Debates of June 17th, 1994

The Environment

[Charles Caccia, Liberal, Davenport, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Industry.

There are disturbing reports in connection with the trade agreement being negotiated between the federal government and the provinces to the effect that plans for cutting interprovincial trade barriers will create environmental and social harm.

Can the minister assure this House that the environment is being taken fully into account in these negotiations and that the end result will be a trade agreement in which environmental, social and trade goals will have been integrated?

[John Manley, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, I will of course pay tribute to the great reputation my colleague from Davenport has on environmental issues and his concerns. When he raises concerns on theses issues we know they come from understanding and heartfelt conviction.

In negotiating this internal trade agreement, for the first time in a trade agreement we are including a chapter dealing with environmental protection. It is the first time we have done that.

Let me say that among the principles we are including-and the council of ministers on the environment has been directly involved in the process and my colleague, the Minister of the Environment, has consulted on it-the environmental chapter will include provisions that will prevent provinces from weakening environmental measures as an inducement for investment. The chapter will encourage upward harmonization of environmental measures. Finally, the chapter will allow for the use of the precautionary principle.

These are key points. I know Reform Party members are not interested in the environment. They are indicating that by their response. We think it is important and I think it is important as well.

Government Programs

[Nelson Riis, NDP, Kamloops, BC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the minister of human resources who, along with all Canadians, was delighted when the United Nations identified Canada out of 185 countries as the best place to live and raise a family.

[Some hon. members]

Hear, hear.

[Nelson Riis, NDP, Kamloops, BC]

We will also realize that one of the main reasons for that designation was the incredible wide range of social programs that reflect a caring and compassionate society.

The minister has indicated some dramatic, drastic changes and, from some of the leaked reports, perhaps even draconian changes. He has also indicated he will release his proposals in the middle of July when Parliament is not sitting. To keep in line with the traditions of the government to announce to Parliament first-

[The Speaker]

Order. We had a comment earlier that there must be a full moon. I suggest the moon is going to be out if we have long questions like this. Would the hon. member please put his question.

[Nelson Riis, NDP, Kamloops, BC]

Mr. Speaker, when you only get one question a year you have to take advantage of that.

[The Speaker]

It surely should not take a year to put it.

[Nelson Riis, NDP, Kamloops, BC]

To keep the tradition of the government of making major announcements when Parliament sits, would the minister give some thought to recalling Parliament in the middle of July so Parliament can receive his report and provide an opportunity for some immediate debate on this very critical set of changes?

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Solicitor General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, will the hon. member give a cast iron undertaking that he will definitely be here?

Points Of Order

[Dave Chatters, Reform, Athabasca, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order to correct the record.

During my question to the minister and in his response he said that we refused to meet with the Council of Yukon Indians. In fact we arranged a meeting with the Council of Yukon Indians.

[The Speaker]

I just want to make a clarification before I start getting some letters.

When the hon. member for The Battlefords-Meadow Lake rose to make a statement today I mentioned he was from Saskatoon-Clark's Crossing and then I said that was close enough.

I meant of course not that your ridings were close enough but that your seatmate was next to you. I just do not want to get any letters on that and I wanted to clarify it.

[Dick Harris, Reform, Prince George—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday during clause by clause consideration of Bill C-33 and Bill C-34 in the Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development the member for Yukon was present and allowed to vote at the committee.

She was not a legal voting member according to Standing Order 114(2)(c). The standing order reads as follows:

At any time when no list has been filed with the clerk of the committee pursuant to paragraph (a) of this section or when no notice has been received by the clerk of the committee pursuant to paragraph (b) of this section, the Chief Whip of any recognized party may effect substitutions by filing notice thereof with the clerk of the committee, having selected the substitutes from among all the Members of his or her party and/or the independent members listed as associate members-pursuant to Standing Order 104(4)-

The relevant phrase is: "the independent members listed as associate members". House of Commons records will indicate that the member for Yukon was not then and is not now an associate member of the Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development.

Although a substitution form was filed by the chief opposition whip with the clerk naming her as a substitute, she did not meet the requirements as an independent under the standing orders in order to be a legitimate voting member. Yet the chairman of the committee allowed her to vote on more than one occasion.

Should you, Mr. Speaker, review the minutes of the committee meeting you will further note that I raised the matter as a point of order and it was dismissed by the chair. Even though the chair, the hon. member for Prince Albert-Churchill River, was made aware of this irregularity he continued to allow the member for Yukon to vote and participate as a member of the committee in good standing.

We are not questioning the presence of the hon. member for Yukon as the elected representative of Yukon. What we are questioning is the chair's primary responsibility to ensure that the committee operates under the rules established by the House of Commons.

I realize, Mr. Speaker, you rarely rule on proceedings in committee. However this is a clear breach of the standing orders. It is not a matter which can or should be left in the committee where it originated. The rules have been broken throughout the entire clause by clause consideration of Bill C-33 and Bill C-34. The report of the committee should be ruled out of order and the committee should be directed to go back and reconsider clause by clause Bills C-33 and Bill C-34.

The chairman of the aboriginal affairs committee whose role it is to uphold the rules of the committee knowingly allowed the rules to be broken. I suggest the chairman of the aboriginal affairs committee resign and allow another member to preside over clause by clause reconsideration of Bill C-33 and Bill C-34.

[Don Boudria, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I also was a substitute member on that committee for a portion of last evening and starting at roughly 4.45 a.m. today.

It is well known by you, Mr. Speaker, that committees are masters of their own business. That is a principle that has long been accepted by Parliament and in previous rulings. Need I remind the Chair of the ruling on the Lachance case in the early 1980s as well as the ruling on what is known commonly as the Blenkarn report on the goods and services tax.

