House of Commons Hansard #77 of the 38th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was students.

Topics

PetitionsRoutine Proceedings

3:50 p.m.

Conservative

David Tilson Conservative Dufferin—Caledon, ON

Madam Speaker, I wish to present a series of petitions signed by 875 constituents of my riding of Dufferin—Caledon.

The petitioners wish to preserve the definition of marriage by having Parliament affirm legislation recognizing the institution of marriage in federal law as being the union of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others.

PetitionsRoutine Proceedings

3:50 p.m.

Conservative

Greg Thompson Conservative St. Croix—Belleisle, NB

Madam Speaker, I have six petitions to present. Five of my petitions are on the traditional definition of marriage.

The petitioners are calling upon Parliament to protect the traditional definition of marriage as being in their opinion the lifelong union of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others.

I would like to identify these five petitions by area. They are from a wide ranging area in my constituency. Most of them are from Fredericton Junction and Tracy. There is another group that has been signed by people in that same area of Tracy, Fredericton Junction and Hoyt. Another one is from the Grand Bay, Westfield, Nerepis area. There is another group of people from Grand Manan Island, an island of 3,600 people in the Bay of Fundy. Many of those citizens have signed this petition. There is another one from the area of Fredericton Junction, New Brunswick and Mazerolle Settlement.

PetitionsRoutine Proceedings

3:55 p.m.

Conservative

Greg Thompson Conservative St. Croix—Belleisle, NB

Madam Speaker, there is one more petition and which is a very important one. I have risen many times in this House on this petition. This petition is completely different from the ones I have just tabled.

The petition is on the proposed LNG terminal in Eastport, Maine. This is a very controversial proposal to build an LNG terminal in Eastport, Pleasant Point, Maine.

Members may ask why would petitioners be petitioning the Parliament of Canada on a proposal in the United States. The reason is that this proposal to build this plant has been turned down in the United States in a number of areas up and down the New England coast. They have now identified an area in Maine which can only be accessed, believe it or not, by going through Canadian waters. These waters are very dangerous and include the very narrow Head Harbour Passage.

The petitioners want the Government of Canada to say no to the transport of LNG tankers through that passage simply because of the dangers that Canada would be exposed to.

The petitioners are asking the Government of Canada to do the very same thing it did approximately 30 years ago when it said no to the passage of tankers through Head Harbour Passage for at that time the construction of an oil terminal.

The petitioners ask the Government of Canada to say no to the passage of LNG tankers through--

PetitionsRoutine Proceedings

3:55 p.m.

The Acting Speaker (Hon. Jean Augustine)

The hon. member for Yukon.

PetitionsRoutine Proceedings

3:55 p.m.

Liberal

Larry Bagnell Liberal Yukon, YT

Madam Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order, 36 I am presenting a petition signed by 42 people who live in Whitehorse. The petitioners call upon Parliament to pass legislation to recognize the institution of marriage in federal law as being the lifelong union of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others.

PetitionsRoutine Proceedings

3:55 p.m.

Conservative

Merv Tweed Conservative Brandon—Souris, MB

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to present two petitions from the constituents of Brandon—Souris. The petitioners request that Parliament define marriage in federal law as being the lifelong union of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others.

PetitionsRoutine Proceedings

3:55 p.m.

Liberal

Paul Szabo Liberal Mississauga South, ON

Madam Speaker, many petitions seem to be on the same subject and I hope it will work. We as parliamentarians should listen to what the people have to say.

I would like to present two petitions both on the subject of marriage with different aspects and which have been signed by a number of Canadians, including from my riding of Mississauga South.

Under the first petition, which has to do with the definition of marriage, the petitioners want to raise for the attention of the House that the institution of marriage is between a man and a woman to the exclusion of all others and it is the exclusive jurisdiction of Parliament. They ask Parliament to pass legislation to recognize the institution in federal law as being the lifelong union of one man and one woman because there is no definition in current federal law.

The second petition has to do with the notwithstanding clause and is signed by a number of constituents. The petitioners want to draw to the attention of the House that the majority of Canadians believe that the fundamental matters of social policy should be decided by elected members of Parliament and not by an unelected judiciary and that it is the duty of Parliament to ensure that marriage is defined in Canada as Canadians wish.

They, therefore, call upon Parliament to take all legislative measures possible, including the invocation of section 33, known as the notwithstanding clause, to ensure that marriage is preserved and is defined as one man--

PetitionsRoutine Proceedings

4 p.m.

The Acting Speaker (Hon. Jean Augustine)

The hon. member for Wild Rose.

PetitionsRoutine Proceedings

4 p.m.

Conservative

Myron Thompson Conservative Wild Rose, AB

Madam Speaker, I too am pleased to rise today to present a petition on behalf of several hundred constituents in the Coaldale area of Alberta to be added to the list of probably millions of names that have already been signed to petitions. The petitioners call upon the government to recognize the institution of marriage as being that between one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others and to invoke section 33 of the charter, if necessary, to preserve that definition.

Now is the time to listen to the people's voice.

PetitionsRoutine Proceedings

4 p.m.

Conservative

James Lunney Conservative Nanaimo—Alberni, BC

Madam Speaker, I have four petitions to present today.

The first, like others we have heard, is on the subject of marriage. Multiple pages of it come from communities in my riding such as Nanaimo, Parksville, Qualicum Beach and Nanoose areas. The petitioners call upon Parliament to recognize that marriage is, has and always should be known as the union of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others.

