Debates of May 29th, 2000

The Late Maurice Richard

[The Speaker]

I am going to permit myself a few words about Rocket Richard. I pass on this story to you.

Those of you in the House who are of my vintage might have been around at the time when at Christmas we would get a hockey sweater for whatever team. In my neighbourhood we were mostly French-speaking kids. Invariably we would get a hockey sweater. In those days, and I do not know if they did not have enough money or if they just made them like that, they never put numbers on the sweaters. There must have been four or five of us who received a Montreal Canadiens sweater. Our mothers all sewed on the number that we wanted. We all showed up with No. 9 on our backs.

If today one or all of you had come into the House of Commons with a Montreal Canadiens sweater with No. 9 on the back, I would not have said that you cannot use props. With that sweater, that number and the memory of Maurice Richard, it would have been parliamentary.

Grain Transportation

[David Collenette, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 32(2), I am pleased to table a copy of the draft bill, entitled an act to amend the Canada Transportation Act, which will put in place legislation for the grain transportation reforms that I announced with my colleagues the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-food and the minister responsible for the wheat board some weeks ago.

It would be my intention to formally introduce the bill in the House later this week.

Government Response To Petitions

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

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to the standing orders, I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's response to three petitions.

Interparliamentary Delegations

[Steve Mahoney, Liberal, Mississauga West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 34(1), I have the honour to present to the House, in both official languages, the sixth report of the Canadian-NATO Parliamentary Association which represented Canada at the annual meeting of the standing committee held in Brussels on April 8, 2000.

Committees Of The House

[Walt Lastewka, Liberal, St. Catharines, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the fifth report of the Standing Committee on Industry. The committee has considered the votes under industry in the main estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2001, and reports the same.

[Paul Devillers, Liberal, Simcoe North, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the third report of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights.

Pursuant to its order of reference dated December 2, 1999, and provisions contained in article 233 of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act, a subcommittee of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights was established to conduct a comprehensive review of the provisions and operation of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act.

In accordance with its mandate, the subcommittee held public hearings in Ottawa and in many other cities in Canada. It also visited all levels of correctional facilities in various locations in Canada and attended conditional release hearings.

In the course of these visits, in camera, it heard management teams, correctional officers, conditional release officers, members of program staff, members of the parole board, inmates, members of citizens' advisory committees and other witnesses.

The subcommittee presented to the standing committee the following report entitled “A Work in Progress: The Corrections and Conditional Release Act”. The standing committee adopted the report.

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

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the 32nd report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs regarding its order of reference from the House of Commons of Tuesday, February 29, 2000.

In relation to the main estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2001, and in regard to vote 20 under Privy Council, chief electoral officer, the committee reports the same, less the amount voted in interim supply.

Petitions

[Mac Harb, Liberal, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I present a petition signed by constituents who want the government to remove the $500 charge for those who apply for permanent residency or refugee status in Canada.

[Inky Mark, Reform, Dauphin—Swan River, MB]

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to present petitions signed by over 25,000 Canadians who call on the government to pass legislation, such as my private member's Bill C-474, to ensure that registered charities, not for profit groups and federal political parties would receive the same tax credit on the first $1,150, and that for any amount above $1,150 the tax credit for charitable donations would revert to 29% of the donation, up to a maximum of a tax creditable donation of 50% of taxable income.

[Ghislain Lebel, Bloc, Chambly, QC]

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to table three separate petitions that all concern the same issue and are signed by 286 Quebecers.

The petitioners are quite simply calling for the abolition of section 13(5) of the Canada Post Corporation Act, which was voted on in the House and nearly passed in a vote of 114 to 110.

Taxpayers want rural letter carriers to be able to bargain collectively with the government.

[Maud Debien, Bloc, Laval East, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to table a petition signed by a number of Quebecers concerning the Canada Post Corporation Act.

The petitioners are calling upon parliament to revoke section 13(5) of that act, which denies rural route delivery persons the right to collective bargaining.

The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms stipulates that freedom of association and the freedom to engage in collective bargaining are among every individual's fundamental freedoms. Denying that freedom constitutes a discriminatory practice toward rural workers.

Parliament must therefore revoke section 13(5) as promptly as possible, in order to comply with its own charter and to respect the right to unionize and to engage in collective bargaining.