Furthermore, in the unlikely event, Mr. Speaker, that you were to review the proceedings of the committee you would find that in no case was any vote in a position whereby one person would have changed the vote. In fact for virtually all votes we had scores of 6:2 that were registered; in other words six people carrying each clause versus two against. The only exceptions I remember during the whole night were the odd votes on which one member of the Reform Party voted with the government making the score 7:1 instead of 6:2.

To review what I said previously, whether or not the vote deems that it is appropriate for him to review the business of the committee would not change the outcome of the vote. In any case, Mr. Speaker, sustaining the precedents I have brought to your attention I think you would rule that in cases such as these the Speaker has not interfered with the reports of committees in the past.

[Nelson Riis, NDP, Kamloops, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to use this opportunity to point out what I believe is a serious fault in our system. While you review the committee events of last evening perhaps a point to keep in mind is the people of Yukon chose the hon. member for Yukon to represent them as their member of Parliament, knowing full well she was also a member of the New Democratic Party.

The issue before the aboriginal affairs committee last night was dealing exclusively with that territory, Indian land claims and Indian self-government in the Yukon territory. Being the only member from that territory it seems not unreasonable that she would want to play an advisory role, a serious role, in an issue that dealt explicitly and exclusively with her constituents.

Technically my hon. friend may be correct that it reveals some of the inappropriateness of some of our standing orders, particularly as they refer to committee and the role of so-called independent members. For my friend-and I respect the technical case that he is making-to suggest for a moment that the sole representative for the Yukon territory not be allowed to participate in critical legislation regarding her constituents surely must point out a major flaw in our system.

[Dick Harris, Reform, Prince George—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I have listened to hon. members and the point is not that the hon. member was allowed to be present and participate in the committee. The point is that this was a clear breach of the rules, of the standing orders. The chairman was in complete breach of his responsibility as chairman by not recognizing the point of order I raised, which was a very clear point of order.

As I mentioned, we have no difficulty with the hon. member for Yukon being present. The difficulty we have which we raised in the committee meeting last night with the chairman was that by allowing her to vote the chair was in clear breach of the standing orders that govern the committee proceedings.

We ask, Mr. Speaker, that you rule on that point.

[Paul Szabo, Liberal, Mississauga South, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on the same point of order. I would simply like to advise the House that I was in attendance at the committee meeting between midnight and 5 a.m. during the point at which the question was raised by the hon. member.

The clerk presented the appropriate documents to the Reform Party for examination and advised the chair of the committee that the member for Yukon was eligible to vote. The chair proceeded on the basis of the advice of the clerk appointed by the House.

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

I would like to speak, if I may, Mr. Speaker, on the point of order that was just raised. In my mind, the Official Opposition is perfectly entitled to allow any member of this House it pleases to speak on an issue that not only concerns a member from a party other than ours but also on which the hon. member in question had special knowledge.

We think it is an extremely open-minded thing to do to transcend party boundaries and draw on the parliamentary expertise of all members of this House so as to improve the bill under review and ensure it better meets the needs of the people for whom it is intended.

I do not think it is in the interest of the Reform Party to try and control or decide beforehand who should or should not be allowed to speak on this bill. We have willingly agreed to let the hon. member use speaking time which was ours. I believe there are precedents in parliamentary law in that regard. I think such a gesture serves democracy well, as it reflects unselfishness and care for first-rate legislative action.

[Dick Harris, Reform, Prince George—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, on the same point of order, I made it clear earlier that we had no objection to the presence of the hon. member for Yukon there and in fact participating in the debate. The point I raise in this point of order is the fact that she was not a legal voting member of that committee.

Even though the chief opposition whip had signed the proper notice with the clerk, the fact is the member for Yukon was not listed as an associate member and therefore-

[The Acting Speaker (Mr. Kilger)]

I think the member already made that point earlier. We do not need to hear points repeated.

[Len Taylor, NDP, The Battlefords—Meadow Lake, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I would like one short opportunity to intervene in this point of order as well.

I am an associate member of that committee. The leader of my party, the member for Yukon, was sitting on my behalf in the aboriginal affairs committee.

What this debate points out is that there could be a flaw in our standing orders that this House now has an opportunity to correct, knowing the difficulties that it puts in place for independent, associate or other members of this House who have an interest in committee work but who are not members of a specific committee.

On behalf of the member for Yukon and my party I want to thank the members of the Official Opposition for their co-operation and assistance in allowing the member for Yukon to participate in the way she was able to during that committee.

I think the work the members of the Official Opposition have done in this case should serve as an example of the change that we need to make in the standing orders so that we will be able to allow forms to be signed by someone who cannot sign a form, to allow for participation of other members.

Members realize that an associate member has no way to transfer his or her place at the table to another member and that the only means of voting is to take the place of a member who does have a voting spot which rests with the three major parties.

[The Deputy Speaker]

Hon. colleagues, I wish to thank all the hon. members who have spoken on this rather sensitive question.

We are dealing with Standing Order 114. The matter gets before the House today because of the fact there will be a report presented from the relevant committee. The matter will be considered carefully, taking into mind all of what the members have said today and the Chair will make a ruling on it presumably on Monday.

Convention On The Rights Of The Child

[Albina Guarnieri, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 33(2), I have the pleasure to present to this House, in both official languages, the first Canadian report to the United Nations on the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

Order In Council Appointments

[Peter Milliken, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to table in this House today, in both official languages, a number of Order in Council appointments which were made recently by the government.

Pursuant to Standing Order 110(1), these are deemed referred to the appropriate standing committees, a list of which is attached.

Government Response To Petitions

[Peter Milliken, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I am also pleased to table, in both official languages and pursuant to Standing Order 36(8), the government's response to two petitions.