?
Richard Bilodeau Director General, Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness
The intent of the legislation is to be fairly broad with political processes. It is our interpretation and intent that those things would be captured under the current drafting of Bill C-70.
Liberal
Conservative
Michael Chong Conservative Wellington—Halton Hills, ON
Mr. Chair, we'll support this amendment because it provides greater clarity on what officials have said is the intent of the bill's clause.
Liberal
Liberal
Iqwinder Gaheer Liberal Mississauga—Malton, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I believe the amendments offered to the Security of Information Act also define a “political or governmental process” using the unamended definition. Can the officials confirm that this is the case?
Senior Counsel, Department of Justice
It is true that there is a definition within proposed subsection 20.4(4) of the Security of Information Act that is similar to the one at clause 113 of the bill. The effect of the amendment would be that it would change the definition in one place in the bill and not change it in the other place.
Liberal
Iqwinder Gaheer Liberal Mississauga—Malton, ON
Could I just ask a follow-up question?
What are the consequences of having those two different definitions?
Senior Counsel, Department of Justice
It's difficult to predict definitively, but there is the possibility that a judge might determine subsequently that this was done intentionally and that a different interpretation should be applied to the two different definitions provided to the same term.
Liberal