House of Commons Hansard #27 of the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was budget.

Topics

Heritage Canada
Oral Questions

Noon

Liberal

Mauril Bélanger Ottawa—Vanier, ON

Mr. Speaker, the government has repeatedly indicated its intention to review the mandate of the CBC. This week the heritage committee asked to see and comment on the terms of reference of any such review.

We all know her boss, the Prime Minister, is not keen on parliamentary democracy. However, will the Minister of Heritage seize the opportunity and seek the input of her fellow parliamentarians in the review of the mandate of CBC, one of our most important cultural institutions?

Heritage Canada
Oral Questions

Noon

Durham
Ontario

Conservative

Bev Oda Minister of Canadian Heritage and Status of Women

Mr. Speaker, as the House knows, the CBC is important to Canada. Because it has not been kept up to date and it is threatened by new technologies, we believe a mandate review is called for.

Consequently, we have just received the motion. I will give it due consideration. In a democracy we will use every instrument we can to ensure that it has fulsome discussion.

Veterans Affairs
Oral Questions

May 19th, 2006 / noon

Conservative

Jeff Watson Essex, ON

Mr. Speaker, our military men and women fought for our freedom and many lost their lives doing so. This year veterans of the Essex and Kent Scottish Regiment are planning to replace a memorial at Dieppe, France.

Could the Minister of Veterans Affairs tell us what the government is doing to ensure our veterans complete this project?

Veterans Affairs
Oral Questions

Noon

New Brunswick Southwest
New Brunswick

Conservative

Greg Thompson Minister of Veterans Affairs

Mr. Speaker, first, I want to thank the member for Essex for his help with the Essex and Kent Scottish Regiment. It has done good work.

The Government of Canada will be assisting. DND will help in the transport of that monument to Dieppe. We will also be assisting simply because of the presentation the member made to me, to which the Prime Minister was made privy. Therefore, we will be assisting those veterans in their travel needs as well.

I want to commend the member also for reaching out to opposition members, particularly from Essex, Windsor and Tecumseh, for their help on this file.

Veterans Affairs
Oral Questions

Noon

Liberal

The Speaker Peter Milliken

That concludes question period for today. The Chair has notice of a question of privilege from the hon. member for Windsor--Tecumseh.

Oral questions
Privilege
Oral Questions

Noon

NDP

Joe Comartin Windsor—Tecumseh, ON

Mr. Speaker, I rise again to request consideration by the Speaker of this case of privilege involving the Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister and the attack that he made on the credibility of the member for Toronto--Danforth.

Since the initial discussion that we had on this earlier today, I have had confirmation from a member of our caucus that the conversation that the parliamentary secretary alleges to have taken place, and that he claims he overheard between that member and one of the other members of our caucus, in fact never took place.

She was not with the member for Toronto--Danforth at the time the conversation was alleged to have taken place, so the parliamentary secretary could not have overheard it.

This is damaging to the reputation of the member for Toronto--Danforth. As I mentioned earlier this morning, this continues the pattern of members of the government making statements about what other people said and then it turning out not to be true. It directly affects the ability of the member for Toronto--Danforth to do his job as a member of Parliament.

I am asking that the Chair take this under consideration. Mr. Speaker, if you are prepared to find that there has been a potential breach of privilege, I will move the necessary motion.

Oral questions
Privilege
Oral Questions

12:05 p.m.

Calgary Southeast
Alberta

Conservative

Jason Kenney Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister

Mr. Speaker, I would submit that this is clearly not in any fashion a point of privilege.

Yesterday, during an exchange in question period in response to a question from the leader of the NDP, the member for Toronto--Danforth, I reported some remarks that I had heard while I was walking into the main entrance of West Block this past Tuesday on my way to the meeting of the committee which was interviewing Mr. Gwyn Morgan with respect to his nomination for the public appointments commission.

At that time, just as I was entering the building, at precisely 9 a.m., I distinctly heard the leader of the NDP speaking to a colleague, not the member for Parkdale--High Park who was already in the committee. I was as usual running a couple of minutes late.

