This week, I changed much of the tech behind this site. If you see anything that looks like a bug, please let me know!

House of Commons Hansard #17 of the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was documents.

Topics

Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

1:35 p.m.

NDP

Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC

Madam Speaker, I would like to ask this of the hon. member who has so much experience with South America. There are countries in South America that are committed to progressive values. They are democratizing their countries. They are trying to raise the standard of living of their citizens, and they are making human rights progress. I am thinking of countries like Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay and even Venezuela. I am wondering if my hon. friend would comment on why he thinks the government has chosen to sign a free trade deal with Colombia, probably the worst violator of human rights in South America, as opposed to these other countries. I am wondering if he thinks Canada's trade policy might be better directed at dealing with trade with other countries including Brazil, notably, which is one of the most powerful emerging economies in the developing world.

Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

1:35 p.m.

Bloc

Serge Cardin Bloc Sherbrooke, QC

Madam Speaker, it is not from a trade point of view that this free trade agreement is beneficial to Canada, but rather from an investment point of view. The investment agreement is the twin of chapter 11 of NAFTA. The best resource lands are those from which people were forcibly removed or for which they were simply killed.

These lands were taken without their owners' consent. The day those people decide to claim their rights with regard to those lands after they have been sold to a Canadian company, can one imagine what kind of situation this will create? Once again, the Conservative Party's main focus is to protect the financial interests of those who invest in Colombia, whatever they do.

Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

1:40 p.m.

Bloc

Christian Ouellet Bloc Brome—Missisquoi, QC

Madam Speaker, I am rising to speak to this agreement, which the Bloc Québécois opposes. We could not possibly be in favour of it.

It is hard to understand why the Liberals jumped ship and say—as an hon. member did this morning—that there is less violence and fewer murders now in Colombia when our colleague tells us that 48 trade unionists were killed in 2008, which is not so long ago.

Is it because the Liberals think life is less valuable now than it used to be or that lives in Colombia are not worth much? Is that how we should take it? Or should we assume they are afraid of being accused during the next election of opposing the agreement with Colombia?

In my view, it is probably the latter. It is still too bad, though, that they fail to see how valuable the lives of Colombians are.

We in the Bloc have always been in favour of free trade when it is with countries where the standard of living is roughly comparable to our own. That was true of NAFTA but it is not the case in the agreement with Colombia, where 77% of the people live below the poverty line and 12% in dire poverty.

This means that 17% of the people live in a certain amount of comfort and that real wealth is concentrated in the hands of 1% or 2%. This is the tiny proportion with whom the government wants to sign an agreement. A few Canadians would also like to be able to operate mines and factories without being bothered by the Government of Colombia, which might bring legislation forward that would place restrictions on their operations.

What we need to remember about this free trade agreement is that it will enable Canadians and Quebeckers who have the money to develop new mines or factories to get around potential legislation passed by Colombia.

If the Conservatives were sincere—and I will return to this point—and really wanted to see the situation in Colombia improve, they would start by providing aid and helping to reduce drug trafficking. When poverty in Colombia has been reduced, they could then sign a free trade agreement more or less between equals.

The Liberals are really feeling guilty—at least that is what I heard them saying this morning—and say they will require a report to be submitted every year in order to see whether the situation has improved. Just imagine. They sign an agreement and then they study the reports.

Once the agreement has been signed with the Government of Colombia, are they really going to change their minds and backtrack because of a report? That is nonsense. A report certainly will not change anything.

There is extreme poverty throughout Colombia.

It is really unfortunate and there has to be help in this regard. This country is heavily in debt, has 43 million inhabitants and has wealth concentrated in the hands of a few individuals. So it is hard to imagine respect being given to people working in difficult areas, such as mines, and human rights being upheld. It is also hard to image that the unions will have the power to change the government's attitude.

I would like to quickly go over conditions which prevent the country from readily adopting legislation. We are told it is for trade. Let us take a look at one thing. Colombia exports grain and beef. We have those here. That is their primary production. We are not going to trade cattle for cattle and grain for grain. Is it not really for the extraction of precious metals? I think that would be much more likely. So, it is not a trade agreement, it is an agreement to avoid legal proceedings if damage to the environment results.