They call upon Parliament to do whatever it takes to see that this remains the case.

PetitionsRoutine Proceedings

4 p.m.

Conservative

James Lunney Conservative Nanaimo—Alberni, BC

Madam Speaker, the second petition is on the issue of age of consent and is signed by about 225 folks from my riding. The petitioners are very concerned about the exploitation of young people. They call for a raising of the age of consent from 14 to 18 years of age in order to protect young people from exploitation by sexual predators.

PetitionsRoutine Proceedings

4 p.m.

Conservative

James Lunney Conservative Nanaimo—Alberni, BC

Madam Speaker, the third petition is on autism, a very serious issue, and is signed by 150 folks in my riding. The petitioners call upon the government to ensure that applied behaviour analysis is available to help parents who are suffering with children with this affliction.

They call upon the government to take whatever steps are necessary, both to see that they are treated properly so they can advance and also to find a solution to what is causing this plague.

PetitionsRoutine Proceedings

April 6th, 2005 / 4 p.m.

Conservative

James Lunney Conservative Nanaimo—Alberni, BC

Madam Speaker, the final petition is on freedom of religion. The petitioners from my riding are very concerned about infringement of rights of freedom of religion and conscience related to Bill C-250 on hate crimes, which was recently adopted. The bill would inhibit free speech on behalf of people sincerely following their religious beliefs and being able to communicate their religion to their children, to people of their own faith and to those in need of the advice that their religion offers. They are asking for that protection for freedom of religion.

PetitionsRoutine Proceedings

4 p.m.

Conservative

Dave MacKenzie Conservative Oxford, ON

Madam Speaker, I would like to present four petitions on behalf of some of the constituents from Oxford county. They are from members of the Cornerstone Baptist Church in Woodstock, supporters of Rehoboth Christian School in Norwich, members of the Evangelical Christian Fellowship of Canada and members of Hi-Way Pentecostal Church in Ingersoll.

The petitioners call upon Parliament to define marriage as a union between one man and one woman.

PetitionsRoutine Proceedings

4 p.m.

Conservative

Mark Warawa Conservative Langley, BC

Madam Speaker, I have two sets of petitions. The first one is from the Canadian Coalition for Democracies. This organization wishes to draw the attention of Parliament that we, as Canadians, need to respect and support peace, liberty and democracy around the world.

PetitionsRoutine Proceedings

4 p.m.

Conservative

Mark Warawa Conservative Langley, BC

Mr. Speaker, I have two petitions both calling for Parliament to use whatever legislation is necessary, including invoking section 33 of the charter, if necessary, to preserve and protect the current definition of marriage as being between one man and one woman.

PetitionsRoutine Proceedings

4 p.m.

Conservative

Ken Epp Conservative Edmonton—Sherwood Park, AB

Madam Speaker, the petition I present today again has to do with the issue of marriage and the definition to be retained as the union of one man and one woman. The petitioners, mostly from my riding but also from adjacent areas, have drawn another important point, which is it is the duty of Parliament to ensure that marriage is defined as Canadians wish it to be defined. That is a role of Parliament, according to this petition, and I am very honoured to present it in the House today.

Questions Passed as Orders for ReturnsRoutine Proceedings

4 p.m.

Beauséjour New Brunswick

Liberal

Dominic LeBlanc LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Madam Speaker, if Question No. 96 could be made an order for return, the return would be tabled immediately.

Questions Passed as Orders for ReturnsRoutine Proceedings

4:05 p.m.

The Acting Speaker (Hon. Jean Augustine)

Is that agreed?

Questions Passed as Orders for ReturnsRoutine Proceedings

4:05 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Question No. 96Routine Proceedings

4:05 p.m.

Conservative

John Williams Conservative Edmonton—St. Albert, AB

With regard to the rubric “Losses of Public Property Due to an Offence or Other Illegal Act” for the Department of National Defence as listed on page 3.25 of Volume III of the Public Accounts of Canada 2003-2004, and the 4,611 cases of “theft of combat clothing/kit” totalling $234,074, the 13 cases of “theft of transportation equipment” totalling $13,848; the eight cases of “theft of machinery” totalling $2,319, the 16 cases of “theft of telecommunication equipment” totalling $4,097, the 39 cases of “theft of electrical equipment” totalling $32,733, the 36 cases of “theft of technical equipment” totalling $18,778, the 97 cases of “theft of tools” totalling $11,444, the 82 cases of “theft of weapons and accessories” totalling $4,228, the 471 cases of “theft of military specific equipment” totalling $21,683 and the 76 cases of “theft of non-military specific equipment” totalling $27,239: ( a ) what was stolen in each individual case; ( b ) what was the value of each individual item; ( c ) where was the location of the theft; and ( d ) were there any charges laid in any of the individual cases, and if so, which ones?

(Return tabled)

Question No. 96Routine Proceedings

4:05 p.m.

Liberal

Dominic LeBlanc Liberal Beauséjour, NB

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

Question No. 96Routine Proceedings

4:05 p.m.

The Acting Speaker (Hon. Jean Augustine)

Is that agreed?

Question No. 96Routine Proceedings

4:05 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Motions for PapersRoutine Proceedings

4:05 p.m.

Beauséjour New Brunswick

Liberal

Dominic LeBlanc LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Madam Speaker, I ask that all Notices of Motions for the Production of Papers be allowed to stand.