Debates of March 1st, 2000

Privilege

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

No, I am merely repeating—

[The Speaker]

Order, please. I wish to hear what the member has to say.

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

Mr. Speaker, I do not believe I am imputing motives and it is up to you to decide, which you will do with your customary wisdom.

What I am saying is that members said in their testimony before parliamentary committees that they intended to introduce amendments in this House with the ultimate goal of bringing parliament to a halt. I am not imputing motives. I am merely repeating what the members who are making accusations against those working for you today in the House have threatened to do. This is the result of the situation we find ourselves in today.

I could table the statements I have just described, Mr. Speaker, to the effect that they intended to bring parliament to a halt by bogging it down with all this work.

Mr. Speaker, I submit that you have the support of the House in your work. Those working for you do their jobs not just well, but extremely well. I congratulate them and you on the work you do, which is to represent and lead us well.

[The Speaker]

I do not wish a debate, but I see that the hon. member for Rimouski—Mitis would like to add something, after which I will recognize the official opposition's House leader.

[Suzanne Tremblay, Bloc, Rimouski—Mitis, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to add a small clarification.

When I said that the bundle of documents we submitted was not used, it is because the clerk who shares space with the legislative counsel consulted the counsel's data base. Therefore, he saw on the legislative counsel's computer, to be more specific, all of the amendments in the data base. It is that data base that was used to deny our amendments, including two that had never been introduced.

That is why I say that there has been contempt of this House. Someone went into a computer, that of the legislative counsel, in whom we have every confidence.

[Chuck Strahl, Reform, Fraser Valley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it is clear to me that the government House leader is upset with the number of amendments put forward. I know you will deal as best as you can with whether they are in order, how they will be grouped and all that. We have to leave it to you and your staff to do that.

It obvious to me that what has happened here again is that we have the government bringing forward a very controversial bill. It has limited debate in the House of Commons. It went to committee and it limited the debate in committee.

It refused to let the committee travel. It refused to let the committee have a full list of witnesses. At every opportunity it refused to allow the opposition parties, whether for or against the bill, to have ample opportunity to discuss the bill in its entirety, clause by clause, to get a full hearing of it. It disallowed any travel whatsoever.

It is crocodile tears from the government House leader to say that someone is obstructing the business of government when we repeatedly see a record number of time allocation and closure motions by the government. Time after time the government has been stepping in not to interrupt the operations of government but the operations of democracy.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Verchères, QC]

Mr. Speaker, there are two matters.

First, I wish to state that, given the speech by the government House leader of a few minutes ago, which was melodramatic to say the least, it is not in any way our intention in this question of privilege to challenge the excellent work of all of the House of Commons staff. That is not the point.

Two questions were raised. The totally inappropriate imputing of motives by the government House leader in his speech just now notwithstanding, there are two issues.

We have a relationship of confidentiality with the legislative counsels. We worked with one of them in drafting a number of amendments. A number of the amendments we had prepared were tabled. I believe it to be the most basic of our privileges to select which ones to table and which not.

We noted something that gives us cause for concern. The government House leader said “They were not tabled, not selected, no problem”. The problem is that we now have doubts about the confidentiality of our relationship with the legislative counsels. It appears that the clerks, which ones I cannot say, used the legislative counsels' data base, which ought to be confidential. That is where the problem lies.

The other problem is that the Deputy Principal Clerk pointed out to us that a number of our amendments were rejected for technical reasons. He explained the technical reasons for the rejection of these amendments. We relied on what he said and not on the remarks of the legislative counsel, as the government House leader intimated. We relied on what the Deputy Principal Clerk had to say. We followed his recommendations. We reworked the amendments and resubmitted them and they were again rejected. It seems there is a bit of a problem.

I was listening to the government House leader and his remarks oddly enough made me think of those who justified barn burnings as a means to fight against the sovereignist movement. We have to wonder whether the end does not justify the means, in the case of those opposite.