[Michel Bellehumeur, Bloc, Berthier—Montcalm, QC]

Mr. Speaker, like my two colleagues, I have a petition signed by the people of my riding calling for the revocation of section 13(5) of the Canada Post Corporation Act, which interferes with the fundamental right to association, the right to unionize. It is a denial of a basic right.

I am pleased to table this petition and to state that I support what the petitioners are demanding, 100%.

[The Deputy Speaker]

The hon. member for Berthier—Montcalm has a great deal of experience in this House. He is well aware that the standing orders do not allow comments about one's support or non-support of a petition. I am sure he will not make the same mistake again.

[Pierre Brien, Bloc, Témiscamingue, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to table a petition on the price of gasoline. Many people throughout Quebec and outside it as well are greatly concerned by the very rapid increase in the price of gasoline. In my region, over 3,500 people signed a petition, which I table in part today.

This petition asks the government to act quickly against this increase. It also asks the government to take steps to develop alternate sources of energy.

[Eric C. Lowther, Reform, Calgary Centre, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I present several hundred names in support of a call by adoptive parents who face significant adoption related costs and out of pocket expenses applicable to adoption.

The petitioners request that parliament pass Bill C-289, which would recognize a deduction for the expenses related to the adoption of a child.

Questions On The Order Paper

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

I ask, Mr. Speaker, that all questions be allowed to stand.

[The Deputy Speaker]

Is that agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

Point Of Order

[Pierre Brien, Bloc, Témiscamingue, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to draw the House's attention to something that concerns the tabling of petitions.

Very often individuals or lobby groups signing petitions forward them to us for tabling here in this House.

However, in today's context, with the development of new means of communication, petitions may come in different forms. This has happened with me.

One individual has presented an electronic petition, on CD-ROM, with over 17,000 names. Mr. Goyette, a resident of Montreal, in Quebec, collected, through electronic means, 17,000 signatures. That petition, like the one I tabled earlier, asks the government to take action regarding the gasoline pricing issue. This type of petition does not quite comply with the current rules of the House, more specifically with Standing Order 36.

I am asking the Chair whether it would be possible to get a very broad interpretation of this provision of the standing orders or, if it is deemed more appropriate, to have the standing orders amended or updated so that in the future Canadians can use such means.

In some ways an electronic petition is better than a traditional one. It is much easier for the person who is collecting signatures to make sure that someone did not sign the petition more than once. By using an electronic address, it is possible to limit the number of signatures. In any case, an increasing number of people have an electronic address. We are likely to see others follow the example of Mr. Goyette who, to my knowledge in the first one to submit a petition in this format.

There are also advantages in terms of the storing of archival information. This simple CD-ROM has 17,000 signatures but it could have 50 times more. Storage capability for petitions would be greatly enhanced.

Considering that people can now file their personal income tax return by using the Internet, it seems to me that the House of Commons should review its standing orders to make it possible to table petitions in that format.

I respectfully submit this issue to your attention and I am anxiously awaiting your ruling.

[The Deputy Speaker]

Do any other members wish to speak on this topic?

[Some hon. members]

No.

[The Deputy Speaker]

As the hon. member for Témiscamingue pointed out, the Standing Orders are fairly clear on this point. I refer to Standing Order 36(2)( f ), which states:

1. (2) In order to be certified, pursuant to section (1) of this Standing Order, every petition shall:... f ) contain only original signatures and addresses written directly onto the petition and not pasted thereon or otherwise transferred to it; and

Under these circumstances, it is difficult for the Chair to do other than insist that petitions be presented in the form required under the standing orders of the House of Commons.

However, if the hon. member himself, or through his colleagues who are members of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, wishes to raise the matter with the committee, perhaps it can recommend changes to the standing orders which can be passed by the House, thus helping the hon. member with the problem he has so ably described.

I urge the hon. member for Témiscamingue to find a way to raise this issue with the committee I have mentioned. I am sure that the committee chair, who is now in the House, has listened carefully to the point raised and to the Speaker's ruling under the circumstances.

[Michel Bellehumeur, Bloc, Berthier—Montcalm, QC]

I rise on a point of order, Mr. Speaker. While we are waiting for the House of Commons to enter the new millennium with respect to electronic petitions, is there unanimous consent to allow the member for Témiscamingue to table this CD-ROM with 17,000 signatures on this issue, particularly since he had tabled a duly completed petition on the same issue before setting out to table the CD-ROM?

[The Deputy Speaker]

Is there unanimous consent to allow the hon. member to table this petition?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.