House of Commons Hansard #231 of the 36th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was competition.
Allan Rock LiberalMinister of Health
Mr. Speaker, what was passed yesterday by the House of Commons was the amendment proposed by the government.
As I have made perfectly clear, we intend to act soon. Before this House breaks in June, in fact, I intend to table the details of the research we are going to propose.
Peter Stoffer NDP Sackville—Eastern Shore, NS
Mr. Speaker, we know that the government has much difficulty in dealing with the Americans when it comes to protecting Canadians' interests.
My question is for the fisheries minister. We understand from British Columbia and the coastal communities on the west coast that a Pacific salmon treaty deal is very near. Can he assure the House that that deal will indeed take into consideration the interests of coastal communities on the west coast? Will it protect the interests of northern and southern fishermen in British Columbia?
David Anderson LiberalMinister of Fisheries and Oceans
Mr. Speaker, in response to the first question, absolutely. In response to the second question, absolutely. In response to the third question, absolutely.
Jim Jones Progressive Conservative Markham, ON
Mr. Speaker, no ordinary person can meet with their local MP and get $600,000 of taxpayers' money with no questions asked. No ordinary person can summon well connected Liberals to squeeze another $100,000 from the government.
The questions mount, but the Prime Minister's non-answers persist. If the Prime Minister wants Canadians to trust him, why will he not release every single document related to these shady hotel deals, or will he continue to let the industry committee chair fight his battles for him?
Pierre Pettigrew LiberalMinister of Human Resources Development
Mr. Speaker, there is nothing shady about this transaction.
There is the access to information law. All information could be accessed quite easily if the member bothered to do his job seriously.
The Prime Minister, the member for Saint-Maurice, has absolutely done his job to promote employment in his region.
I can tell the hon. member that the transactions were absolutely kosher, absolutely acceptable, and they were approved by everyone else in the region.
John Duncan Reform Vancouver Island North, BC
Mr. Speaker, by Revenue Canada's own numbers, it takes 140 people to process 723,000 returns.
Why does the minister engage in smoke and mirrors whenever we ask a question about Shawinigan? Would the minister like to revise his earlier numbers which said there is only one person involved in processing 723,000 claims?
Herb Dhaliwal LiberalMinister of National Revenue
Mr. Speaker, obviously the member does not listen very well.
First, the member from Calgary asked if we had moved hundreds of jobs in Ottawa. I stood and said that we had moved one job. Obviously the hon. member does not understand the difference between moving people and processing tax returns.
I want to tell the hon. member that we will ensure that we provide the best possible services in a way that is efficient and cost effective to all Canadians.
Presence In GalleryOral Question Period
The Speaker
I draw the attention of hon. members to the presence in the gallery of Mr. Tota Singh, Minister of Education for Punjab, India.
Peter MacKay Progressive Conservative Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough, NS
Mr. Speaker, earlier today I saw on television two ministers of the crown who referred to each other throughout the announcement as Sheila and Sergio. They indicated that the government had decided to significantly change the content and the operation of Bill C-55.
They said that the Senate would be sending the bill back to the House of Commons next week for alteration. It appears that the Minister of Canadian Heritage and the Minister for International Trade are part of the Senate public relations team.
May I inquire, Mr. Speaker, as to whether you have received notification of the intention of the government to make ministerial statements either today or tomorrow concerning Bill C-55? I know the Chair will agree that any—
Points Of OrderOral Question Period
The Speaker
It is out of order to ask the Speaker any questions. The hon. member might want to wait until Thursday to find out the order of business.
Lee Morrison Reform Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK
Mr. Speaker, during question period I raised a question regarding the disbursement of public funds and was ruled out of order for doing so. The business of the House is to consider how public money is spent. By what criteria did you shut me down?
Points Of OrderOral Question Period
The Speaker
I refer the hon. member to citation 410, subsection (17).