The environment is global and important. In other words, the government does not want Colombia to pass restrictive legislation on the environment that would reduce the production of Canadians investing there. In terms of the environment, consideration must be given to potentially dangerous waste from a number of open-pit mines. Deforestation occurs as well. Trees are cut without proper replanting because the mine is open. If there were legislation requiring replanting, some would not be pleased because it would cut into their profits. Landslides are a risk as well. When open pit mines are created over vast areas, mudslides can occur in heavy rains, such as we see increasingly with climate change, which can bury villages built below the cliffs where people go to work in the mines. There are no town planning regulations, it goes without saying. The investors do not like that.

As concerns water, a number of factors may have an impact. What is taken from the mines can impact surface water, drinking water. We have seen this in mines in South America owned by Canadians. The water is so polluted that people can no longer drink it or use it for laundry. Naturally, underground water and the water table can be contaminated. It can have even more sinister effects because water some 40 or 50 kilometres away in another village can be polluted along with all the wells.

So we can see where this leads? Only the word environment and binding environment protection legislation can lead us further. The sole purpose for this free trade agreement is to save investors from having to face too many environmental constraints.

As for labour laws, the situation is the same. It means that people would be given respectable working conditions, that the unions could make demands so that it would cost investors more a few years after they set up. It is too restrictive, so they do not want to hear about it.

Let us talk about health laws now. Whether we are talking about open-pit mines or underground mines, in the long term, health can deteriorate when minerals this dangerous are being extracted. They prefer to let people’s health deteriorate rather than allow a government to enact binding legislation.

Let us also talk about pension laws. We would have to look long and hard to see people being looked after once their career is over. The government could enact pension legislation, and the companies would then have to pay. That is among the things that would not be welcomed by companies that prefer no constraints.

Once again, this is all aimed more at protecting investments than at trade. These are not negotiations between equals. I have described the extent of the poverty in that country. It is quite obvious that we are not going to be selling General Motors cars to the population. We will sell some to a few people who are very rich, and we will sell a few commercial or utility vehicles to people on the ground to promote investment from Canada. It is quite obvious that this agreement is not about free trade with the people. Thinking that amounts to putting on a blindfold.

There is a certain hypocrisy in this kind of agreement. Obliquely, we imply we will be opening up. Yesterday afternoon, I even heard a member of cabinet say that this kind of agreement would allow Canada to develop its foreign trade. That is not the case. Signing an agreement with Colombia is not going to develop Canada’s foreign trade. Be serious! We have to have agreements with Europe. We have to have agreements with people who have money. We have developed our foreign trade with the United States because there are people there with purchasing power; and still there are ups and downs. Because of the current crisis, globalization has had some setbacks.

Other members said earlier that it was time to sign this agreement because of the current global crisis. In a global crisis, poor countries are much harder hit than wealthy countries. Let us now go and see, in Colombia, how hard the Colombians have been hit by the crisis. This is not the time to go and exploit them more, it is the time to help them. If we really wanted to help those people, we would lend them money, we would help them to get on track and develop their country, we would not be proposing to sell them things. It is entirely improbable that this is going to happen.

This kind of agreement will not produce any improvement. Globalization has not improved the situation in every country, but it has greatly improved the situation in the big countries: the United States and its satellite countries.

Let us go and see whether globalization has brought well-being to Africa. The United States sells them rice that is subsidized and grown using super-mechanized methods. In those countries rice growing has been killed off. Elsewhere, countries have killed off the garment manufacturing industry by dumping cheap clothing.

So globalization is not automatically an improvement, particularly for smaller or less wealthy countries like Colombia, whose economic equilibrium is fragile.

Canada is able to make products cheaply and wants to sell them those products, and this will destroy the commercial fabric of those countries, which is very fragile.

Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

1:55 p.m.

Some hon. members

Oh, oh!

Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

1:55 p.m.

NDP

The Acting Speaker NDP Denise Savoie

Could I ask for a little order, please. Out of respect for the member who is speaking, I ask for a little order until 2 o'clock when the speeches will be finished.

The hon. member for Brome—Missisquoi.

Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

1:55 p.m.

Bloc

Christian Ouellet Bloc Brome—Missisquoi, QC

I will carry on, Madam Speaker.

At present, there is no protection for unions. In Colombia, one can kill a trade unionist and pay a fine. Does that qualify as protection of life and human rights? I think not. In that case, how can we be expected to vote for a free trade agreement with a country where we know human rights are not respected? While some Liberal members said this morning that progress had been made, the fact remains that 48 trade unionists were killed in 2008, as my colleague indicated. That is certainly 48 deaths too many. I do not think that Canada would have tolerated having 48 trade unionist murdered on its territory in 2008. That would make absolutely no sense because human rights are respected in Canada. So why do we not care about a South American country where human rights are much more severely trampled and very little progress is being made? Too little progress can be expected to be made, say within the next year, to see an agreement signed and expect that everything will be fine from then on.

The prevailing political, economic and social conditions in Colombia are deplorable, and not just because there are so many poor people. Conditions are bad because of the 17% of the population that I mentioned earlier, the people who are in government, who keep the government in power, who control commercial activity, and who thwart efforts to pass social legislation. We are not talking about a democratic government that all citizens have a say in. Most of the illiterate people do not have a chance to express themselves. One has to wonder why a government like Colombia's would even want to sign a free trade agreement with Canada. Clearly, the real reason for this agreement is investment.

If Colombia is just after investment, then, to be sure, it will not bite the hands that feed it. It will not pass restrictive laws. It is clear to me that an agreement like this one, with a poor country, is not an agreement between equals. The poor country wants an agreement that makes it easier for investors to play a leading role. This agreement is ill-conceived. It will enable the Government of Colombia to keep doing what it has been doing all along. The government will not voluntarily pass measures that could reduce returns on those investments, and this agreement will not require it to do so.

These are all reasons why we must vote against this agreement. I believe that anyone voting for this agreement will be doing so for purely electoral reasons.

Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement Implementation ActGovernment Orders

2 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Peter Milliken

When this bill comes up for debate again in the House, the hon. member for Brome—Missisquoi will have 10 minutes for questions and comments on his speech.

Maureen VodreyStatements by Members

2 p.m.

Conservative

Ted Menzies Conservative Macleod, AB

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to stand in the House today to congratulate senior interpreter, Maureen Vodrey, on her retirement from the House of Commons.

Maureen is the longest serving parliamentary interpreter in Canadian history, beginning her career in 1973 at a time when Pierre Trudeau was our prime minister and John Diefenbaker was still a member of this House. She has interpreted countless events, including royal visits, leadership debates and the 1982 repatriation of Canada's Constitution.

During her career, Maureen interpreted for Ed Broadbent, Jean Chrétien. She even interpreted Joe Clark's High River French, John Diefenbaker, Robert Stanfield and John Turner, just to name a few.

Her loyal service has made her a witness to history, not to mention an expert in parliamentary procedure. She has won numerous awards for her craft and has earned tremendous respect from her colleagues both on and off the Hill.

Please join me, along with her husband Robert and son Simon, in congratulating Maureen Vodrey on 37 years of outstanding service to Canada and this House.

InfrastructureStatements by Members

2 p.m.

Liberal

John Cannis Liberal Scarborough Centre, ON

Mr. Speaker, the other day during debate members of the Conservative government were outlining the infrastructure and RInC money given to their ridings. I am happy for them, but for years I have been corresponding with various ministers requesting financial assistance for the building of the first Greek Canadian cultural community centre in Toronto. My correspondence seems to have been passed from one department to the other and one minister to another. The answer is always no, no money.

Greek Canadians are proud Canadians. They too have played a role in building this great country of ours. They too pay taxes. Therefore, I ask this. Why is the Conservative government turning its back on the Green community?

A government is elected to treat its people fairly and equally, especially today, March 25, when Greek Canadians are celebrating Greek Independence Day and the Greek community of Toronto is celebrating its 100th anniversary in Canada. It seems the Conservative government does not like Greek people. What a shame.

Come election time, they will not forget.

United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous PeoplesStatements by Members

2 p.m.

