Debates of Jan. 31st, 2001

Speech From The Throne

[Joe Clark, Progressive Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I do not intend to respond in kind but I would imagine that I remember more of what the hon. member said in opposition than he does. If we want to get into that kind of exchange, we can do that.

If I may say so, his response indicates exactly what is wrong with the House. If there is a question about which we should not be partisan, it is the question of how we make the House work more effectively.

Was I responsible for actions which did not advance accountability in the House? Yes, I was. Did the House of Commons deliberately decide that we would move away from the committee of the whole consideration of estimates? Yes, we did.

Were we right? No, we were not. We were wrong. We should recognize that we collectively were wrong. Members of several parties took that decision because we recognized that the old rules were not allowing us to adjust to a new reality.

I am asking the House to recognize now that the new rules we put in place also do not work. I can dig up as much information about the past as anyone in the House. I have a longer memory. I have the capacity to make the point in both languages. That is not the purpose of the House of Commons.

In fact, the reason we are in such low repute is that the people of the country look at parliament and they see us casting arrows at one another, putting partisan interest ahead of national interest. That is not what we are here to do.

We are here to make parliament work. We are here to make democracy work. If we are honest at all with one another, we know that it is not working as well as it should. Perhaps the proposals I have put forward today are not adequate. If they are not adequate, let us bring forth better proposals. Let us not lose the chance to change parliament, to hold the government more accountable, and to give more power to individual members of parliament.

I hope that this was a temporary lapse, that the highly responsible minister, the leader of the government in the House, thought he was a rat packer again. He got caught in a time warp and slipped back to his old behaviour. I would like to believe that there is a real commitment to reform among the members of the Liberal Party. I know that there is a commitment among many of their backbenchers. I hope it is reflected in the government benches too.

[Ken Epp, Canadian Alliance, Elk Island, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I only have one question. While I was listening to the member's speech I was thinking that what drove me out of his party and into the then Reform Party, now the Canadian Alliance, was the lack of accountability by parliament for the finances of the country.

There is no doubt about the fact that if the government that we have now, and the government of which the member was a member previous to that for nine years, would have exercised restraint, we would not have even today a gross debt of over $600 billion. He has put his finger on it. It took him some 10 years longer to find out than those of us who are in this section of the opposition.

I honour and respect now what he has just said. What I would like to know is how do we know for sure that on his road to Damascus his conversion is real.

[Joe Clark, Progressive Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I will not speak about the consistency between what people say on the way to an election and what they do when they get to the House. There has been recent evidence very close to the member for Elk Island about how quickly positions can change. I do not want to get into that. I will not argue who was where first. The important thing he said is that he agrees with my analysis as to what is wrong here.

Judging from the reforms proposed by his House leader, his party believes that there are changes that have to be made. So do we. Certainly, if I may speak on this occasion for her, so do members of the New Democratic Party.

I think we could include the members of the Bloc Quebecois. Everyone agrees, and some members of the governing party would also like to see major changes to the standing orders of the House. We would like to see parliament's ability to control the government restored. That is the challenge we face.

On this we agree. On other topics, we do not. That is the nature of parliament and democracy, but if we wish to protect and enhance democracy in Canada and the reputation of parliament, we must consider changes to the standing orders of the House.

I welcome the support of the hon. member on this issue. I know it is only on this issue.

I believe we have work to do here. I hope that in the session that begins this week we will accept that responsibility and change this institution to restore and serve democracy.

[The Deputy Speaker]

In closing, let me thank all members of the House for their collaboration on this being a leaders' day. I might add that it is great to be back in the Chair.

It being 6.40 p.m., the House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 10 a.m. pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 6.40 p.m.)