Evidence of meeting #25 for Public Safety and National Security in the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was floor.
A video is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Jean-Yves Duclos
I call the meeting back to order.
Is there any debate about BQ‑9?
Mr. Ramsay, you have the floor.
Liberal
Jacques Ramsay Liberal La Prairie—Atateken, QC
Based on what's been forwarded to the clerk, we'd like to move a subamendment. It complies with what's proposed in BQ‑9, but it's just a matter of making sure that it complies with the Privacy Act.
Do you want me to read the subamendment, or do you already have it?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Jean-Yves Duclos
It would be better if you read the subamendment and make sure that it has been distributed to all committee members so that they can read it.
Liberal
Jacques Ramsay Liberal La Prairie—Atateken, QC
I move that amendment BQ‑9, proposing to amend clause 11 of Bill C‑8, be replaced by the following.
That Bill C‑8, in clause 11, be amended in item (a) by adding the following after line 11 on page 22:
personal information has the same meaning as in section 3 of the Privacy Act (renseignements personnels)
in item (b) by adding the following after line 13 on page 31:
For greater certainty 26.1 For greater certainty, nothing in this Act affects the provisions of the Privacy Act in relation to the protection of personal information.
Liberal
Liberal
Jacques Ramsay Liberal La Prairie—Atateken, QC
In fact, if Mrs. DeBellefeuille agrees, it would replace BQ‑9. Mrs. DeBellefeuille may have to withdraw her amendment so that we can submit ours; if she agrees, of course.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Jean-Yves Duclos
There are two possibilities: Either we make sure that the subamendment has been distributed to all members of the committee, which may take some time, or we withdraw BQ‑9 by unanimous consent.
Is there unanimous consent to withdraw BQ-9?
Bloc
Claude DeBellefeuille Bloc Beauharnois—Salaberry—Soulanges—Huntingdon, QC
I didn't hear the interpretation, but I still understood. It's a simple sentence in English.
I don't agree with withdrawing BQ‑9 like that, on the fly, as they say.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Jean-Yves Duclos
In any case, we have to take another short break so that the legislative clerks have the information they need. They informed me a few moments ago that they didn't have quite all the necessary information.
Don't flee the room too quickly, because we'll start as soon as we can.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Jean-Yves Duclos
I call the meeting back to order.
We're going to do something rare. We're going to stand clause 11 for future discussion. That will enable us to move on to the other clauses, including clause 11.1, while the legislative clerks, analysts and experts determine the content and interpretation of clause 11, as well as the links between the various related amendments and subamendments.
Is there a mover to stand down clause 11?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Jean-Yves Duclos
Okay.
Is everyone in agreement with that?
(Clause 11 allowed to stand)
We are standing clause 11 and moving to clause 11.1.
Is clause 11.1 adopted?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Jean-Yves Duclos
(Cause 11.1 agreed to on division)
(Clause 12 agreed to on division)
(Clause 13 agreed to on division)
(Clause 14 agreed to on division)
(Clause 15 agreed to on division)
(Clause 15.1 agreed to on division)
(Clause 16 agreed to on division)
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Jean-Yves Duclos
We'll now go to proposed section 17.
Mrs. DeBellefeuille, do you want to move BQ‑15?
Bloc
Claude DeBellefeuille Bloc Beauharnois—Salaberry—Soulanges—Huntingdon, QC
Yes.
This amendment enables parliamentarians to follow up on a new act. Bill C‑8 is long awaited and important, but we know that during the debates, there were still questions on the way things should be done. It seems that it would be wiser to review the act after five years to see whether there are any amendments or improvements to be made, since that will be revealed through use.
I'm asking for my colleagues' support to force the government, five years after the passage of Bill C‑8, to undertake a review of the act and publish a report.
Liberal
Liberal
Jacques Ramsay Liberal La Prairie—Atateken, QC
We support the principle of the five-year review, but we would like to propose an amendment. Let me explain why.
Mrs. DeBellefeuille's amendment proposes that the Minister of Industry conduct the review. However, the act is the responsibility of the Minister of Public Safety, so it would be more appropriate for him to conduct that review.
I can read the amendment. Do you already have it?
February 24th, 2026 / 5:15 p.m.
Liberal
Jacques Ramsay Liberal La Prairie—Atateken, QC
I move that BQ‑15 be replaced by the following.
That Bill C‑8 be amended by adding after line 27 on page 88 the following new clause:
Review Five-year review
15.1 (1) Five years after the day on which section 11 comes into force, the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness must undertake a review of the Critical Cyber Systems Protection Act. Report (2) At the conclusion of the review, the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness must prepare a report on the review that sets out the Minister’s findings on the effectiveness of the measures provided by that Act respecting offences that are more easily committed using cyber technology, among other matters, and the Minister’s recommendations, including any changes to any Act, such as the Criminal Code. Tabling of report (3) The Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness must cause the report to be tabled before each House of Parliament on any of the first 15 days on which that House is sitting after the report is completed.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Jean-Yves Duclos
Okay.
We're going to take a break, because the legislative clerks have to confirm some things.
I will suspend the meeting for a few minutes.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Jean-Yves Duclos
I call the meeting back to order.
The teams worked very hard during the break. This isn't a criticism of anyone, but there is a bit of confusion about the nature of the subamendment that Mr. Ramsey would have proposed. It isn't a real subamendment, so it can't amend BQ‑15. Instead, if I understand correctly, the hope is to submit a new subamendment to BQ‑15, and that gets a bit complicated.
We're going to adjourn today's meeting, which will enable us to do two things. First, we're going to look at the new clause 17, which may get a subamendment proposal on Thursday. Second, we'll come back to clause 11 on Thursday, and there's a lot of work to be done on that between now and then.
Before adjourning the meeting, I want to let you know that on Tuesday, March 10, after we return from a week in our respective ridings, the minister and his team will appear in committee as part of the study on the supplementary estimates (C). We'll then have an opportunity to discuss other activities for our wonderful Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security.
The meeting is adjourned.
Have a good evening.