Bloc

Yvon Lévesque Bloc Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC

Mr. Speaker, this morning I had the chance to meet the delegates of the Pauktuutit annual general meeting. This association advocates on behalf of Inuit women, helps guide them on pursuing equality issues and encourages their participation in social and political life in their communities and in Canada.

Pauktuutit organizes activities to promote women's and children's rights, gender equality and abuse prevention. Founded in 1984 with modest means, Pauktuutit is now a respected organization that assists thousands of women.

At their annual general meeting, the delegates told me about their concerns that the Conservative government had still not signed the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. I want to remind the government of the importance of signing this daring and promising human rights instrument.

Maternal and Child HealthStatements by Members

2 p.m.

NDP

Yvon Godin NDP Acadie—Bathurst, NB

Mr. Speaker, I recently travelled to Ethiopia with an NGO called Results Canada.

During this trip, I learned that tuberculosis, which killed 1.8 million people in 2008, can be treated for just $20 per person.

I also came to realize the impact that access to basic sanitation can have on the health of a child and an entire community.

I witnessed the quality of the work done by community and health workers who provide care and a clean space where a woman can safely give birth to her child.

I would like to congratulate Results Canada on its efforts and its incredible work.

However, the Conservative government has a responsibility towards the poor in this world. The government must act immediately by investing in these types of effective, low-cost interventions that save the lives of millions of women and children in this world. The mothers and children of this world cannot wait any longer.

Canwest Canspell National Spelling BeeStatements by Members

2:05 p.m.

Conservative

Candice Bergen Conservative Portage—Lisgar, MB

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the Canwest Canspell spelling bee participants from across Canada. This grassroots literacy initiative encourages academic excellence in grades four to eight students. Approximately 250,000 young spellers participated in the 2010 Canspell competition.

I would like to make special mention of Josh Mathews who is with us on Parliament Hill today with many of his fellow competitors. He is a grade five student from the riding of Winnipeg South and he won the Winnipeg Free Press regional spelling bee.

Josh and the top spellers from each regional bee received a $5,000 Canspell Education Award. Congratulations to all them. I wish them the best of luck this week as they compete for the Canadian title.

I would also like to point out that it is Josh's 11th birthday on Monday. Happy Birthday, Josh, and good luck to everyone involved.

EpilepsyStatements by Members

March 25th, 2010 / 2:05 p.m.

Liberal

Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS

Mr. Speaker, tomorrow, March 26, is Purple Day, a day to raise international awareness about epilepsy. I would like to encourage my colleagues to wear purple in support of this special event.

Epilepsy is one of the most common neurological disorders affecting 300,000 Canadians and 50 million people globally.

In 2008, Cassidy Megan, a young girl who lives in my riding of Halifax West, founded Purple Day to build support for people with epilepsy. I hope all of us will join Cassidy and wear purple tomorrow.

Global Advocacy DaysStatements by Members

2:05 p.m.

Conservative

Joy Smith Conservative Kildonan—St. Paul, MB

Mr. Speaker, today marks the 203rd anniversary of the enactment of the Slave Trade Act by the British Parliament. This historical legislation resulted in the end of the Atlantic slave trade. However, today there are more humans enslaved than any other given moment throughout history.

Over the past two days, Ottawa has played host to the Global Advocacy Days, the first conference in Canadian history to educate and equip modern abolitionists.

The Global Advocacy Days has been organized by the Not For Sale, an international movement of students, artists, people of faith and many others all united to fight the global slave trade. Yesterday, I had the honour of speaking to these great and dedicated Canadians who are fiercely committed to ending this modern day slave trade that remains a terrible mark upon our generation.

Today, I am pleased to welcome our Canadian abolitionists and Dr. David Batstone, founder of the Not For Sale Campaign on Parliament Hill.

After question period today, I invite all hon. members to Room 200 West Block, at 3:30 p.m., to meet these advocates and help end human slavery once and for all.

Jean BrissonStatements by Members

2:05 p.m.

Bloc

Claude Guimond Bloc Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC

Mr. Speaker, a remarkable citizen from my riding is celebrating his birthday today. At 79, phenomenal personality Jean Brisson is still hosting his own daily radio program on a Rimouski station, and he still brings the same energy and outstanding passion to the job as he did when he started in 1949.

