Debates of Dec. 2nd, 1996

Ways And Means

[The Acting Speaker (Mr. Milliken)]

The hon. member for Regina-Lumsden will know that was the effect of the consent that was given in the application of the vote, because I believe his party voted no on Motion No. 10 as well.

The House will now proceed to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the subamendment.

[Bill Gilmour, Reform, Comox—Alberni, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Unless I am mistaken, you asked for the approval of the House, but the government whip did not say which way the government was going to vote.

[The Acting Speaker (Mr. Milliken)]

Just to clarify the position for the House, the chief government whip asked that the vote taken on Motion No. 10, which was the first vote, be applied to the second vote. I sought the consent of the House to make that application. Two names were added by the Reform whip and subject to that, I thought there was House agreement that it be done and I declared the motion carried. That is why there was not an indication as to how the government would be voting. It was clear from the proposal which the chief government whip put to the House.

The House resumed from November 29 consideration of the motion that Bill C-29, an act to regulate interprovincial trade in and the importation for commercial purposes of certain manganese-based substances, be read the third time and passed; and of the amendment and the amendment to the amendment.

Manganese-Based Fuel Additives Act

[The Acting Speaker (Mr. Milliken)]

The House will now proceed to the recorded division on the amendment to the amendment of Mr. Sauvageau at the third reading stage of Bill C-29.

[Bob Kilger, Liberal, Stormont—Dundas, ON]

Mr. Speaker, if the House would agree I would propose that you seek unanimous consent that members who voted on the previous motion be recorded as having voted on the motion now before the House, with Liberal members voting nay.

[Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral, Bloc, Laval Centre, QC]

Official opposition members will vote yes, Mr. Speaker.

[Chuck Strahl, Reform, Fraser Valley East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, Reform Party members present are voting yea, with the addition of the hon. member for North Island-Powell River. He is in on this vote as well.

[John Solomon, NDP, Regina—Lumsden, SK]

Mr. Speaker, New Democrat members of Parliament present vote no on this matter.

[Gilles Bernier, Independent, Beauce, QC]

No, Mr. Speaker.

(The House divided on the amendment to the amendment, which was negatived on the following division:)

[The Acting Speaker (Mr. Milliken)]

I declare the amendment to the amendment lost.

The next question is on the amendment.

[Bob Kilger, Liberal, Stormont—Dundas, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I will try one more time for unanimous consent to apply the results of the vote on the subamendment to the vote presently before the House which is on the amendment.

[The Acting Speaker (Mr. Milliken)]

The House has heard the terms of the proposal of the chief government whip. Is there unanimous consent?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Acting Speaker (Mr. Milliken)]

I declare the amendment lost.

The next question is on the main motion.

[Bob Kilger, Liberal, Stormont—Dundas, ON]

Mr. Speaker, you will find there is unanimous consent that those members who voted on the previous motion be recorded as having voted on the motion now before the House, with Liberal members voting yes.

[Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral, Bloc, Laval Centre, QC]

Mr. Speaker, official opposition members will vote no.

[Chuck Strahl, Reform, Fraser Valley East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, Reform Party members present will vote no, unless instructed otherwise by their constituents.

[John Solomon, NDP, Regina—Lumsden, SK]

Mr. Speaker, New Democratic Party members in the House of Commons today vote yes on this matter.

[Gilles Bernier, Independent, Beauce, QC]

I will vote yes, Mr. Speaker.

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

[The Acting Speaker (Mr. Milliken)]

I declare the motion carried.

(Motion agreed to, bill read the third time and passed.)

The House resumed consideration of the motion.

Constitution Amendment

[Dennis Mills, Liberal, Broadview—Greenwood, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I realize that I will probably only have three or four minutes before question period after which I will resume my debate.

Before the taking of the votes I said that we had a responsibility to look at the work of Senator Kirby who took part in the debate on the proposed amendment to term 17 in the other House. We on this side of the House should show some respect for the remarks that he made in the other House on term 17.

As I mentioned earlier our Liberal government put almost total trust in him when we were developing the campaign to repatriate the Constitution. It would be abnormal for us to dismiss his remarks just because subsequent to his career as a public servant advising the government we put him in the Senate. To think that just because a person has been appointed to the Senate he loses his ability to judge and be fair does not make sense in my view.

As I mentioned earlier, the Senate with unanimous consent gave Senator Kirby extended time to develop his argument. I am sure many members after they read his speech and go through his remarks will realize that his motivation for proposing this amendment to term 17 is not for partisan reasons. There is no mischief here. He has had great loyalty to the Liberal Party and the government for over 20 years.

Some of the other senators who supported the amendment are highly respected constitutional lawyers.

[The Speaker]

My colleague, of course you will have the floor after question period when we resume debate.

It being almost 2 o'clock, the House will proceed to statements by members.

Health Care

[Walt Lastewka, Liberal, St. Catharines, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I want to share with other members of this House the grave concerns of my constituents on the state of health care in Ontario.

Kristine Etten wrote about the lack of prenatal care for Ontario women. She stated: "Women are being turned away by obstetricians-.When the time comes for them to deliver there will be no pediatrician available if there are any complications with the baby. If this had been the case seven months ago, I have to wonder if my daughter would be with me today".

I was also moved by a letter from Mrs. Maria Pankratz, 89 years old, who wrote last month about the extra burden being placed on seniors for medication costs. She stated: "I just don't know what to do. I have willingly fended for myself all my life till I no longer could. I've been very thankful for what my country has done for me. But now I'm scared and sick. What now?"

Cuts to health care are not trivial. They hurt those who are most in need of help. They hurt seniors and children who are the innocent victims of Ontario's attack on health care.

I appeal to the province of Ontario to come to its senses. Do not follow in the footsteps of Alberta and cut, cut, cut only to back pedal and return money to a wounded health care system after people have been hurt and jobs have been lost.

There are some things we must support and demand. One of those things is proper health care.