Debates of April 30th, 2004

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

Mr. Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to have the following motion passed:

That, in the opinion of this House, the government should bring forward, before the dissolution of the House, a reform of the employment insurance plan to implement the 17 recommendations contained in the unanimous report of the Standing Committee on Human Resources Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities, entitled “Beyond Bill C-2: a Review of Other Proposals to Reform Employment Insurance”.

Do I have unanimous consent?

Sue Barnes Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to table, in both official languages, a number of order in council appointments made recently by the government.

Denis Coderre for the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-33, an act to amend the Fisheries Act.

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

Jay Hill Prince George—Peace River, BC

Mr. Speaker, it is my honour and privilege today to present five petitions to the House.

The first three petitions concern the issue of substandard housing on our nation's military bases, and are signed by hundreds of Canadians from across Canada. They come from communities like Rossland, B.C., Canmore and Coleman, Alberta, North Battleford, Saskatchewan, Ste. Anne and Carman, Manitoba, St. Catharines, Cochrane, Windsor and Simcoe, Ontario, Kensington, P.E.I. and Springdale, Newfoundland.

They call upon Parliament to rein in the Canadian Forces Housing Agency by preventing any future rent increases, at least until improvements are made to bring substandard housing up to acceptable living conditions.

Jay Hill Prince George—Peace River, BC

Mr. Speaker, the next petition I am pleased to present today is on behalf of hundreds of citizens from the province of Saskatchewan. These concerned Canadians call upon Parliament to pass legislation that reconfirms the traditional definition of marriage as the lifelong union of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others.

Jay Hill Prince George—Peace River, BC

Mr. Speaker, the final petition I have the pleasure to present today is from constituents from my riding of Prince George—Peace River, citizens from Fort St. John, Charlie Lake, Baldonnel, Buick and other rural communities.

The petitioners are deeply concerned that with the passage of Bill C-250, which adds sexual orientation as an explicitly protected category under sections 318 and 319 of the Criminal Code of Canada, this could impinge upon moral and religious doctrines regarding homosexuality. Therefore, they call upon Parliament to protect the rights of Canadians to be free to share their religious beliefs with no fear of prosecution.

James Lunney Nanaimo—Alberni, BC

Mr. Speaker, I have 10 petitions, all on the same subject. They are on the traditional definition of marriage. These petitions come from across the country, many from my own riding from the city of Nanaimo. Others come from across B.C., Manitoba and Toronto. Some come from New Brunswick and some from Quebec: Sainte-Anne-du-Lac, Charlesbourg, Prince Édouard, Montreal, Gatineau, and even from francophone communities in St. Boniface and St-Norbert in Manitoba.

They are all calling on the government to preserve the traditional definition of marriage. They claim that elected members of Parliament should decide the marriage issue, not appointed judges. They call upon Parliament to take all necessary steps to preserve marriage as the union of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others.