Privilege  The hon. member said he was raising a question of privilege about the use of time allocation. Now we are into Standing Order 56.1. This is very interesting but we had better stick to the subject under discussion. Has the member any more points to make on time allocation with respect to this question of privilege or is he finished with that?

Privilege  The hon. member claimed that the government's use of time allocation was a misuse of its authority and that the time had come “to declare the measures imposed by the government today as excessive and unorthodox”. The hon. member argued that the Speaker has the authority to refuse to put a time allocation motion if, in his judgment, the government is abusing its powers and the rules of the House by not allowing sufficient amount of time for debate.

Standing Orders  Speaker, you are very familiar with them, but perhaps some of the thousands of listeners out there in CPAC world are not. I will give a very brief description on the difference between closure and time allocation and why the government has chosen time allocation over and above closure about 99% of the time. I think we may have had a couple of closures, but it has almost always been time allocation.

Modernization Of House Of Commons Procedure  The outcome of all these reforms was that, while they indeed speeded up the legislative work of parliament, they considerably reduced the ability of members of parliament to make a personal contribution. Examples of this are the reduction in time allocated for private members' business, the increased use of time allocation motions, and the time restrictions in question period. Today we need to look at what the government has in mind with this parliamentary reform.

Canada Elections Act  On the matter of pensions, we happen to believe that people are fully entitled to pensions but the hypocrisy of the Alliance members on that issue, and again on this issue, is breathtaking. I have only a couple of minutes left, and we are under time allocation, but we are saddened that we are unable to deal with current trust funds. I know that come January 1 everything will be transparent under this bill and trust funds will no longer be able to exist.

Canada Elections Act  In the final moments of this debate I want to say to the House leader of the Bloc Quebecois that I appreciate that he shortened his remarks in order to give the member for Saint John and me an opportunity to speak, because of course the bill is under time allocation. I am pleased to speak at third reading of Bill C-24, an act to amend the Canada Elections Act and the Income Tax Act. It is a bill that changes how we finance elections and political parties in Canada.

Privilege  How about ministers or so-called leadership candidates accepting payments from undisclosed interests to finance their undeclared leadership races? How about my favourite issue: closure and time allocation? It has been implemented 75 times. That is a higher number than under any other government in the history of this great nation. It leads to frustration. Mr. Speaker, you had strong words to describe the abuse of time allocation and closure when you were in opposition.

Canada Elections Act  I declare the motion carried. Order, please. I wish to inform the House that, because of the proceedings on the time allocation motion, government orders will be extended by 30 minutes.

Canada Elections Act  Mr. Speaker, shame on the minister for introducing time allocation yet again. The Prime Minister has repeatedly said that Bill C-24 is about ending corruption in the Liberal Party. Heaven knows there are plenty of examples we can use. There is the ongoing Shawinigate investigation, secret contracts given to relatives of Mr.

Canada Elections Act  Speaker, that was not a very serious question asked by the hon. member. We are supposed to be discussing this morning why time allocation at this stage of the bill is required. Instead we have these questions which are not really serious and it surprises me because the member is usually a very serious person, particularly as it pertains to election laws.

Canada Elections Act  Frankly, we have been very frustrated and Canadians will not be the least impressed that on the one hand we have the government bringing forward legislation, and it is now obvious that it intends to invoke closure and push ahead and vote time allocation because it is hell-bent to get this legislation on the books, but on the other hand the bill actually does not do what the government said its purpose was in the first instance, and that is to level the playing field, to eliminate contributions both from corporations and from unions.

Canada Elections Act  In order to create an illusion that the Liberals were going to address that and do something about it, they came up with Bill C-24. They now intend, as was stated here a few minutes ago, to bring forward time allocation and rush this piece of legislation through because it is the most important issue that is seizing the nation. I mean everybody in the real world, outside of Ottawa and Parliament Hill, is talking about the need for Bill C-24.

Points of Order  The Chair had the best of intentions in wishing to give the hon. member for Provencher the opportunity to express his position in connection with a point of order, without in any way affecting the length of time allocated to private members' business. I would simply remind the House that I took that initiative and accept responsibility for it. That is why I have not announced debate because, at that point, any time taken up for any reason, point of order or otherwise, would cut into the time for debate in the hour allocated to private members' business.

Committees of the House  If I understood correctly, the additional time allocated was 10 minutes. I was generous in timing those 10 minutes.

Committees of the House  The table officers have told me that the original request was for a few minutes. Then, the chair occupant before me said that the time allocated would be 10 minutes. Thus, I thought that was what the hon. members had agreed to. Once again, I was generous with that 10 minute period. Now, I have simply opened the debate; I looked at the government side so the parties could alternate and I gave the floor to the hon. member for London West.