[The Speaker]

There are two issues here. I will look into the first and come back to the House with a ruling.

As to the second issue on whether amendments are in order, it should be discussed when Bill C-20 is before us. At that point I will listen to all members and make a ruling.

The first thing is very serious for us in parliament, because, next to the members, the clerks are essential to the running of the business of this House. I will therefore look into what I have heard this afternoon and get back to the House.

Government Response To Petitions

[Derek Lee, Liberal, Parliamentary 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 four petitions.

Interparliamentary Delegations

[Bryon Wilfert, Liberal, Oak Ridges, ON]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 34 I have the honour to present to the House, in both official languages, the report of the Canada-Japan Interparliamentary Group.

The delegation participated in the eighth annual meeting of the Asia-Pacific Parliamentary Forum in Canberra, Australia, from January 9 to 14, 2000.

Committees Of The House

[Derek Lee, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Orders 133(3) and 140 I have the honour to present the 18th report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs regarding the first report of the examiner of petitions for private bills presented to the House on February 7 concerning Bill S-14, an act to amend the act of incorporation of the board of elders of the Canadian district of the Moravian Church in America.

If the House gives its consent, I intend to move concurrence in the 18th report later this day.

Canada National Parks Act

[Sheila Copps, Liberal, Minister of Canadian Heritage]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-27, an act respecting the national parks of Canada.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

Access To Information Act

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

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-448, an act to amend the Access to Information Act (Crown corporations).

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to reintroduce my private member's bill, an act to amend the Access to Information Act, which would include all crown corporations.

Clearly, Canadians want an open and accountable government and access to information ensures that the government is as transparent as is reasonably possible. Yet some crown corporations, not all, such as CBC and Canada Post, which are funded by public money, are exempt from access to information.

Crown corporations must be open, accessible and accountable to all the taxpayers because we pay the bills.

What my bill would do is open all crown corporations to public scrutiny and ensure that the corporations are open to honesty, integrity and openness. In other words, all corporations would be available to access to information.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Act

[Peter Goldring, Reform, Edmonton East, AB]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-449, an act to change the name of the electoral district of Edmonton East.

Mr. Speaker, I wish to introduce the bill to call for a change to the name of the riding of Edmonton East to better reflect the community that it serves.

The Edmonton East riding as presently known also includes the city centre portion, the Alberta Legislative Centre, as well as the city hall. It is my belief that a preferred name for this riding would be Edmonton Centre East. This would reflect the fact that a sizeable portion of people do live within the city centre core and properly identify with it in that fashion.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

Petitions

[Paul Szabo, Liberal, Mississauga South, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to present a petition on behalf of a number of Canadians, including from my own riding of Mississauga South, on the issue of child poverty.

The petitioners would like to draw to the attention of the House that one in five Canadian children do live in poverty; that also on November 24, 1989, the House of Commons passed a resolution to seek to eliminate child poverty by the year 2000; and also that Canada's number of poor children has increased by 60%.

The petitioners therefore call on parliament, in the 2000 budget, to introduce a multi-year plan to improve the well-being of Canada's children, and the government has done just that.

[Reed Elley, Reform, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to rise today in the House to present two petitions.

The first petition is from 168 people in my riding and across Vancouver Island who are very concerned about the lack of a law in the Province of British Columbia regarding child pornography.

They are asking that parliament override the B.C. Court of Appeal decision, reinstate the clauses in the criminal code that make possession of child pornography in B.C. illegal and that this be done as soon as possible.

[Reed Elley, Reform, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the second petition has been signed by 175 people on Vancouver Island who are asking that parliament pass legislation recognizing naturopathic practitioners as equal to members of the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons. They would thereby be eligible for coverage in government medical insurance.

[Dennis Gruending, NDP, Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I have a number of petitions containing hundreds of names, most of them people from Saskatoon, Saskatchewan. I might add that I have had many letters from these people and have also met with a good number of them.

