Deborah Grey

[Members Of Parliament, February 18th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, if for some reason some member of the House chose not to vote on that sensitive issue, whom would he or she be representing: the party position, his or her personal judgment or conscience, or the wishes of his or her constituents?

[Members Of Parliament, February 18th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I am glad you are here. My question to the Deputy Prime Minister has to do with the fact that our Prime Minister has gone on and on recently about the need for members to use their judgment. Yet the last time this House voted on the question of physician assisted suicide back in March 1993 the Prime Minister, then leader of the opposition, failed to show up to cast his vote.

Canadians are wondering when the Prime Minister-

[Members Of Parliament, February 18th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Deputy Prime Minister in the absence of the Prime Minister.

In recent days our Prime Minister-

[Members Of Parliament, February 17th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, we are in the Chamber. This is what concerns us today. I quote: "The erosion of confidence in politicians is partly a result of an arrogant style of political leadership. The people are irritated with governments that do not consult them or that disregard their views". Those words come straight from the Liberal red book.

When did the Prime Minister begin to disregard this section of his red book?

[Members Of Parliament, February 17th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister.

Yesterday the Prime Minister told Canadians that the whole idea of members voting solely on the basis of what their constituents want or believe is revolting.

At a time when Canadians are seeking better representation in Parliament, could the Prime Minister please explain why this is so revolting to him?

[Petitions, February 4th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, surely some of these things are important to the government, not just the opposition ranks.

My supplementary question is for the Deputy Prime Minister. Would she allow debate on just one petition pertaining to the credibility of Parliament and public trust in this particular institution, namely the petition that is currently circulating in the riding of Markham-Whitchurch-Stouffville?

[Petitions, February 4th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Deputy Prime Minister.

One of the few mechanisms which the Canadian public has for making direct input into the House of Commons is through the use of petitions. Yet petitions seem to be simply tabled here and left to collect dust. There is no mechanism whereby they can be debated or acted upon directly.

Would the government entertain the notion of further amending the standing orders so as to allow even for a one day debate on those petitions that enjoy a large degree of public support?

[Beaver River Constituency, February 4th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to make reference to the recent proposal by the federal Electoral Boundaries Commission of Alberta. It was released last Monday and suggests adding one new riding to Calgary. To facilitate this it proposes enlarging the Vegreville, Crowfoot, Athabasca and Elk Island ridings and totally eliminating the riding of Beaver River, which has only been in existence since the 1988 election.

What were its population projections? The numbers show our population has increased by some 4,000 people since then so why would it be eliminated so soon? Are we drawing lines between urban and rural Canada again? Are we going to demand that MPs travel even farther than they are now if Beaver River is dismantled and segmented out to other ridings?

I encourage all my constituents to attend the public hearings to be held in St. Paul, Lac la Biche and Redwater later this spring. Phone [phone] for dates and times.

Beaver River lives.

[Social Security System, February 2nd, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the comments of the member for Winnipeg South. I would like to make a few comments on his speech. Obviously there are political disagreements in terms of philosophies in the House, but I want to ask the member a couple of questions about some of the things he said in his 10-minute usage of time.

He attributed to my leader words to the effect of "cut it now so you will save it later". We in the House need to budget our own personal finances in such a way that they do not come after us. We need to live within our means. Do we then just spend it all now? What happens later?

Let me use the analogy of credit cards. Is the member then saying that he would be happy or he thinks it is advisable for those of us in the country who are responsible for social policy to use our American Express card to pay off our Visa?

Somehow this vicious cycle needs to end. Having worked in the child welfare system he realizes how important it is to look after the lives of children. What if his government that is responsible for the funding came to him in the province of Manitoba and said: "The gig is up; there is no more cash?" How is he going to protect the lives of the children? Should we not specifically target spending to make sure that the people who absolutely need it will get that funding? How will American

Express paying off his Visa bill make sure that we do look after one million poor children in Canada?

[Recall Act, February 2nd, 1994]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-210, an act to provide for the recall of members of the House of Commons.

Madam Speaker, I would like to table this. I appreciate the chance to introduce today a bill to provide for the recall of members of the House of Commons.

This bill would allow the electors in any federal constituency to recall their member of Parliament by circulating a petition containing the names and addresses of a majority of the voters who voted in that riding in the previous election. If a recall petition were to be deemed successful by the chief electoral officer a by-election would be called for that seat.

The bill also contains a number of limitations on the recall process designed to avoid superfluous and mischievous employment of this device.

I believe this bill would do more to ensure democratic parliamentary reform than any other single measure. I recommend that the government support this bill as quickly as possible. As the late Senator Stan Waters who said regularly:

"Democracy delayed is democracy denied". I hope we act on this quickly.

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