Chuck Strahl Reform Fraser Valley, BC
Mr. Speaker, during question period the member for Cypress Hills—Grasslands asked a question of the Minister of Transport that dealt directly with the role of the minister in his capacity as the keeper of the gate, so to speak, for a crown corporation. That crown corporation—
Points Of OrderOral Question Period
The Speaker
With all due respect to my hon. colleague, the opposition whip, I made a decision. I referred to the rule. I would refer him to the rule. I consider the matter closed.
Peter Adams LiberalParliamentary Secretary to Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's response to six petitions.
Charles Caccia Liberal Davenport, ON
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 34(1), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the report of the Canada-Europe Parliamentary Association on the meeting held in London between March 7 and 9, 1999 on the occasion of a meeting with the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development.
Pursuant to Standing Order 34(1) I have the honour to present, in both official languages, another report on the meeting which took place with the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development on behalf of the Canada-Europe Parliamentary Association.
Colleen Beaumier Liberal Brampton West—Mississauga, ON
Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the eighth report of the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade.
In accordance with its order of reference of Friday, April 30, 1999, your committee has considered Bill S-22, an act authorizing the United States to preclear travellers and goods in Canada for entry into the United States for the purposes of customs, immigration, public health, food inspection and plant and animal health, and has agreed on Tuesday, May 25, 1999, to report the bill without amendment.
John Maloney Liberal Erie—Lincoln, ON
Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the 22nd report of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights.
Pursuant to the order of reference of Tuesday, April 20, 1999, your committee has considered Bill C-79, an act to amend the Criminal Code (victims of crime) and another act in consequence, and has agreed to report it without amendment.
Jay Hill Reform Prince George—Peace River, BC
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I would ask the indulgence of the House. I will not be in the House tomorrow to introduce my private member's bill. I would respectfully request unanimous consent to introduce it today.
Committees Of The HouseRoutine Proceedings
The Deputy Speaker
Does the hon. member for Prince George—Peace River have unanimous consent of the House to proceed with the introduction of his bill at this time?
Jay Hill Reform Prince George—Peace River, BC
moved for leave to introduce Bill C-513, an act to amend the Criminal Code (conditional sentencing).
Mr. Speaker, I thank all hon. members present this afternoon and my hon. colleague from Calgary Northeast for seconding the bill.
Conditional sentencing was introduced in the 35th parliament in Bill C-41. Since that time over 18,000 conditional sentences have been handed down. Most of these sentences are for petty crimes. However, many have been handed down for crimes as serious as sexual assault, manslaughter, drunk driving and drug trafficking.
In 1997 the B.C. Court of Appeal stated in a decision regarding conditional sentencing that “if parliament had intended to exclude certain offences from consideration it should have done so in clear language”.
My bill does exactly that. It lists the offences to be excluded from any possibility of receiving a conditional sentence. Canadian victims and their families have been wronged and in many cases revictimized by sentences that do not reflect the crime. We have an opportunity to correct this mistake and prove that the justice system is meant to protect Canadians and punish criminals and not the reverse.
A recent national poll states that 84% of Canadians are in favour of the bill, so I encourage all members of the House to support the bill and the overwhelming majority of Canadians.
(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)
Charles Caccia Liberal Davenport, ON
Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present on behalf of my constituents and people in the broader area of Toronto and Hamilton a petition addressed to the House of Commons.
It calls on parliament to enact animal protection legislation that provides for the abrogation of any part of the Criminal Code which reduces animals to the status of property, that provides for the imposition of sanctions upon those convicted of cruelty to animals in a variety of ways, and that provides for the severest penalties when crimes against animals are committed for the purpose of financial gain.
Art Hanger Reform Calgary Northeast, AB
Mr. Speaker, I have two petitions to present. The first bears 26 signatures.
The petitioners call upon parliament to enact legislation such as Bill C-225 so as to define in statute that a marriage can only be entered into between a single male and a single female.