Debates of April 26th, 1995

Petitions

[Bob Mills, Reform, Red Deer, AB]

Madam Speaker, I have three petitions to present today.

The first petition is signed by 45 people who express great concern with respect to the aiding or abetting of suicide and active or passive euthanasia.

[Bob Mills, Reform, Red Deer, AB]

Madam Speaker, the second petition which is signed by 42 people of my riding expresses their concern with abortion. The petitioners call upon Parliament to exercise its authority to enact legislation to halt abortion.

[Bob Mills, Reform, Red Deer, AB]

Madam Speaker, the last petition which I have to present is signed by 215 citizens. They request that Parliament support laws which will severely punish all violent criminals who use weapons in the commission of a crime and that Parliament support new Criminal Code firearms control provisions which recognize and protect the rights of law-abiding citizens to own and use recreational firearms.

[Cliff Breitkreuz, Reform, Yellowhead, AB]

Madam Speaker, I rise to present five petitions bearing hundreds of signatures of Yellowhead constituents.

These petitions are due largely to the efforts of Edson Reynolds of Evansburg. The petitioners ask Parliament to introduce legislation by which the criminal misuse of firearms would be severely punished and the right of law-abiding citizens to own and use firearms would be protected.

I concur with the petitioners.

Questions On The Order Paper

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

Madam Speaker, I would ask that all questions be allowed to stand.

[The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Maheu)]

Is that agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

Motion For Papers

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

Madam Speaker, I suggest that the notice of motion for the production of papers be allowed to stand.

[The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Maheu)]

Is that agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

Budget Implementation Act, 1995

[Alfonso Gagliano, Liberal, Secretary of State (Parliamentary Affairs) and Deputy Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, I move:

That, in relation to Bill C-76, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on February 27, 1995, not more than one further sitting day shall be allotted to the consideration of second reading stage of the Bill; and

That, fifteen minutes before the expiry of the time provided for Government Business on the allotted day of the second reading consideration of the said Bill, any proceedings before the House shall be interrupted, if required, for the purpose of this Order and, in turn, every question necessary for the disposal of the second reading stage of the Bill shall be put forthwith and successively, without further debate or amendment.

[The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Maheu)]

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[Some hon. members]

No.

[The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Maheu)]

All those in favour of the motion will please say yea.

[Some hon. members]

Yea.

[The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Maheu)]

All those opposed will please say nay.

[Some hon. members]

Nay.

[The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Maheu)]

In my opinion the yeas have it.

And more than five members having risen:

[The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Maheu)]

Call in the members.

(The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:)

[The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Maheu)]

I declare the motion carried.

The House resumed from April 6 consideration of the motion that Bill C-76, an act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on February 27, 1995, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

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

Madam Speaker, I am rising to participate in the debate today, in part

because of the importance of the bill. I want to put some views in respect of the bill on the record.

Also I want to anticipate what I know members opposite are going to say in the course of their remarks. I expect that you, Madam Speaker, and members of the House will be treated to a lot of bleating and whining and shrieking this afternoon about the evils of time allocation.

I want to speak briefly about the virtues of time allocation, at least in respect to the bill today. I certainly have had cause to criticize its use in the past. I want to point out today some relevant facts about the use of time allocation in the debate on this bill.

We have been debating this bill for four days. We debated it on March 30, March 31, April 3 and April 6. And there had been almost 16 hours of debate until today.

I turn to the experience we endured in respect of Bill C-93 during the debates in 1992 and 1993. That was another budget implementation bill. It implemented a budget much worse than the one to which Canadians have been subjected by the Minister of Finance. He has had to take very difficult steps in the budget, in part because of the dreadful budgets we endured during the Tory years. Members on this side of the House will remember.

[An hon. member]

Yes.

[Peter Milliken, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

I do not think anyone except the hon. member for Beaver River from the other side and some of the New Democrats will remember that.