The time I have today is not nearly enough to highlight his career and his many accomplishments. As a consultant, columnist, and television, radio and telethon host, Mr. Brisson dedicated his life to his community and to the well-being of all. He took on countless challenges and became well-known through his involvement in many social and humanitarian causes. I would like to wish Mr. Brisson a very happy birthday and to congratulate him on his brilliant career.

I hope my friend has a truly wonderful day and a joyful year. He is an inspiration to us all.

The EconomyStatements by Members

2:05 p.m.

Conservative

Dave MacKenzie Conservative Oxford, ON

Mr. Speaker, our government's number one priority is the creation of jobs and economic growth.

I am pleased to announce that today the Prime Minister welcomed Kongsberg Defence and Aerospace's decision to create jobs and invest in Canada by opening a new manufacturing facility in London, Ontario, which is just down the road from the riding of Oxford.

The new facility is expected to directly create up to 100 jobs in the London area, with a further 500 jobs through supplier activity. These are the kinds of knowledge intensive jobs on which the highly developed economy of the future will be based.

Kongsberg's decision confirms that Canada has the right conditions to attract and nurture the new economy. Canada is open for business and will emerge from recession more powerful, more competitive and more prosperous than it ever was before.

National Day of Reflection on the Prevention of GenocideStatements by Members

2:10 p.m.

Liberal

Irwin Cotler Liberal Mount Royal, QC

Mr. Speaker, two years ago the House unanimously adopted a motion designating April 7 as the National Day of Reflection on the Prevention of Genocide.

I rise today in remembrance and commemoration of the 16th anniversary of Rwandan genocide, of horrors too terrible to be believed but not too terrible to have happened, where one million Rwandans, mostly ethnic Tutsis and Hutus, were murdered in less than 100 days.

But the worst horror is not only that of the genocide itself but that this genocide was preventable. No one can say that we did not know. We knew but we did not act.

And so, as the Security Council and international community dithered and delayed, Rwandans died.

Indeed, the great tragedy is not only how many Rwandans were murdered but how so few intervened to save them, ignoring the compelling lesson of history that the Rwandan genocide occurred not simply because of the machinery of death but because of indifference in the face of incitement and atrocity.

Never again.

Project HeroStatements by Members

2:10 p.m.

Conservative

Bradley Trost Conservative Saskatoon—Humboldt, SK

Mr. Speaker, Project Hero, which was started in 2009 by retired General Rick Hillier and honorary Lieutenant Colonel Kevin Reid, is a unique program which provides undergraduate scholarships to the children of fallen Canadian armed forces service men and women.

Sadly, a ragtag group of radical leftist professors at the University of Regina are opposed to Project Hero, including the leader of the pack whose research interests include Marxism and the Latin American left. The attitude of these so-called academics is shameful.

Project Hero is giving a helping hand to the children of men and women who have made the ultimate sacrifice in the service of our country. Yet a bunch of comfortable academics sitting thousands of kilometres away at a university far from the fields of Afghanistan have the nerve to oppose this program.

These so-called academics should stop letting their extreme left-wing views in opposition to the conflict in Afghanistan get in the way. They should join Canadians in getting behind Project Hero.

Canwest Canspell National Spelling BeeStatements by Members

2:10 p.m.

NDP

Denise Savoie NDP Victoria, BC

Mr. Speaker, I rise to give a 21 gun salute to 21 young scholars from across Canada. They are in Ottawa this week to participate in the Canwest Canspell National Spelling Bee. Among them, I am proud to say, is my constituent, Laura Weir, who won the Victoria Times Colonist regional spelling bee.

A quarter of a million middle school students participate annually in this competition. That is a quarter of a million young Canadians celebrating literacy together and setting an example.

Regional champions, like Laura, are available to help members and senators with their spelling today and they will be in Kanata to cheer on the other Senators on Saturday.

Though only one winner can compete internationally, I congratulate all the Olympian spellers. They make us p-r-o-u-d, proud.

Liberal Party of CanadaStatements by Members

2:10 p.m.

