House of Commons Hansard #54 of the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was billion.

Topics

Statements by Members
Points of Order
Oral Questions

3:30 p.m.

Liberal

Martha Hall Findlay Willowdale, ON

Mr. Speaker, I would just add that many times members in this House vote for or against specific legislation, not necessarily because they do or do not support it but perhaps, in some cases, because they feel that a very just cause can be improved by voting for better legislation.

I echo my colleagues who have said that just because members vote a particular way does not mean they deserve personal insults.

I do not agree with many of the things my Bloc Québécois colleagues say or the reason they are here, but every member of this House was elected by a majority of Canadians and therefore has a right to be here.

Every member here, no matter how we feel or how we vote, deserves to be treated with respect and civility, which is the only we can all show respect for this institution.

Statements by Members
Points of Order
Oral Questions

3:30 p.m.

NDP

Wayne Marston Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON

Mr. Speaker, I will add to this discussion by saying one thing. How did we get to this place and time? How did we get to this point where we are attacking each other to this degree of severity, across this floor, showing a lack of respect for both sides and for all members?

I have to calm myself down because I am very concerned with this. This is a watershed moment that we can step back from and move forward to restore some dignity in this place.

Statements by Members
Points of Order
Oral Questions

3:30 p.m.

Liberal

Jean-Claude D'Amours Madawaska—Restigouche, NB

Mr. Speaker, I will be brief. In this country, we are entitled to our opinions. That means that the 308 members of this House can make comments and support positions.

Members may or may not agree with other members. I will never agree with the fact that the member for Saint Boniface wants the Liberal members to apologize because they do not think like the Conservatives. It is not acceptable that members of the House should not be entitled to their own opinions. We do not need to share the Conservative government's views all the time.

We represent four political parties, and we are entitled to be respected as individuals and as parliamentarians. I will never apologize for having opinions and standing up for the people I represent. I will never accept the Conservatives' position. Never!

Statements by Members
Points of Order
Oral Questions

3:30 p.m.

Bloc

Serge Ménard Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC

Mr. Speaker, as one of the oldest members, I may be one of the calmest. As you know, the crux of the matter is the insults regularly hurled at the Bloc Québécois because, according to those uttering the insults, we vote against protecting children.

Many hon. members would know exactly what the bill was about and might change their mind, as might you Mr. Speaker, if they bothered to read the entire bill and not just the title. It takes two minutes and if they read it, they would see that the bill is not about protecting children. That is never mentioned in the bill. They would see that it is about the exploitation of persons under the age of 18. The Bloc Québécois voted against the bill because it felt that anyone exploiting young people under the age of 18, in one way or another, does not deserve a minimum of five years, which is appropriate for those who exploit children.

Basing an opinion on the title alone is what misleads hon. members. Having not read the bill, they hurl insults that they would refrain from using if they had read the bill with a modicum of intellectual honesty.

I hope we can deal with this once and for all, Mr. Speaker, because it is very insulting to be told over and over again that we vote against the protection of children, that we are against protecting children, and that when we defend the rights of everyone in a legal system we are defending criminals' rights, and it triggers reactions that can be just as insulting, I agree. However, I have always refrained from reacting that way.

Statements by Members
Points of Order
Oral Questions

3:35 p.m.

Prince George—Peace River
B.C.

Conservative

Jay Hill Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, I will keep this extremely brief. I have made this mini-speech many times in the past but I would urge all colleagues from both sides of the House to consider tempering their remarks in the days and weeks ahead. We still have three weeks to go before the House is scheduled for the summer recess.

As House leader for the government, I certainly try to work co-operatively with my colleagues on the other side of the House to accomplish what we have been sent here by our constituents to accomplish, which is to govern our nation. I would suggest that we all take a breath here and consider tempering our remarks over the days and weeks ahead because the summer weather will get hot and I am sure it will get warmed up in this House.

I have always respected the fact that this is a place of lively debate. When I listened to my hon. colleague from the Bloc Québécois on his question of privilege or point of order about what was said during statements today, I did not hear one thing that, in some people's opinion, would not have been the truth. I did not hear one thing that was unparliamentary, except what he said, in my estimation, when he was hollering out across the way Calamity Jane, personally attacking a colleague by calling her the name “Calamity Jane”.

