Speech (committee meeting)

{
    "time": "2023-02-03 09:20:00",
    "attribution": {
        "en": "Ms. Nancy B\u00e9langer",
        "fr": "Mme Nancy B\u00e9langer"
    },
    "content": {
        "en": "<p data-HoCid=\"7573668\" data-originallang=\"en\">I'll give a charter analysis course 101. </p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"7573669\" data-originallang=\"en\">The first test is to examine whether or not the rule as written infringes any constitutional rights. When it came to freedom of expression, I am stopping people from lobbying for at least two years or a year, depending on the circumstances. The courts have said the minute you stop people from being able to speak\u2014it's a very low threshold\u2014the freedom of expression has been breached.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"7573670\" data-originallang=\"en\">Then when you look at section 1, is it justified? Is there a reason for this and has it been crafted in a way that it minimally impairs charter rights? When the objective is to ensure that we have ethical and transparent lobbying and that lobbyists do not lobby people who have a sense of obligation towards them, the legal opinion says that this objective is clear. </p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"7573671\" data-originallang=\"en\">In the way the rule has been crafted, we're not stopping people from doing political work. In fact, we're letting them do it, but if they choose to do so, there might be limits on who they can lobby afterwards. It's only the people that they've helped get elected, and their close associates. </p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"7573672\" data-originallang=\"en\">It is also limited in time, and, depending on the facts, the time could be reduced. If somebody is your campaign manager and within a week you realize that it's not working and you let them go, they shouldn't be prohibited from lobbying you for two years. </p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"7573673\" data-originallang=\"en\">Some facts will be reviewed. According to the opinion, it was crafted in a way that the court would likely simply say that it's justified.</p>",
        "fr": "<p data-HoCid=\"7573668\" data-originallang=\"en\">Je vais donner un cours 101 d'analyse de la Charte.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"7573669\" data-originallang=\"en\">Le premier crit\u00e8re consiste \u00e0 d\u00e9terminer si la r\u00e8gle porte actuellement atteinte \u00e0 des droits constitutionnels. Dans le cas de la libert\u00e9 d'expression, j'emp\u00eache des gens de faire du lobbying pendant au moins une ou deux ann\u00e9es, selon les circonstances. Les tribunaux ont dit que d\u00e8s qu'on emp\u00eache quelqu'un de parler \u2014 le seuil est tr\u00e8s peu \u00e9lev\u00e9 \u2014, on porte atteinte \u00e0 la libert\u00e9 d'expression.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"7573670\" data-originallang=\"en\">Quand on regarde ensuite l'article 1, est\u2011ce justifi\u00e9? Y a\u2011t\u2011il une raison \u00e0 cela, et la r\u00e8gle a\u2011t\u2011elle \u00e9t\u00e9 r\u00e9dig\u00e9e de mani\u00e8re \u00e0 violer le moins possible les droits garantis par la Charte? Lorsque l'objectif est de garantir un lobbying \u00e9thique et transparent, et d'\u00e9viter que des lobbyistes interviennent aupr\u00e8s de personnes ayant un sentiment d'obligation \u00e0 leur \u00e9gard, l'avis juridique dit que l'objectif est clair.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"7573671\" data-originallang=\"en\">Compte tenu de la fa\u00e7on dont la r\u00e8gle est formul\u00e9e, nous n'emp\u00eachons pas les gens de faire un travail politique. En fait, ils sont libres de le faire, mais si c'est leur choix, il y a des limites quant aux personnes aupr\u00e8s desquelles ils peuvent intervenir. Il s'agit seulement des personnes qu'ils ont aid\u00e9 \u00e0 se faire \u00e9lire et de leurs proches collaborateurs.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"7573672\" data-originallang=\"en\">La p\u00e9riode pr\u00e9vue est \u00e9galement limit\u00e9e, et selon les faits, elle peut \u00eatre r\u00e9duite. Si apr\u00e8s une semaine vous vous rendez compte que votre directeur de campagne ne vous convient pas et que vous le cong\u00e9diez, il ne devrait pas lui \u00eatre interdit de faire du lobbying aupr\u00e8s de vous les deux ann\u00e9es suivantes.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"7573673\" data-originallang=\"en\">Certains faits seront examin\u00e9s. Selon l'avis, la r\u00e8gle est r\u00e9dig\u00e9e de mani\u00e8re \u00e0 ce que les tribunaux disent tout simplement que c'est justifi\u00e9.</p>"
    },
    "url": "/committees/ethics/44-1/55/nancy-belanger-25/",
    "politician_url": null,
    "politician_membership_url": null,
    "procedural": false,
    "source_id": "12028084",
    "document_url": "/committees/ethics/44-1/55/",
    "related": {
        "document_speeches_url": "/speeches/?document=%2Fcommittees%2Fethics%2F44-1%2F55%2F"
    }
}