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.
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
4:55 p.m.
NDP
Alistair MacGregor NDP Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC
With great respect to you, Chair, because I understand the confines you find yourself in, I would move formally to challenge you. As a committee, the motion would be to accept the amendments as proposed by Ms. O'Connell. This is a minor fix and, really, it lends itself to making the bill more clear.
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ron McKinnon
Let's make this proper. Ms. O'Connell's request is to amend the previous line as stated. I rule it out of order. You're challenging me.
Shall the decision of the chair be sustained?
(Ruling of the chair overturned)
I'm outvoted. Okay.
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ron McKinnon
Is there debate on that change? Are we clear on what we've done here?
Let's suspend for a short time while we get squared away up here.
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
Jennifer O'Connell Liberal Pickering—Uxbridge, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
In effort to speed this along, I'm going to withdraw my amendment.
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ron McKinnon
We need unanimous consent. Do we have unanimous consent?
(Amendment withdrawn)
Go ahead, Mr. MacGregor.
5:15 p.m.
NDP
Alistair MacGregor NDP Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC
I am going to ask for unanimous consent for two items. The first request is for unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment.
5:15 p.m.
NDP
Alistair MacGregor NDP Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC
My second request is for unanimous consent to amend, I think, line 16. I'm just looking at the clerks. I'm making sure I have it correct.
Is it line 16 on page 76?
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
5:15 p.m.
NDP
Alistair MacGregor NDP Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC
We have it all kind of spelled out here. I'm just going to basically read out the subamendment and amendment together.
5:15 p.m.
NDP
Alistair MacGregor NDP Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC
It's replacing lines 16 and 17 with “(b) provincial, territorial, or municipal political or governmental processes”.
5:15 p.m.
NDP
Alistair MacGregor NDP Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC
Certainly. It's replacing lines 16 and 17 on page 76 with the following: “(b) provincial, territorial, or municipal political or governmental processes”.
June 10th, 2024 / 5:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ron McKinnon
Okay. I think we're clear on that. Do we have unanimous consent to take this action?
Yes, we do, over the ruling of the chair, I know.
(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Okay. Let us carry forth. This means that NDP-7 and BQ-3, as we said before, can't be moved. If NDP-6 was moved, then NDP-7 and BQ-3 could not be moved because they were identical. They can no longer be moved.
That brings us to BQ-4.
Mr. Villemure, you have the floor.
5:20 p.m.
Bloc
René Villemure Bloc Trois-Rivières, QC
Mr. Chair, I am pleased to move amendment BQ‑4, which has the objective of adding Crown corporations and universities to clause 113, as suggested by Mr. Fadden, former director of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, and Ms. Leung of Hong Kong Watch.
We want to make sure that the law applies to these institutions, because they are places of foreign interference right now.
5:20 p.m.
Liberal
Iqwinder Gaheer Liberal Mississauga—Malton, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
We think this might be an overcorrection beyond the position of the government, but I'd like to ask the officials for their position.
5:20 p.m.
Director General, Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness
Thank you, Chair, for that question.
On the proposed amendment in relation to paragraph (d), “the political or governmental processes of a federal or provincial Crown corporation”, the intent and interpretation is that the current definitions in Bill C-70 include Crown corporations, so our interpretation—which would be subject to the commissioner's interpretation, obviously—is that those are already included in the definition.
In terms of “the political or governmental processes of a university or government research centre”, I would say that the proposed amendment goes beyond what we intended in terms of the transparency registry. It was intended to increase transparency in activities related to governmental and political processes, whether processes of the federal, provincial-territorial or indigenous governments, but this would go far beyond that.
I would say that in terms of research in universities, again, it would significantly expand the scope. I would say that there are already a number of initiatives and programs in place, such as the safeguarding science initiative, the outreach program at the service and new national security guidelines for research partnerships that are aimed at tackling the problem of research security.
The transparency proposals here as they relate to the government would be very difficult to apply in the context of a university, because they would target the governmental and political process of the university, which is very different from the governmental or political process of a government.
5:20 p.m.
Bloc
René Villemure Bloc Trois-Rivières, QC
Yes, Mr. Chair.
Overall, even if Bill C‑70 is, in my opinion, aimed at solving a problem, it is difficult to apply in certain cases and we will have to discuss its application. Furthermore, we are told that the aim of the bill is to increase transparency in order to reduce, if not eliminate, foreign interference, which seems a little ambitious to me.
The fact remains that universities that receive federal funding are currently targets of foreign interference, despite the presence of programs like those named by Mr. Bilodeau. If we want to reduce the damage done by foreign interference, then we can't ignore universities.
5:20 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ron McKinnon
Thank you, sir.
Is there any other discussion?
Shall BQ-4 carry?
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
That brings us to BQ-5.
Go ahead, Mr. Villemure.