Joe Clark

[Ethics Counsellor, January 31st, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, that is a promise broken.

I have another question for the Prime Minister. In his various conversations with the president of the Business Development Bank was there any reference, direct or indirect, to the Grand-Mère Golf Club located next to the Auberge Grand-Mère, a golf club in which the Prime Minister had held shares?

[Ethics Counsellor, January 31st, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, my question to the Prime Minister is simple and it allows a yes or no answer. Will the Prime Minister fulfil his 1993 red book promise?

The Ethics Counsellor will be appointed after consultation with the leaders of all parties in the House of Commons and will report directly to parliament.

[Election Of Speaker, January 29th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, may I extend my congratulations to you. There is nothing extraordinary about the member for Kingston and the Islands playing such an important role in the life of parliament, nor is it the first time such a thing has happened. Sir John A. Macdonald, as well as Flora MacDonald, have represented this riding. It is a riding that has a strong tradition of service to the country and, today, you are part of that tradition.

I also congratulate the other candidates who put their names forward. I encouraged the members of my caucus not to put their names forward for this, and you are just fortunate, Mr. Speaker, that the hon. member for Saint John followed my advice on this occasion.

Mr. Speaker, we all recognize your long interest in this institution. As the Prime Minister said, you were a student of this institution before you were a member here. You understand the reason there is a parliament. You understand the responsibilities of this institution. You understand the importance of treating each member here as an individual with equal rights and equal responsibilities.

We as your constituents will be holding you to account for that view as we go forward.

We also all know that we are meeting at a time and electing a Speaker at a time when there is a declining respect for parliament and the profession of politics as a whole. It is a responsibility upon all of us in the next four years to ensure that we change that pattern and re-establish a respect for this institution.

That has to do with more than just comportment on the floor of the House. It has to do with more than what might be called respect. It also has to do with ensuring that this place becomes a House that has the power to determine the destiny of the country.

The House of Commons was established to have members of parliament with power, to have influence over affairs and a parliament with power to control the spending of government. We are all equal here.

There is a great difference between a government and a parliament. In a government there is a primus inter pares. The Prime Minister is a leader among others but not here. In the House of Commons we are all equal as members of parliament. With the greatest of respect to you, we expect to be treated that way in the days to come.

The House of Commons itself will consider changes in the rules and the regulations that need to be introduced. We are counting upon you to ensure that the rules now in place are interpreted in a sense of fairness and equality and make the House earn the respect of the people of the country. We all want to serve our country. We know you do too.

We congratulate you on your election today. On behalf of my party we look forward to working very constructively with you in the interests of parliament and of Canada.

[Transport, October 20th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, that raises a very interesting issue about how this parliament is able to function and get at facts that need to be known and conduct public business that needs to be carried out.

There was obviously a range of questions raised by the auditor general. The government has agreed to a special meeting at 12.30 p.m. today. That obviously will not allow the House to pursue the questions that arise from the report.

Let me ask the Deputy Prime Minister, will the government agree right now to a second meeting of the public accounts committee on Monday to allow the House of Commons to have a full examination of the—

[Transport, October 20th, 2000]

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

The Toronto airport authority was granted a $185 million rent reduction just after it signed its lease agreement. The auditor general said “The department could not provide us with the rationale”.

I have two questions for the Deputy Prime Minister. First, why was the rent reduced by a whopping $185 million? Second, was any minister directly or indirectly advised of or involved in discussions that led to that decision?

[Auditor General's Report, October 19th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is talking about the Canada lands corporation which is required to report. The Downsview corporation is not. It is protected by the way the government set it up. The Prime Minister can change that. He and the governor in council have the power under the access to information law to designate crown corporations that would be subject to the law.

My question is simple. Will the Prime Minister right now today give us a commitment that he will later this day have an order in council processed that would make the Downsview corporation subject to the access to information law so these secrets will be in the public domain so the public will know what is going on?

[Auditor General's Report, October 19th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister. It relates to the secret deal at Downsview.

The Prime Minister will know that crown corporations established by this parliament are subject to the access to information law. Crown corporations established as Downsview was are not subject to the access to information law. Is that the reason the Prime Minister set up Downsview in a way that has been criticized by the auditor general? Did he set it up deliberately to avoid scrutiny by the access to information law?

[Speaker Of The House, October 19th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, I wonder if, as one of the newer members of the House, I might be permitted to extend my great appreciation to you for your service to the country and more particularly to the Chamber in a way that has enhanced the reputation of Canada.

While I have only served occasionally under your guidance as Speaker, I fondly recall the years in which we served together in the House before you took that post. We tend to have a slightly different evaluation of the election in which your constituents kept you home. You will not take this at all personally, but Sir, I rather wish there had been more of those.

All of us in the House know that the office of Speaker is not an easy one. This is a House that can often edge to the borders of being out of control. It requires not only firmness in the chair but the kind of geniality in the chair you have demonstrated and the kind of respect that everyone in the House knows that you hold for parliament.

I know, Sir, that you are a hockey fan. You have seen a little bit of high sticking here. You have called a few misconducts or certainly a few offsides. You have maintained the capacity to maintain the order and respect of the House and the respect for the rules and the game that make it essential.

If I might add one thing, it is that part of your success as Speaker of this House is, I believe, because you are more than just an MP. You are also a teacher, someone with a background in education. I believe it has always been important to you to communicate to our fellow citizens the essence, the very nature, of this House of Commons.

The skills you brought as a communicator, as a lover of the institutions of Canada, as someone who wanted to ensure that our institutions are well known in the country, have added to the high regard in which you are held by all members of the House. Thank you for your service et bon chance.

[Canada Health Care, Early Childhood Development And Other Social Services Funding Act, October 19th, 2000]

An amendment was introduced at the plenary stage that was deemed to be in order. The Chair did not have the opportunity to call for a vote on that amendment. The report was made before a vote had been taken.

Consequently the process was not completed, and through no ill will. The House would certainly want to have the committee of the whole, in either committee of the whole forum or forum of the whole House, to be able to vote upon a motion properly put, accepted as being within the rules of parliament, and overlooked simply because of the fluctuation in time.

[Canada Health Care, Early Childhood Development And Other Social Services Funding Act, October 19th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order.