House of Commons Hansard #77 of the 38th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was students.

Topics

Petitions
Routine Proceedings

4 p.m.

Conservative

Mark Warawa Langley, BC

Mr. Speaker, I have two petitions both calling for Parliament to use whatever legislation is necessary, including invoking section 33 of the charter, if necessary, to preserve and protect the current definition of marriage as being between one man and one woman.

Petitions
Routine Proceedings

4 p.m.

Conservative

Ken Epp Edmonton—Sherwood Park, AB

Madam Speaker, the petition I present today again has to do with the issue of marriage and the definition to be retained as the union of one man and one woman. The petitioners, mostly from my riding but also from adjacent areas, have drawn another important point, which is it is the duty of Parliament to ensure that marriage is defined as Canadians wish it to be defined. That is a role of Parliament, according to this petition, and I am very honoured to present it in the House today.

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns
Routine Proceedings

4 p.m.

Beauséjour
New Brunswick

Liberal

Dominic LeBlanc Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Madam Speaker, if Question No. 96 could be made an order for return, the return would be tabled immediately.

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns
Routine Proceedings

4:05 p.m.

The Acting Speaker (Hon. Jean Augustine)

Is that agreed?

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns
Routine Proceedings

4:05 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Question No. 96
Routine Proceedings

4:05 p.m.

Conservative

John Williams Edmonton—St. Albert, AB

With regard to the rubric “Losses of Public Property Due to an Offence or Other Illegal Act” for the Department of National Defence as listed on page 3.25 of Volume III of the Public Accounts of Canada 2003-2004, and the 4,611 cases of “theft of combat clothing/kit” totalling $234,074, the 13 cases of “theft of transportation equipment” totalling $13,848; the eight cases of “theft of machinery” totalling $2,319, the 16 cases of “theft of telecommunication equipment” totalling $4,097, the 39 cases of “theft of electrical equipment” totalling $32,733, the 36 cases of “theft of technical equipment” totalling $18,778, the 97 cases of “theft of tools” totalling $11,444, the 82 cases of “theft of weapons and accessories” totalling $4,228, the 471 cases of “theft of military specific equipment” totalling $21,683 and the 76 cases of “theft of non-military specific equipment” totalling $27,239: ( a ) what was stolen in each individual case; ( b ) what was the value of each individual item; ( c ) where was the location of the theft; and ( d ) were there any charges laid in any of the individual cases, and if so, which ones?

(Return tabled)

Question No. 96
Routine Proceedings

4:05 p.m.

Liberal

Dominic LeBlanc Beauséjour, NB

I ask, Madam Speaker, that all remaining questions be allowed to stand.

Question No. 96
Routine Proceedings

4:05 p.m.

The Acting Speaker (Hon. Jean Augustine)

Is that agreed?

Question No. 96
Routine Proceedings

4:05 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Motions for Papers
Routine Proceedings

April 6th, 2005 / 4:05 p.m.

Beauséjour
New Brunswick

Liberal

Dominic LeBlanc Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Madam Speaker, I ask that all Notices of Motions for the Production of Papers be allowed to stand.

Motions for Papers
Routine Proceedings

4:05 p.m.

The Acting Speaker (Hon. Jean Augustine)

Is that agreed?

Motions for Papers
Routine Proceedings

4:05 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

The House resumed from April 5 consideration of the motion that Bill C-38, an act respecting certain aspects of legal capacity for marriage for civil purposes, be read the second time and referred to a committee, and of the amendment.

Civil Marriage Act
Government Orders

4:05 p.m.

Liberal

Paul Szabo Mississauga South, ON

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. As there has not been any members rise to resume debate, I assume the question will be put and deferred until next week, as per the order previously approved by the House. Since there is a little time here, I want to ask the Chair to respond to what I believe is a problem with the bill. Clause 3 states:

It is recognized that officials of religious groups are free to refuse to perform marriages that are not in accordance with their religious beliefs.

The authorization to solemnize marriage is a matter of provincial jurisdiction. This is implying that somehow it is a federal responsibility. I am asking whether this clause should be in the bill. I would like to receive a response from the Chair whether in fact the clause is out of order.

Civil Marriage Act
Government Orders

4:05 p.m.

The Acting Speaker (Hon. Jean Augustine)

The member is getting into a point of debate. There will be opportunities in committee to raise his point of order.

Pursuant to order made on Thursday, March 24 the question to dispose of the amendment to the motion at second reading stage of Bill C-38 is deemed put and a recorded division is deemed demanded and deferred until Tuesday, April 12 at the expiry of the time provided for government orders.