Excise Tax Act   in this government, which always seems to be governing by the seat of its pants? So I cannot come down on the side of this measure today. I shall have to vote against it if the government refuses to give us a detailed report from the Finance Committee on its repercussions on all categories

The Reform Party  Mr. Speaker, let me ask the House the following skill-testing questions. What is the name of the party that preached listening to people and then proceeded to vote against a measure approved by business, government and natives in the Yukon Territory? What is the name

Canada Student Financial Assistance Act   to good programs for post-secondary education. I really see nothing new and nothing terribly earth shaking in these changes. I believe they are for the benefit of Canadians. Therefore, I suggest that this motion is out of order. If the motion stands I would urge all members to vote

Canada Student Financial Assistance Act   of the problems with this bill. At the end of the day, however, you will find we support this bill, but at this moment we will be speaking against and voting against the motion put forward by the Bloc Quebecois.

Integrity In Government   agreements entered into to terminate the Pearson deal. We felt that Canadian taxpayers should know the amounts paid and the recipients of those payments. Yet every Liberal in this House voted against that amendment, defeating it and preventing Canadians from possibly ever knowing what

Non-Confidence Motions  Mr. Speaker, on January 20 this year, the hon. member for Mission-Coquitlam tabled a motion whose purpose-and I say this for the benefit of our listeners who may be wondering where all this started-was to allow members to express themselves freely and to vote against the party

Pearson International Airport Agreements Act   be questioned, especially when they are much too close to this government and when they represent interests contributing to the election fund of the Liberal Party of Canada. For all these reasons, the Bloc Quebecois will vote against Bill C-22. We are still demanding a commission of inquiry

Canada Wildlife Act   their credibility. That is why we suggested the same amendments to the Standing Committee. As I explained earlier, and this happens regularly, our amendments were defeated. We will not vote against Bill C-24, but I think accepting our two amendments would have benefited the legislation. I

Yukon First Nations Self-Government Act  . If Bills C-33 and C-34 are passed, only cabinet will have to approve the other 10 yet to come. There is something seriously wrong here. I will vote against these bills and I urge my colleagues in this House to do the same.

Yukon First Nations Self-Government Act   spoke to many of my aboriginal friends and I asked them what they thought about that. Of course they disagreed and they voted against the Charlottetown accord because they did not feel that they were included. They did not understand many of the provisions. There was not the dialogue

Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Suspension Act, 1994   introduced, listened to the Reform Party argue that Bill C-18 should be amended and finally, voted against these amendments, we will not change our position. We stand by the original version of Bill C-18. If the government has decided to bend to the will of the Senate, then so be it. Let

Supply   Board allocating money to VIA Rail and to Industry grants. Then we want to be recorded as voting against the main estimates in their entirety.

Supply  Mr. Speaker, I understand from the negotiations we had that the vote we were to take is on the amendment to the motion. Therefore the government side is voting against the amendment. That is why I said in reverse of the vote that we took before. If I made a mistake at this hour

Supply   examples of backbench members of Parliament on the govern- ment side for instance, voting against government measures. It means that the cabinet and the Prime Minister have to be much more sensitive to backbench opinion and that is a good thing. I also want to say to Reform Party

Supply   should cut more than $1,000 out of his salary, but we are not recommending that at the moment. For the record, back in 1973 when the government allowed the estimates to be reduced, albeit by $20,000, the member for Shawinigan, our current Prime Minister, voted against the motion. He