House of Commons Hansard #221 of the 35th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was trade.

Topics

Alternative Fuels Act
Private Members' Business

12:55 a.m.

The Speaker

Those in the Reform Party who are going to vote please stand. We have Mr. McClelland and the clerk will record the following: Mr. White, Mr. Ringma, Mr. Frazer and Mr. Hart will vote yea.

Alternative Fuels Act
Private Members' Business

12:55 a.m.

NDP

Bill Blaikie Winnipeg—Transcona, MB

Mr. Speaker, the New Democratic Party votes yes on concurrence at report stage.

(The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:)

Alternative Fuels Act
Private Members' Business

1 a.m.

The Speaker

I declare the motion carried.

Alternative Fuels Act
Private Members' Business

1 a.m.

Liberal

Jane Stewart Brant, ON

moved that the bill be read the third time and passed.

Mr. Speaker, I respectfully request that you take the vote just taken and apply it to the motion for third reading.

Alternative Fuels Act
Private Members' Business

1 a.m.

The Speaker

Is it agreed?

Alternative Fuels Act
Private Members' Business

1 a.m.

Liberal

Don Boudria Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON

Agreed.

Alternative Fuels Act
Private Members' Business

1 a.m.

Bloc

Gilles Duceppe Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC

Agreed.

Alternative Fuels Act
Private Members' Business

1 a.m.

Reform

Jim Silye Calgary Centre, AB

Mr. Speaker, I think you will find the vote we just had can be applied in the same way. If members of the party agree, I agree.

Alternative Fuels Act
Private Members' Business

1 a.m.

NDP

Len Taylor The Battlefords—Meadow Lake, SK

Agreed.

Alternative Fuels Act
Private Members' Business

1 a.m.

The Speaker

I declare the motion carried.

(Bill read the third time and passed.)

The House resumed consideration of the motion that Bill C-295, an act to provide for the control of Canadian peacekeeping activities by Parliament and to amend the National Defence Act in consequence thereof, as amended, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Peacekeeping Act
Private Members' Business

June 19th, 1995 / 1 a.m.

The Speaker

Pursuant to an order made Friday, June 16, the House will now proceed to the taking of the deferred division on Bill C-295, an act to provide for the control of Canadian peacekeeping activities by Parliament and to amend the National Defence Act in consequence thereof.

As this is a private member's motion, we will proceed as we did with the other private member's motion. We will begin on my left.

(The House divided on the motion, which was negatived on the following division:)

Peacekeeping Act
Private Members' Business

1:10 a.m.

The Speaker

I declare the motion lost.

Peacekeeping Act
Private Members' Business

1:10 a.m.

Liberal

Douglas Young Acadie—Bathurst, NB

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I have paid close attention to the number of votes taken tonight with members of the House participating and I want to check with the Chair to see if we could be informed why the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada has not participated in the voting tonight.

A motion to adjourn the House under Standing Order 38 deemed to have been moved.

Peacekeeping Act
Adjournment Proceedings

1:10 a.m.

Bloc

Paul Crête Kamouraska—Rivière-Du-Loup, QC

Mr. Speaker, on May 5, 1995, I put a question to the Minister of Canadian Heritage about budget cuts affecting a program designed to subsidize the distribution of magazines and publications. At the time the minister told me he would check with his officials and find out how effective the cuts were.

However, I may recall for the benefit of the minister that cutting a job in the cultural sector has a more significant impact than it would in other sectors. For instance, it is said it costs about $20,000 to create a job in the cultural sector. Reducing subsidies for magazines and publications would have a far more significant impact in terms of jobs lost than similar cuts in other sectors.

The cultural sector is very sensitive to reductions in subsidies. In the current context it is clear the government must make cuts. However, one always wonders whether the cuts are appropriate and if it would have been possible to avoid them by raising additional taxes in some way, to avoid having to cut this kind of program.

In this particular case the current government's decision is not one with which we can feel comfortable, considering the impact this decision will have on cultural industries. Furthermore, this decision adversely affects the dissemination of Canadian and Quebec culture. The publications and magazines that receive these subsidies tend to have a fairly low circulation and may as a result of this decision be forced to stop publishing, which is a far more drastic impact than what the minister had in mind.

I would like to know whether since my question was put, the government received additional information it could use to analyse the situation or perhaps find alternatives so that the cultural sector would not be penalized by the government's decision.