I do not remember anything my colleague said during his comments that personally attacked an individual member. They might dispute what has been said, and that is their right as members of Parliament to dispute in lively debate what is said, but it really does damage to my colleague from the Bloc's argument that he rose about insults when he, in turn, in the middle of his point of order, called my colleague Calamity Jane, a personal insult.

I rise to point out that we want to always remember to temper our remarks because what is viewed as insults by some obviously is viewed as debate by others.

Statements by Members
Points of Order
Oral Questions

3:35 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Peter Milliken

I thank all the hon. members who participated in this debate this afternoon.

I want to say that I have given warnings previously about statements by members.

I suggested that hon. members should avoid making statements about other members, and should certainly refrain from making personal attacks. In my opinion, we have had some that were very close to crossing that line. I can perhaps intervene more often, but I hope that after the discussions in the House today, all hon. members will take note of what has happened.

I will review the statements made by the member for Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord.

I will review his complaints. If there is a problem, I will come back to the House. Otherwise, as suggested by the hon. Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, I hope that we can have fewer personal attacks and fewer attacks against other parties, especially during S.O. 31 statements.

I urge hon. members to discuss topics that are important to them.

I also have notice of a point of order from the hon. member for Churchill arising out of statements by members.

Statements by Members
Points of Order
Oral Questions

3:40 p.m.

NDP

Niki Ashton Churchill, MB

Mr. Speaker, during my statement earlier today there was an incredible amount of commotion. As a result, even members sitting directly next to me and around me could not hear what I had to say.

My right to be heard by Canadians and members of the House were abridged. I would hope that, in the future, members' ability to be heard, not only in the House but by Canadians, will be respected and ensured.

Statements by Members
Points of Order
Oral Questions

3:40 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Peter Milliken

I am sure it will be. I could hear the hon. member and will look at the television version. I suspect it could be heard on television as well, so, in that sense, I think it was probably all right. Had I not been able to hear, I would have stood up and interrupted. There was a lot of noise, I agree, but I could hear the hon. member.

Oral Questions
Points of Order
Oral Questions

3:40 p.m.

Liberal

Anita Neville Winnipeg South Centre, MB

Mr. Speaker, during question period, the Minister of International Cooperation said that she had read the 1994 Cairo action plan on population and development. I wonder if she could please table it in its entirety so that Canadians can see what in fact she left out in her remarks.

Oral Questions
Points of Order
Oral Questions

3:40 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Peter Milliken

She did not refer to the document or read from the document so she is not required to table it, but I am sure the minister will bear in mind the hon. member's comment and, if she wishes to table the document, she is free to do so at any time.

Government Response to Petitions
Routine Proceedings

3:40 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, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8)(b) I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's response to one petition.

Copyright Modernization Act
Routine Proceedings

3:40 p.m.

Conservative

Jay Hill Prince George—Peace River, BC

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-32, An Act to amend the Copyright Act.

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

International Trade
Committees of the House
Routine Proceedings

3:40 p.m.

Conservative

Lee Richardson Calgary Centre, AB

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the second report of the Standing Committee on International Trade in relation to Bill C-2, An Act to implement the Free Trade Agreement between Canada and the Republic of Colombia, the Agreement on the Environment between Canada and the Republic of Colombia and the Agreement on Labour Cooperation between Canada and the Republic of Colombia.

The committee has studied the bill and has decided to report the bill back to the House with amendments.

Industry, Science and Technology
Committees of the House
Routine Proceedings

June 2nd, 2010 / 3:40 p.m.

Conservative

Michael Chong Wellington—Halton Hills, ON

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the second report of the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology, concerning its study of Bill C-309, An Act establishing the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Region of Northern Ontario. The committee requests an extension of 30 days to be able to properly study the bill.

I also have the honour to present, in both official languages, the third report of the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology, in relation to its study of Bill C-393, An Act to amend the Patent Act (drugs for international humanitarian purposes) and to make a consequential amendment to another Act.

The committee requests a 30-day extension in order to give the bill proper consideration and to hear all witnesses who wish to appear.

Industry, Science and Technology
Committees of the House
Routine Proceedings

3:45 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Peter Milliken

With respect to both reports tabled by the hon. member for Wellington—Halton Hills, pursuant to Standing Order 97.1(3)(a) a motion to concur in the report is deemed moved, the question deemed put and a recorded division deemed demanded and deferred until Wednesday, June 9, immediately before the time provided for private members' business.