House of Commons Hansard #103 of the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was forest.

Topics

Motions for Papers
Routine Proceedings

3:30 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

No.

Motions for Papers
Routine Proceedings

3:30 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Peter Milliken

All those in favour will please say yea.

Motions for Papers
Routine Proceedings

3:30 p.m.

Some hon. members

Yea.

Motions for Papers
Routine Proceedings

3:30 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Peter Milliken

All those opposed will please say nay.

Motions for Papers
Routine Proceedings

3:30 p.m.

Some hon. members

Nay.

Motions for Papers
Routine Proceedings

3:30 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Peter Milliken

In my opinion the yeas have it.

And five or more members having risen:

Call in the members.

(The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:)

Vote #130

Motions for Papers
Routine Proceedings

4:10 p.m.

Conservative

The Deputy Speaker Andrew Scheer

I declare the motion carried.

Motions for Papers
Routine Proceedings

4:15 p.m.

Conservative

Tom Lukiwski Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, SK

Mr. Speaker, I ask that all other notices of motions for the production of papers be allowed to stand.

Motions for Papers
Routine Proceedings

4:15 p.m.

Conservative

The Deputy Speaker Andrew Scheer

Is that agreed?

Motions for Papers
Routine Proceedings

4:15 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Seventh Report of the Standing Committee on Finance
Privilege
Routine Proceedings

November 24th, 2010 / 4:15 p.m.

Liberal

Paul Szabo Mississauga South, ON

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, after question period, the member for Outremont rose on a question of privilege concerning the leak of the finance committee's confidential draft report on its prebudget consultations. He also reported that the leak was by Mr. Russell Ullyatt the then employee of the member for Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar.

Also, yesterday at 6:23 p.m., after the presentations on the privilege issue were made, the clerk of the committee received another email from a Mr. Andy Gibbons, who has Conservative ties and is with the lobby firm of Hill & Knowlton. Today the clerk provided that copy of the email to the hon. members of the finance committee before our meeting started.

I bring this to the attention of the House and the Speaker for consideration of the question of privilege raised yesterday. It would appear the disclosure of now a fourth person is more than has been presented to the House with regard to how broad this has gone.

It appears this has gone much further than the House has been aware. As a consequence, I submit that information for the Speaker's consideration and I ask for the unanimous consent of the House to table the email from Mr. Gibbons to the clerk of the committee, in both official languages.

Seventh Report of the Standing Committee on Finance
Privilege
Routine Proceedings

4:15 p.m.

Conservative

The Deputy Speaker Andrew Scheer

Does the hon. member have the unanimous consent of the House to table this?

Seventh Report of the Standing Committee on Finance
Privilege
Routine Proceedings

4:15 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

No.

Seventh Report of the Standing Committee on Finance
Privilege
Routine Proceedings

4:15 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, I want to add my small intervention to this matter. Yes, indeed there was a fourth lobbyist, apparently, who received an email from the now terminated, former employee of the office of the member for Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar.

I would submit for your consideration, Mr. Speaker, that whether there are three or four, I think the arguments presented both for and against a breach of privilege yesterday are still germane. This does not change things, but I would point out for your consideration, as one of my colleagues said earlier, that there was another breach of confidentiality yesterday, made by the member for Mississauga South, who in his intervention spoke to emails that were discussed in camera at the finance committee. One of my colleagues asked him respectfully to apologize to the House for the breach of confidence. He did not do so. I would ask that you take that under consideration when considering the original breach of privilege motions and interventions that were made yesterday.