These people are petitioning and calling on parliament to immediately rescind the so-called head tax on immigrants and refugees.

In the budget earlier this week the so-called head tax was rescinded for refugees. I have called my constituents to see if they wanted this matter to rest but they have insisted that the head tax also be rescinded for all immigrants.

I am pleased to present this petition on behalf of many people in Saskatoon.

[René Laurin, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am tabling in this House a petition signed by 216 people.

The petitioners call on parliament to quickly pass legislation to make it mandatory to label all foods that are totally or partially genetically modified.

[Bill Casey, Progressive Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester, NS]

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to rise today to present a petition signed by 130 citizens of Truro, Nova Scotia. It is sponsored by the United Church of Canada, the St. Andrews United Church in Truro and Maggie's Place, also located in Truro.

They call on the government to address the issue of child poverty and, in particular, they have several issues they want to make the House aware of. One is the fact that one in five children now lives in poverty in Canada. They also want to remind the House that in 1989 the House of Commons unanimously resolved to end child poverty in Canada by the year 2000, but since then child poverty has actually increased by more than 60%.

The petitioners call on parliament to use the federal budget of 2000 to introduce a multi-year plan to improve the well-being of Canada's children. They urge parliament to fulfil the promise of 1989 in the House of Commons resolution to end child poverty by the year 2000.

[Peter Goldring, Reform, Edmonton East, AB]

Mr. Speaker, today I take great pride in presenting a petition put forth by 2,500 concerned Canadians, mostly from the province of Quebec.

These petitioners ask our government to affirm that all Canadians are equal under all circumstances and without exception in the province of Quebec and throughout Canada. They wish to remind our government to only enact legislation that affirms the equality of each and every individual under the laws of Canada.

[Wendy Lill, NDP, Dartmouth, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased this afternoon to present a petition on behalf of over 75 people in Dartmouth, Nova Scotia who are horrified by pornography which depicts children and are astounded by legal determinations that possession of such pornography is not criminal.

My constituents would like to see, through the enactment and enforcement of the criminal code, the protection of the most vulnerable members of society. They would like to see parliament take measures to ensure that possession of child pornography remains a serious criminal offence and that federal police forces be directed to give priority to enforcing the laws that protect children.

[Yvan Bernier, Bloc, Bonaventure—Gaspé—Îles-De-La-Madeleine—Pabok, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am tabling in this House a petition signed by nearly 1,000 people from my riding.

The petitioners want to make their position on genetically modified foods known to the government. In this petition, they remind us that Canadian consumers are entitled to relevant information.

They also remind us that, under the federal government's current policy, labelling is only voluntary. They are asking the government to take action on this issue.

[Ken Epp, Reform, Elk Island, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I cannot resist this. Getting me to stand and not recognizing me for 20 times adds to my much needed exercise regimen, so I thank you for your consideration, Mr. Speaker.

I am very proud today to stand on behalf of constituents, not only in my riding but also in one of the Liberal held ridings in Edmonton, as I recognize these addresses here.

These people are stating to the House that where they place the protection of children at the highest possible priority, they request that parliament take whatever measures are necessary in order to immediately reinstate the criminal code provision which makes the possession of child pornography illegal.

On behalf of the petitioners, I am very pleased to present these 128 names, adding to the over 500,000 now on record on this issue.

[Judy Wasylycia-Leis, NDP, Winnipeg North Centre, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased and honoured to present a petition signed by almost 1,000 Manitobans and Canadians pertaining to the decision by the government to proceed with court martial proceedings against a citizen of Canada, a resident of Winnipeg and a member of the Canadian Armed Forces who served this country with dedication and distinction.

The petitioners express their concern about the anthrax vaccination and about the government's decision to require members of our armed forces to take this vaccination despite concerns about safety.

They call upon the government to request that the military's court martial of Sergeant Mike Kipling be stopped and a proper impartial investigation into this whole affair be conducted.