Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Legal and Constitutional Affairs
Issue 3 - Evidence for December 5, 2007
OTTAWA, Wednesday, December 5, 2007
The Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs, to which was referred Bill S-207, An Act to repeal legislation that has not come into force within ten years of receiving Royal Assent, met this day at 4:08 p.m. to give consideration to the bill.
Senator Joan Fraser (Chair) in the chair.
[English]
The Chair: Honourable senators, our agenda today begins with a look at Bill S-207, an act to repeal legislation that has not come into force within ten years of receiving Royal Assent.
As you will recall, this is a bill that has been sponsored more than once now by Senator Banks. It has been thoroughly canvassed already, in at least the last session of this Parliament, by this committee. I have taken the liberty of asking the law clerk to provide the same assurance to us that he provided to us when we were looking at Senator Bryden's bill on cruelty to animals — that is, that the bill that Senator Banks has presented to us now is identical to the bill that was studied in the last session of this Parliament.
With your indulgence, I shall read that letter into the record. It is from the Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel, dated December 4, 20007, to the Honourable Joan Fraser, Chair, Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs. The letter reads as follows:
Dear Senator Fraser,
Pursuant to your request, please be advised that Bill S-207 of the 2nd session of the 39th Parliament, intituled An Act to repeal legislation that has not come into force within ten years of receiving royal assent, is in substance the same as Bill S-202 of the previous session, as passed by the Senate on June 22, 2006 and sent to the House of Commons.
If Bill S-207 were to be passed by the Senate without amendment it would be sent to the House of Commons in the same form as Bill S-202 was sent, subject only to the required changes in the bill number, the sessional reference, the regnal and calendar year references, and the date on which the bill was passed by the Senate.
I trust that the above meets your needs, and am Yours truly,
Mark Audcent
Unfortunately, Senator Banks cannot be with us this evening — he is on public business in Calgary — but he will be with us tomorrow morning. That may mean that he is en route from Calgary as we speak. He will be delighted to join in the discussion if we were at that point prepared to consider his bill further.
Before we reach that decision, however, are there any questions or comments about the bill and about what has been done so far?
Senator Andreychuk: You read the letter into the record. Usually, it is just tabled.
The Chair: I have seen it done both ways, and I decided to read it in, partly because documents that are tabled are not necessarily on the website.
Senator Bryden: It has been so long ago since I was in this position with my bill. At the time, there was some patter, some discussion, about the steering committee having considered the proceedings before this committee in the earlier session.
The Chair: I was going to give that little patter, but before I got to that I wanted to know if anyone wanted to say anything about what I have done so far and what we have done so far.
Senator Bryden: Sorry, I was anticipating.
Senator Milne: Carry on with the patter.
The Chair: Here is the patter. Traditionally, honourable senators, when a situation like this arises, where it is an identical bill that is brought to us, we have only two real choices. One is to accept the work of the predecessor committee in the earlier session of Parliament and proceed expeditiously with the bill. The other is to decide to reopen our entire study, in which case we do have to do a full, proper study of the bill again.
The steering committee has, in fact, considered this matter in the case of this bill and is prepared to recommend that we accept the work that this committee did in the last session of Parliament and, therefore, proceed tomorrow to clause-by-clause examination of Bill S-207.
Senator Joyal: Do I understand — and I ask this question for the record — that no witness has asked to be heard or has provided views to the committee that might have to be considered by this committee as a proper way of dealing with this bill?
The Chair: No one has been in contact with me or the clerk, nor do I believe with the other members of the steering committee. So far as I can see, everyone concerned believes this committee did its work in the last session.
Senator Joyal: Thank you.
Senator Di Nino: Unless there are other questions, I am prepared to move that your recommendation is the way we go.
The Chair: We shall proceed to clause-by-clause reading of this bill at our meeting tomorrow morning.
We will now proceed to item 2 on the agenda, which means we will be going in camera. I will pause for a moment to allow all the necessary adjustments to be made.
The committee continued in camera.