House of Commons Hansard #85 of the 36th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was budget.

Topics

Human Resources Development
Routine Proceedings

10 a.m.

Egmont
P.E.I.

Liberal

Joe McGuire Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 109, I have the honour to table in both official languages the government's response to the first report of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts on the Human Resources Development Canada accountability for shared social programs.

Human Resources Development
Routine Proceedings

10 a.m.

Liberal

Marlene Jennings Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. As the House is well aware, on December 1, 1999 I tabled private member's Bill C-388, an act to prohibit the use of chemical pesticides for non-essential purposes. It was seconded by the hon. member for Leeds—Grenville. The House adopted it at first reading. This bill would amend the Pest Control Products Act as of April 22 which is recognized as Earth Day.

I am requesting the consent of the House of Commons to deem Bill C-388 votable, to deem it adopted at second reading and to refer it to the Standing Committee on Health.

Human Resources Development
Routine Proceedings

10 a.m.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland)

Does the hon. member for Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine have the unanimous consent of the House to put the motion?

Human Resources Development
Routine Proceedings

10 a.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Human Resources Development
Routine Proceedings

10 a.m.

Some hon. members

No.

Aboriginal Affairs
Routine Proceedings

10 a.m.

Provencher
Manitoba

Liberal

David Iftody Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development

Mr. Speaker, under the provisions of Standing Order 32(2), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, copies of the 1997-98 annual review of the implementation of the Inuvialuit Final Agreement and copies of the 1998-99 annual report of the Indian Claims Commission.

Government Response To Petitions
Routine Proceedings

10:05 a.m.

Scarborough—Rouge River
Ontario

Liberal

Derek Lee Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to the standing orders I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's response to 52 petitions.

Interparliamentary Delegations
Routine Proceedings

10:05 a.m.

Liberal

George Proud Hillsborough, PE

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 34(1) I have the honour to present to the House, in both official languages, the fifth report of the Canadian NATO Parliamentary Association which represented Canada at the meeting of the economic committee and the political committee held in Brussels and Paris, February 20 to 23, 2000.

Committees Of The House
Routine Proceedings

10:05 a.m.

Liberal

Peter Adams Peterborough, ON

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the second report, “Ensuring Accountability: An Interim Report on the 1999 Internal Audit Report on Human Resources Development Canada Grants and Contributions”. I would like to point out that this is an interim report. It is the result of many weeks of hard and serious work by members from all parties on the committee. The standing committee will be presenting its final report by June 1.

Committees Of The House
Routine Proceedings

10:05 a.m.

Reform

Maurice Vellacott Wanuskewin, SK

Mr. Speaker, in view of the gravity and the serious situation with HRDC, the opposition parties together felt there was no way we could accept that report. We are tabling a dissenting report unanimously. It is rather mind-boggling some of the things that were alleged to have happened, such as the misappropriation of funds, multiple criminal investigations, grants being approved after payments made, withholding of information, allegations of falsification of documents, and so on.

We felt that the majority report was simply glossing it over and not taking the situation seriously. As a result we want to get to the bottom of it for the good of the Canadian public and the better use of tax dollars. We oppose the report and we are tabling a dissenting report.

Committees Of The House
Routine Proceedings

10:05 a.m.

Bloc

Paul Crête Kamouraska—Rivière-Du-Loup—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC

Mr. Speaker, in connection with this report, I would like to point out that—

Committees Of The House
Routine Proceedings

10:05 a.m.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland)

In my opinion the opposition is able to present a dissenting report. We will need unanimous consent for any of the other opposition parties. Is there unanimous consent for the hon. member for Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup—Témiscouata—Les Basques to present a dissenting report?

Committees Of The House
Routine Proceedings

10:05 a.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Committees Of The House
Routine Proceedings

10:05 a.m.

Bloc

Paul Crête Kamouraska—Rivière-Du-Loup—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC

I thank hon. members for their support.

The important point is that the dissenting report is a unanimous report by all opposition parties, who noted that the parliamentary majority in the committee was following the government party line, that is downplaying the HRDC scandal.

Our report points out that action must be taken urgently, that it is urgent for the past situation to be remedied, not just to have a six point plan for the future. In this connection, the interim report will have to influence what is done in future in committee.

Statutory Program Evaluation Act
Routine Proceedings

10:05 a.m.

Reform

John Williams St. Albert, AB

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-477, an act to provide for evaluations of statutory programs.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to table this private member's bill which I think can provide a great benefit to Canadians and the Government of Canada. Basically it asks that all programs provided by the government and all services the government provides through its programs be evaluated on a periodic cyclical basis by asking four fundamental questions.

The first question would be what is the public policy the program is designed to address? Once that is known, the second question can be asked, how well are we achieving what we intend to achieve? The third question would be is it being done efficiently? The fourth question would be, can the same results be achieved in a better and more efficient way? The bill says all programs should be evaluated on a cyclical basis by asking those four fundamental questions.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)