House of Commons Hansard #56 of the 36th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was senate.

Topics

Points Of Order

10:15 a.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Points Of Order

10:15 a.m.

Some hon. members

No.

Points Of Order

10:15 a.m.

Bloc

Paul Crête Bloc Kamouraska—Rivière-Du-Loup—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC

Madam Speaker, I am sure you will allow me to table the draft resolution of the government majority on the legislative committee which would put a gag on the committee and which we have been debating since the beginning of the week.

The Liberal majority has failed to convince a single member of the opposition parties that this gag is necessary. Now we have a motion that the House gag the committee's deliberations.

Do I have the consent of the House to table the Liberal majority's draft resolution, which reads as follows:

The committee may, if necessary, for the purpose of better accommodating the list of witnesses, continue to hear witnesses until 5.30 p.m., Thursday, February 24, 2000, provided that the Chair puts all questions necessary to dispose of Bill C-20 at the latest by Thursday, February 24, 2000 at midnight.

That is a gag order, Madam Speaker.

Points Of Order

10:15 a.m.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Thibeault)

Is there unanimous consent?

Points Of Order

10:15 a.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Points Of Order

10:15 a.m.

Some hon. members

No.

Points Of Order

10:15 a.m.

Bloc

Pierre De Savoye Bloc Portneuf, QC

Madam Speaker, as you know, the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs has tabled a bill that will deny the fundamental rights of Quebecers.

I therefore think it would be useful to suggest that an article entitled “Clarity Committee Debate Turning into Family Feud” that appeared in La Presse on February 17 be read in the House.

The journalist who wrote this article mentions that the legislative committee responsible for examining the clarity bill has not shed light on much of anything, except the deep antipathy between federalists and sovereignists.

I seek the House's consent to table this document.

Points Of Order

10:20 a.m.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Thibeault)

Is there unanimous consent?

Points Of Order

10:20 a.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Points Of Order

10:20 a.m.

Some hon. members

No.

Points Of Order

10:20 a.m.

Bloc

Maurice Godin Bloc Châteauguay, QC

Madam Speaker, following the introduction by the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs of a bill denying the fundamental rights of Quebecers, in the days to come, the public will see everywhere a picture of a parking meter with the slogan “Yes, time is up” above it. A theatre tour is being organized for college students and seven mobilization meetings are planned for women.

“Our time is one of extreme federalism”. During a recent press conference, former minister Yves Michaud, the one we know as the Robin des banques, said that federalism “has never been so invasive and destructive in all of its history”.

“We think Ottawa does not intend to give anything to Quebec”, added the president of the Mouvement national des Québécois, Louise Paquet.

“We must explain not only why we wanted independence 20 years ago, but why we want it now. Federalism has changed. The government is taking over the country by spending money. It has taken—”

Points Of Order

10:20 a.m.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Thibeault)

I am sure the hon. member has a precise goal in mind, and I would like to know it right away.

Points Of Order

10:20 a.m.

Bloc

Maurice Godin Bloc Châteauguay, QC

Madam Speaker, I ask for the unanimous consent of the House to table this document.

Points Of Order

10:20 a.m.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Thibeault)

Is there unanimous consent?

Points Of Order

10:20 a.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Points Of Order

10:20 a.m.

Some hon. members

No.

Points Of Order

10:20 a.m.

Bloc

Monique Guay Bloc Laurentides, QC

Madam Speaker, I have here an editorial from the Thursday, January 27, 2000 issue of Le Devoir . I ask for unanimous consent to table it.

I believe it could be of interest for members of the government party since this article is entitled “Ontario After a Yes Vote”. Since the government's majority is from Ontario, it might enlighten it on the future of the rest of Canada after a winning referendum.

Points Of Order

10:20 a.m.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Thibeault)

Is there unanimous consent?

Points Of Order

10:20 a.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Points Of Order

10:20 a.m.

Some hon. members

No.

Points Of Order

10:20 a.m.

Bloc

Stéphane Bergeron Bloc Verchères, QC

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order.

Twice already, for my colleague from Laurentides as for my colleague from Châteauguay, probably because we were stunned by the forceful arguments they were making, we did not hear any noes. We did see some heads shake, but is it the same for the Chair to see heads shake as to hear an audible no?

Points Of Order

10:20 a.m.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Thibeault)

Absolutely not. I clearly heard government members say no. Perhaps I should ask them to speak louder. They do not all have voices as strong as that of the hon. member.

Points Of Order

10:20 a.m.

Progressive Conservative

André Harvey Progressive Conservative Chicoutimi, QC

Madam Speaker, to allow the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs to come out of his constitutional obsession and see that, outside Parliament Hill, there are realities our citizens are asking us to confront, I ask for the unanimous consent to table a document that will greatly inspire him about the real problems. It is the most recent book of Michel Chartrand and Michel Bernard on the concept of guaranteed minimum wage for all citizens.

I challenge him to deal with this issue, and then we will have the opportunity to co-operate together.

Points Of Order

10:20 a.m.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland)

Is there unanimous consent of the House?

Points Of Order

10:20 a.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.