Debates of March 3rd, 2000

Scotia Rainbow

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

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

[The Speaker]

Before dealing with the point of order, earlier I recognized the hon. member for St. Albert who is not here. I have a note in my hand that evidently was sent to me by the member for St. Albert. I am not sure, but I am presuming the points he wanted to make, and he told me they would be very short, are supposed to be made by the hon. member for Elk Island.

I am in the middle of a question of privilege. I guess this point of order will have to be put off a bit, unless I can deal with it just like that.

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

Mr. Speaker, my particular point of order arises from question period today and it could be dealt with just in a few seconds, but it is not the one that was raised by my hon. colleague.

[The Speaker]

I will deal with the member's point of order right now and then I want to hear what the hon. member has to say.

Points Of Order

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

Mr. Speaker, my point of order arising from question period today deals with some confusion arising from the official opposition's assertion of a $10 million line of credit from the Export Development Corporation that we believe benefited Earth Canada.

I have documents that would back up our assertion and I would like permission to table them today.

[The Speaker]

Does the hon. member have permission to the table the documents?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[An hon. member]

No.

[The Speaker]

Because I committed to hearing the member for St. Albert, and I believe from my information that his words will be incorporated by the hon. member for Elk Island, I will hear the member on the question of privilege raised this morning.

Privilege

[Ken Epp, Reform, Elk Island, AB]

Mr. Speaker, in view of what I anticipate will happen in a few seconds, I would like to withhold my statement now.

[The Speaker]

This morning the hon. leader of the Bloc Quebecois and the whip of the Bloc Quebecois asked me to rule on an action taken, not on Motion No. 8.

In that case I will hold in reservation my decision on Motion No. 8 until it comes to the House. In view of what has been transpiring, I thought it appropriate for me to hear what was being said by all hon. members. I am not prepared to rule on a motion which is not before the House.

With regard to the gesture of putting the motion, at this point I have heard from all parties except the government party. If it wants to intervene I am prepared to hear that. If it does not want to intervene that is okay. Does the government House leader wish to intervene on the point of the gesture of bringing it up?

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

Mr. Speaker, however one wants to refer to it, my intervention will be very brief. In the spirit of co-operation and after some consultations with some House leaders, consultations which could even occur later this day, I wish to indicate my intention to withdraw the motion.

[The Speaker]

A few weeks ago, we had turbulent Oral Question Periods for several days and I commented on the events in the House.

I want to make another observation, only from what I see here in the chair. There are days when the House rises above itself, when the House permits itself not only to hear one another in what we are saying but, in what I think is the finest traditions of parliament, to actually listen and act on what was said. If I may, I was the author of criticism of ourselves. Today is one of those good days. Thank you. It was well done.

[Gilles Duceppe, Bloc, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, if I understand correctly, Motion No. 8 will be withdrawn. This does not however deal with the question of privilege I raised. Are we agreed on that?

[The Speaker]

We agree that, if necessary, I will get back to the House. I will give it thought between now and our return. I will consider the question of privilege with respect to the action taken, that is all. If necessary, I will come back to it.

Right now I have another question of privilege of which I have notice. It is from the hon. member for Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough. I have written notification and I intend to proceed with it, but before I do so I will recognize the hon. member for Rimouski—Mitis.

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

Mr. Speaker, just before oral question period, when the discussion on the question of privilege was interrupted, I proposed to put a motion of privilege to refer this question of privilege to the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs. I wonder if you are prepared to entertain such a motion?

[The Speaker]

No, not at this time.

[Peter MacKay, Progressive Conservative, Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate your ruling as well as the good discretion exercised on the part of the government House leader to back off.

This question of privilege arises out of a matter the affects not only members of the House but those in the public who are watching very closely as Bill C-20 proceeds through the Chamber and eventually goes to the other place.

On the government website as of this morning the committee reports with respect to the progress of the legislative committee and the Minutes of Proceedings and Evidence that were heard between the dates of February 14 and February 24, that short time allotted for the committee to contemplate Bill C-20, are shown as unavailable or not available to those who would be tracking the process of what was taking place in the committee.

There is a window on this world that occurs when the evidence is posted on that website. This window is essentially closed and the blinds are pulled. This technical line of communication is a very important and very symbolic site where the government and members of the opposition have the opportunity to communicate over the Internet and on the government website on what is taking place. It is a very important lifeline and form of communication.

This question of privilege concerns the ability of members of the House to review, to re-examine and to contemplate what has already taken place in committee with respect to this bill, which has been given a great deal of priority. There has been tremendous pomp and ceremony about the importance put forward by the government on Bill C-20 and yet to date, for some unknown, unexplained reason, this information is not available on this website.

We already discussed at length previously today and on other occasions the inability of the opposition or others in government, for that matter, to move amendments. Similarly I would say that this absence of information on the government website impacts on the ability of members of parliament and others to reflect on what has taken place already in this process.

Perhaps there is a good reason it is not available, but if it is part of the procedural ambush we have seen in the past I would suggest that it is improper and I would be prepared, with your indulgence, Mr. Speaker, if you find there is a prima facie breach of privilege, to move the necessary motion.

It is the Canadian public and all members of parliament who are affected by the absence on the website.

[The Speaker]

I am not sure we would deal with this matter under a question of privilege. I want to consult to see if I can get some kind of an explanation.

My colleagues, with regard to the information being available, I am told that most of it is on the website right now and we are in the process of finishing up the information. It should be in the hon. member's hands soon.

In direct response to the point of order, I am quoting Speaker Francis who was quoting Speaker Macnaughton. This is what Speaker Macnaughton had to say on March 17, 1965 as reported on page 12479 of Hansard :

The basic question is whether or not a bill in the House of Commons can be discussed, assuming that the evidence has not been completely finished in its English and French printing. I have made a search of the records since Confederation, and there is no case that says that a bill in the House of Commons which is up for discussion cannot be proceeded with until the evidence has been filed. If we were to accept the suggestion of the hon. member for Lapointe (Mr. Grégoire), emotionally pleasing as it may be, nevertheless procedurally in my opinion it would be completely wrong, and would establish a very bad precedent.

Again Mr. Speaker Francis stated and I quote from page 4631 of Hansard dated June 13, 1984:

I really do feel uncomfortable when hon. members do not have the transcripts. However, I am guided by the precedent of Mr. Speaker Macnaughton. I am guided by the fact that the rules are silent as to the form of printing.

I inform the hon. member officially that most of it is on the website now. The rest of it I am sure will be there very soon, before we get into the body of the debate on this.

[Daniel Turp, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order on this.

[The Speaker]

I just ruled on this issue.

[Daniel Turp, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC]

I would appreciate it if you allowed me to add something. You quoted a comment made by a predecessor of yours in the sixties.

We are now in the electronic era. Like my colleague, I find there is a serious problem, because the clerk of that committee told me, the day after the proceedings, that the minutes of the proceedings of the legislative committee on Bill C-20 would be posted in the coming days. We are already one week past that deadline and the minutes have yet to be posted.

Based on the statements—

[The Speaker]

As I said, it is not absolutely necessary to have all the printed documents. We are doing our best. The hon. member will get them, if not today, certainly when we come back in the House to resume debate.

Government Response To Petitions

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

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to have the honour to table in both official languages the government's response to 15 petitions. I move:

That the House do now proceed to orders of the day.

[The Speaker]

This is in order. All those in favour of the motion will please say yea.