House of Commons Hansard #101 of the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was internet.

Topics

Business of Supply--Opposition Motion
Points of Order
Oral Questions

3:40 p.m.

NDP

Libby Davies Vancouver East, BC

Mr. Speaker, I am rising on this point of order because it does have to do with the NDP supply day tomorrow, on Bill C-311.

I would say, first, that I have listened to the government House leader's points about his belief that this would require unanimous consent, but I would point out that we are bringing this forward as a supply day motion, of course, and that within this motion there is still a vote to take place. So, on our supply day we are bringing forward the contents of this bill, because we do think it is an urgent matter, but that in no way negates the need to have a vote on our supply day motion, which of course will take place.

I would point out that we do believe this motion is in order because opposition parties have always been given quite a lot of latitude to propose whatever motion they want so long as it is written in a regular form and as a regular motion.

Page 724 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice by Marleau and Montpetit, first edition, because that is the one we are dealing with, states that:

The Standing Orders give Members a very wide scope in proposing opposition motions on Supply days and, unless the motion is clearly and undoubtedly irregular (e.g., where the procedural aspect is not open to a reasonable argument), the Chair does not intervene.

I would suggest that the motion is worded in a regular way and simply proposes to do things that have, in fact, been done in this place from time to time on previous occasions under closure or time allocation or by unanimous consent. I do believe that because this is part of our supply day, we do have greater latitude in terms of what we choose to bring forward. Certainly the basic tenet and principle of the House, taking a vote, will be very much a part of this process, and so, Mr. Speaker, I would urge you to see that this motion we propose to bring forward tomorrow is in order and that the House be allowed to debate the motion and to vote on the motion as we normally would do with any other supply day motion.

Business of Supply--Opposition Motion
Points of Order
Oral Questions

3:45 p.m.

Conservative

Jay Hill Prince George—Peace River, BC

Mr. Speaker, I would very briefly point out the obvious, that if this process were allowed to stand, we would have in the House a situation in which any opposition party could put forward a similar motion on any private member's bill or motion and have it expedited through the process. I think it would be very unwise for the House to accept that.

Business of Supply--Opposition Motion
Points of Order
Oral Questions

3:45 p.m.

Liberal

Ralph Goodale Wascana, SK

Mr. Speaker, with respect to the same point of order, I would just bring your attention perhaps to the obvious, that this is a matter that will need your urgent attention. If the New Democrats in fact intend to call that motion for the opposition day tomorrow, the issue before you will need to be resolved before that time.

Business of Supply--Opposition Motion
Points of Order
Oral Questions

3:45 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Peter Milliken

I thank the hon. member for Wascana for that very helpful advice. It is something that had occurred to me. Members can see why I am so interested in the point that is being raised.

In any event, I thank the hon. government House leader and the hon. member for Vancouver East for their submissions on this issue.

I certainly agree that it is one that has to be resolved immediately, as suggested by the hon. member for Wascana.

I will give a preliminary ruling now which is that, in my view, this motion is out of order, and I will not permit it to be moved tomorrow. Someone will have to choose something else for tomorrow's supply day and members can sort that out.

In any event, I will give reasons for my decision on this matter in due course. I will come back with something more reasoned. However, I point out that I think, as the government House leader has said, even if this kind of motion could be moved, as a preliminary observation on the matter, there is no provision whatsoever for debate on the bill; it would be deemed adopted at all stages now, which, as the hon. House leader has pointed out, could be done by unanimous consent. However, even on time allocation or on closure, there is provision for debate for a certain specified time; it may be short, but there is a debate. With this motion, there is none and so, the debate would be on the motion only, not on the bill. Accordingly, in my view, the bill goes beyond what is permitted for supply debates.

I will give a more elaborate reason outlining my views on this matter to the House in due course but, at least for tomorrow, we will not proceed with that.

The hon. parliamentary secretary to the government House leader has a point of order.

Technical Difficulties in the Chamber
Oral Questions

October 27th, 2009 / 3:45 p.m.

Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre
Saskatchewan

Conservative

Tom Lukiwski Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, this revolves around an incident which occurred this week, on Monday, October 26.

You will be aware, Mr. Speaker, as most members are, that the interpretation services of the House failed on that day, and consequently that evening during the adjournment proceedings, interpretation services were not available.

The Bloc Québécois quite appropriately pointed out that because of that, their members were impeded from actually getting clear interpretation of the questions and the dialogue and debate that would take place.

Because of that, there have been discussions among all parties and I think you would find unanimous consent for the following motion:

That, notwithstanding any Standing Order or usual practice of the House, on Wednesday, October 28, 2009, the proceedings pursuant to Standing Orders 38 be extended by no more than 20 minutes to allow the hon. Member for Hull—Aylmer and the hon. Member for Don Valley West to raise questions that were to have been raised on Monday, October 26, 2009.

Technical Difficulties in the Chamber
Oral Questions

3:50 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Peter Milliken

Does the hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the government House leader have the unanimous consent of the House to propose this motion?

Technical Difficulties in the Chamber
Oral Questions

3:50 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Technical Difficulties in the Chamber
Oral Questions

3:50 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Peter Milliken

The House has heard the terms of the motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

Technical Difficulties in the Chamber
Oral Questions

3:50 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Technical Difficulties in the Chamber
Oral Questions

3:50 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Peter Milliken

(Motion agreed to)

Iran
Oral Questions

3:50 p.m.

Conservative

Scott Reid Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON

Mr. Speaker, I am relieved to see that we are feeling in the mood for unanimous consent again. There was a consultation among the parties and I believe you will find unanimous consent for the following motion:

That, in the opinion of the House,

(a) Canada supports the democratic aspirations of the people of Iran;

(b) Canada condemns the use of violence and force by Iranian authorities against their own people to suppress pro-democracy demonstrations following the Iranian presidential elections of June 12, 2009;

(c) Canada condemns the use of torture by Iranian authorities;

(d) Canada calls for the immediate release of all political prisoners held in Iran;

(e) Canada calls on Iran to fully respect all of its human rights obligations, both in law and in practice.

(f) Canada condemns Iran's complete disregard for legally binding UN Security Council Resolutions 1696, 1737, 1747, and 1803 and International Atomic Energy Agency requirements.

(g) Canada affirms its opposition to nuclear proliferation and condemns any pursuit by Iran of nuclear weapons capability.

(h) Canada recommends to international organizations of which it is a member that a new set of targeted sanctions be implemented against Iran, in concert with allies, unless Iran comes into compliance with its human rights and nuclear obligations in law and in practice.

Iran
Oral Questions

3:50 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Peter Milliken

Does the hon. member for Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington have the unanimous consent of the House to propose this motion?

Iran
Oral Questions

3:50 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Iran
Oral Questions

3:50 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Peter Milliken

The House has heard the terms of the motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

Iran
Oral Questions

3:50 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.