I distinctly heard the hon. leader of the NDP say that the hon. member for Parkdale--High Park was going to go through his speech and “Tear him apart”. He was not whispering. It was a clear, audible public statement he was making to a colleague on the way into the building.

I reported this remark because I believed it was contextual in terms of the NDP's approach to Mr. Morgan's nomination twice at committee and I did so again yesterday in the House.

I stand by the veracity of what I heard. I am sorry that the leader of the NDP and his colleague from Windsor object to the fact that I have reported what I clearly heard. I do not retract what I believe to be absolutely truthful and I do not believe this is a matter of privilege.

Oral questions
Privilege
Oral Questions

12:05 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Peter Milliken

The hon. member for Windsor--Tecumseh raised this matter this morning as a point of order. In my opinion, it may be a point of order. In my view, it is not a question of privilege because it is not his privileges that are involved in this dispute.

If it were a question of privilege at all, it would clearly be one that would involve the member for Toronto--Danforth and no one else.

I do not know how the hon. member can say his privileges as a member have been in any way damaged by a statement that the parliamentary secretary made about somebody else. I am having trouble with it. I have no difficulty in dismissing this as a question of privilege.

I have already indicated that I will take the point of order that he raised this morning under advisement. We have now heard further submissions on this matter. The government House leader indicated he might want to say something, and if he does, I will hear him in due course.

At the moment, the matter will stay under advisement. I can now at least add the submissions of the parliamentary secretary and of course those of the member for Windsor--Tecumseh which I will add to those that he has already given me on the point of order that was raised earlier this day and which I have under advisement. We will leave it at that point for the time being.

I have another notice of a point of order from the hon. member for Beaches--East York.

Oral Questions
Points of Order
Oral Questions

12:05 p.m.

Liberal

Maria Minna Beaches—East York, ON

Mr. Speaker, I wish to correct an unintentional error in my question to the Minister of Human Resources and Social Development in the House yesterday. It was my intention to say that the previous Liberal government committed to invest $1 billion over five years to develop a national caregiver agenda. Inadvertently, I said that the commitment was to invest $5 billion over five years. In no way did I intend to mislead members of the House and I apologize for the resulting confusion.

Oral Questions
Points of Order
Oral Questions

12:05 p.m.

Liberal

Mauril Bélanger Ottawa—Vanier, ON

Mr. Speaker, earlier this week during question period, you will recall that I brought up the matter of the Prime Minister quoting from a document that he was holding at the time in response to a question from a member of the official opposition. I asked, according to the rules of the House, that the document that the Prime Minister was quoting from be tabled.

Mr. Speaker, I ask that you look into the matter because those of us on this side of the House have clearly identified the document to be, indeed, a cabinet document. I wonder if we could get a resolution to that matter.

Oral Questions
Points of Order
Oral Questions

12:05 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Peter Milliken

As the hon. member knows, the Chair took the point under advisement, has it there, and will get back to the House, I am sure, in due course.

The hon. member for Malpeque is rising on a point of order.

Oral Questions
Points of Order
Oral Questions

12:10 p.m.

Liberal

Wayne Easter Malpeque, PE

Mr. Speaker, during question period today, I gave the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food the opportunity to apologize for how he misspoke in the House yesterday because what he said in Hansard was “$950 million today”. That $950 million is not there today.

Mr. Speaker, I wonder if you might ask the Conservatives to clarify the record.

Oral Questions
Points of Order
Oral Questions

12:10 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Peter Milliken

I think the hon. member for Malpeque knows that these things are matters of debate. He will be able to ask a question the week after next, or whenever we are next sitting, and maybe clarify the matter to his own satisfaction. However, it is not for the Chair to ask members to clarify their statements in the House, entertaining as that might be for the Chair to do. It is not something I would want to get into.

Government Response to Petitions
Routine Proceedings

12:10 p.m.

Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre
Saskatchewan

Conservative

Tom Lukiwski Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for Democratic Reform

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8)(b) I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's response to eight petitions.

Government Response to Petitions
Routine Proceedings

12:10 p.m.

Liberal

Lloyd St. Amand Brant, ON

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Further to a question I asked of the Minister of the Environment today, I wish to table the report from the Climate Institute on the Asia-Pacific Partnership.