Debates of Oct. 2nd, 1997

Poverty

[Ethel Blondin-Andrew, Liberal, Secretary of State (Children and Youth)]

Mr. Speaker, we know that child poverty is a major issue and that it is a priority for all governments.

We are working with our territorial and provincial partners on a major reinvestment plan. We are increasing the national child benefit by $850 million starting in July and an additional $850 million. There are many projects and services that we offer for children, too many to mention, but I know that our hon. colleagues support us in our work on these programs for the children of Canada.

Presence In The Gallery

[The Speaker]

I draw the attention of hon. members to the presence in the gallery of Dr. Zoltan Gal, my brother Speaker of the National Assembly of Hungary.

[Some hon. members]

Hear, hear.

Business Of The House

[Randy White, Reform, Langley—Abbotsford, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I wish to ask the government House leader to advise this House as to the nature of the government's business for the remainder of this week and business for next week.

[Don Boudria, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, we shall continue for the rest of today and tomorrow the conclusion of the address debate.

On Monday we will commence second reading of Bill C-2, the Canada pension plan investment board legislation. This will be followed by Bill C-4 concerning the Canadian Wheat Board. When these items have been disposed of we would propose returning to Bill C-9, the Canada Marine Act which was introduced earlier today.

Members will have noted that there are now a number of bills on the Order Paper. As the week progresses I will be in communication with members opposite in regard to adding additional business. Next Thursday shall be an allotted day.

[The Speaker]

I have notice of a question of privilege. I will hear that before I hear any points of order.

Privilege

[Jay Hill, Reform, Prince George—Peace River, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of privilege. I would like to say to other members of this House that I take points of privilege very seriously and have only decided to pursue this course of action after giving it a great deal of thought.

On Tuesday, September 30 the first draw for Private Members' Business in the 36th Parliament was held. A bill that I wished to have in that draw was not eligible because it has not gone through first reading yet. There were very few changes to be made to this bill as it had been submitted in the last Parliament. However two and a half months after I requested it, the bill has not materialized.

My ability to discharge my parliamentary duties has been severely hampered due to the reduction in House staff responsible for the production of private members' bills. Private Members' Business is a means by which public matters the government is not dealing with can be brought forward by private members of this Chamber.

There are 301 members in this House most of whom may wish to have bills drafted, but there are only two legislative counsel on staff plus one on contract to do all the necessary drafting. The support staff who translate, edit and format the bills are not dedicated only to the production of private members' bills. Other House business can take precedence, including for example amendments to government legislation in committee. It is possible that most of their time could be taken up on other business and Private Members' Business would literally grind to a halt.

On July 9 I notified the House that I wished to reintroduce two bills from the last Parliament with minor or no modifications. Because House staff worked a great deal of overtime while the House was sitting, they were on holidays over the summer. This means no one was available to work on these requests for two months. During that time numerous other members also submitted requests for the drafting of private members' bills creating an enormous backlog. At the time of the draw there were around 170 private members' bills in the system with only 23 of them having reached the stage where they could be introduced in the House to be eligible for the draw. That means that there were almost 150 bills tied up in the backlog.

I wish to stress that I am in no way finding fault with the existing staff. To the contrary, they have done an extremely exemplary job under the circumstances and deserve to be commended in the highest manner possible. However despite their best efforts this happens every year and even more so at the beginning of a new Parliament or a new session. The House knows it is going to happen, yet this dire state of Private Members' Business has not been addressed. The inadequate resources devoted to private members' bills especially at peak periods adversely affects the ability of all members of this House to perform their parliamentary duties.

I would request that the House immediately allocate additional resources so this backlog of Private Members' Business can be cleared up as quickly as possible.

I conclude that this is not a point of privilege only for me. It is for all private members in this House.

[The Speaker]

This is not a problem which is absolutely new to the House. I would find at this point that this is not a question of privilege. However might I suggest that the hon. member speak with his representative on the Board of Internal Economy because this could probably more properly be discussed there. I would respectfully make that suggestion.

As to whether it is a question of privilege or not, my judgment is that it is not.

Is this on another point of privilege?

[Randy White, Reform, Langley—Abbotsford, BC]

On the same point of privilege, Mr. Speaker.

[The Speaker]

I would take it that there is probably new information because this is not a point of privilege. Do you wish to raise a point of privilege?

[Randy White, Reform, Langley—Abbotsford, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to convince you that it is a point of privilege and support my colleague in that manner.

[The Speaker]

I think, my colleague, that this could more properly be discussed in the Board of Internal Economy. Might I request that his intervention be put off perhaps to another time. Are you agreed?

[Randy White, Reform, Langley—Abbotsford, BC]

Agreed.

[The Speaker]

I am now going to deal with points of order. The member for Calgary Southeast.

Points Of Order

[Jason Kenney, Reform, Calgary Southeast, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Yesterday in the House the Minister of National Revenue challenged me during question period at page 330 of Hansard to produce in the House facts and table them here regarding the question I asked both yesterday and today. He repeated that request today.

Therefore I seek the unanimous leave of the House to table a sworn affidavit from senior customs officer Dennis Coffey with respect to his appeal to the Public Service Employment Commission Appeal Board which substantiates the allegations which he has made.

[The Speaker]

Does the hon. member have permission of the House?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Speaker]

You have heard the terms of the request. Is the House agreed that this affidavit be deposited here with the House?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Speaker]

Agreed and so ordered.

[Bill Matthews, Progressive Conservative, Burin—St. George's, NL]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order today flowing out of question period dealing with the Minister of Human Resources Development when in answering a question he referred to and quoted from a letter in response to the leader of the Bloc Quebecois.

I would like to submit to you, Mr. Speaker, that the minister should be required through you to table the letter that he quoted from and referred to. While it is most unlikely that any member in this House of Commons or in any legislature or jurisdiction would stand in his place with a piece of paper and quote from a piece of paper on which there is nothing written, it has happened in the past.

Therefore, I would like to say to you, Your Honour, that the Minister of Human Resources Development should be required to table the letter that he referred to and quoted from in question period.

[Don Boudria, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, someone has gone to get the document in question. We will arrange to have it tabled as soon as possible because of course that is what the standing orders call for.

As to the allegation that the minister might have been reading from a blank piece of paper, the minister is a man of integrity and would not participate in any such activity.

[The Speaker]

We are getting into debate now.

The hon. member's point is well taken. The minister will be asked to table the document which he quoted from in the House. I believe that is the point which the hon. member wanted to make.

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

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to our standing orders, I am pleased to table the letter which was referred to earlier today. It is a letter signed by the Minister of Human Resources Development and is dated March 5, 1997.

The House resumed consideration of the motion.