Procedure and House Affairs committee  Again, I see this as being similar to CPC-16, increasing it to the 57-day maximum for other arrangements, such as Groundhog Day, I guess.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  This prohibits responsible officers of third parties that fail to file expense reports from being candidates, mirroring the current rules for candidates and official agents. It makes sense to me that if an officer of a third party failed to file an expense report, then they wou

Procedure and House Affairs committee  This is essentially that voter information cards are not an acceptable form of ID. We have just seen in the media this week examples of refugee claimants who received voter eligibility cards in the mail. If they were to not say anything, complete them and send them in, they would

Procedure and House Affairs committee  I'm sorry; there's nothing more offensive than...?

Procedure and House Affairs committee  What would you say, then, to the example that just happened?

Procedure and House Affairs committee  I think what Canadians are most worried about is the legitimacy of the electorate. A Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian, but we must ensure that it is Canadians who have obtained this right to vote. This example, which was in the media this past week, specifically identifies a

Procedure and House Affairs committee  Chair, wasn't this meeting scheduled till 7:00?

Procedure and House Affairs committee  Our amendment 10008479 is very similar.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  It's similar in spirit to the previous one. Since we've passed LIB-5, I think it's fine. We don't need to move it. Thank you.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  Yes.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  Sure. This is something that has historically occurred, and I guess we are uncertain as to why the candidates would no longer receive the addresses. What is the problem in their receiving the addresses in addition to the names?

Procedure and House Affairs committee  Sure.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  If they're already receiving the addresses, what's the problem with giving them the addresses once again? If the information is publicly out there, why would we create another obstacle in terms of obtaining the information? If it's out there, then it's out there.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  Just because it's no longer necessary, that doesn't mean that.... I mean, one would argue that there are a lot of things that are no longer necessary that are still completed anyway. To me, this just seems like another obstacle if there's a discrepancy after the fact or after the

Procedure and House Affairs committee  Thank you.