Conservative

Sylvie Boucher Conservative Beauport—Limoilou, QC

Mr. Speaker, tomorrow, the Liberal leader will chair a conference of leading thinkers in Montreal in an effort to reinvigorate his party and offer people a credible alternative to the Conservative government.

Of course, this is the same Liberal leader who was all set to topple the government last fall even though he had no plan of his own for governing. Six months on, he is on a mission to come up with some fabulous new ideas.

Some 250 people are expected to participate in the conference, and they will all be paying an unbelievable amount of money for the privilege of attending.

The purpose of this meeting of leading thinkers is this: “The objective is not to advance simple solutions, or short-term tactics. Rather, the conference will start a national dialogue about the big issues that will determine the future well-being of Canadian families, individuals and both urban and rural communities”.

Oddly enough, the Liberal leader did not see fit to invite his own MPs.

Does he really think that ideas put forward by his—

Liberal Party of CanadaStatements by Members

2:15 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Peter Milliken

The hon. member for Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord.

Maureen VodreyStatements by Members

2:15 p.m.

Bloc

Michel Guimond Bloc Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, QC

Mr. Speaker, today I would like to pay tribute to the dean of interpreters on Parliament Hill, Mrs. Maureen Vodrey, who, after 37 years of loyal service to Parliament, is retiring.

Mrs. Vodrey began her brilliant career in the 29th Parliament. She was, among others, the voice of René Lévesque on the occasion of the unilateral patriation of the Constitution, and was in the interpreting booth during the Meech Lake negotiations. In addition to doing yeoman's service as senior interpreter on the Hill, Mrs. Vodrey also finds the time to train budding interpreters at the University of Ottawa, thereby ensuring that parliamentarians will benefit from the same outstanding language services they have received for years to come.

My colleagues from the Bloc Québécois join me in thanking you for having been the English voice of the Bloc Québécois for the past 20 years, and we wish you a long and happy retirement with your husband.

Thank you for your professionalism, Mrs. Vodrey.

Maureen VodreyStatements by Members

2:15 p.m.

Liberal

Marcel Proulx Liberal Hull—Aylmer, QC

Mr. Speaker, today I rise to pay tribute to one of our interpreters, Mrs. Maureen Vodrey, who is retiring after 37 years of loyal service to Parliament.

Members of this House would be unable to do their work without the support of this team of competent and devoted language specialists. Maureen Vodrey is a member of this team, one of the many who work in the shadows, lending their voices so that we can better understand the content and subtleties of parliamentary debate.

Throughout her career, Mrs. Vodrey has seen a succession of governors general, speakers and clerks. During a turning point in our nation's history, she interpreted Prime Minister Trudeau, Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, and René Lévesque during the patriation of the Constitution, and was present to interpret many of the Meech Lake negotiations.

I am told that parliamentary procedure is one of her passions. Her in-depth and unmatched knowledge thereof has enabled her to react promptly to the countless unforeseen and challenging situations arising in this Chamber, and to train the next generation of young interpreters.

I invite all colleagues to join me in thanking Mrs. Vodrey and wishing her a happy retirement.

Liberal Party of CanadaStatements by Members

2:15 p.m.

Conservative

Scott Armstrong Conservative Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, NS

Mr. Speaker, as the Liberal leader prepares to convene his spenders' conference in Montreal this weekend, let us take a look at his track record.

He promised that the Liberal platform would be ready last June, and yet he tried to force an unnecessary election last fall with no platform in place; this, after coming back to Canada after being away thinking for 34 years. Now the Liberal leader is starting to think about what Liberal policies might be, but we already know.

The only thing to come out of the Liberal spenders' conference this weekend will be grandiose proposals that will require higher taxes, including a GST hike.

Canadians know that higher taxes kill jobs.

Canadians want a government focused on building jobs and growth in this country. Our economy and building our economy is exactly what we are working on. Our Conservative government is working on that every single day.

Let the Liberal leader muse from his professor's lectern during the spenders' conference. At the end of the day--

Liberal Party of CanadaStatements by Members

2:15 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Peter Milliken

Order. Oral questions, questions orales. The hon. Leader of the Opposition.