Would the minister be
agfeeable to accepting a small amendment which I hesitate to mention, but which I believe would clear up what might otherwise be a certain laxity in the wording? I refer to paragraph 8 at page 43 of the consolidation. This paragraph deals with offences, and subparagraph 2 states:
(2) Every person is a party to and guilty of an offence under this order who (a) actually commits it; (b) does or omits any act for aiding any person to commit the offence.
To meet the purpose I have in mind, I move the following amendment:
That the following be inserted in the schedule to the act in the column entitled "amendments" so as to pertain to order in council P.C. 5518 of 16 July, 1943, as amended:
"Section 8(2) is amended by deleting paragraph (b) and substituting therefor: .
(b) does or omits any act for the purpose of aiding any person to commit the offence."
This means that the act would have to be committed with the intention of aiding in the offence. It would mean that no person who committed the act, not realizing the consequences of it, would be guilty. In other words, it is to make sure that the intention element is present.