Debates of June 7th, 2012

Bill C-25—Time Allocation Motion

[Ron Cannan, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my hon. colleague the Minister of State (Finance) for his outstanding job on this file. He has been working on this pooled pension fund project for a couple of years now. He has travelled across the country and met with a variety of stakeholders, small independent business owners, moms and dads, and the gamut of business operations and individuals across this country.

In the remaining time that my hon. colleague has left, I wonder if he could share with the House how many hours of debate has taken place. Could he tell us what he has done to date with respect to consulting with Canadians? I know he has come to my riding and gone to other communities. And could he tell us the timeline for implementing the act once it is passed by Parliament?

[Ted Menzies, Conservative, Macleod, AB]

Madam Speaker, I will not be able to answer the question in one minute, but we have looked at this. We have had six days, 20 hours, of debate; 63 speeches; 4 days, 6 hours and 40 minutes, at committee; and 26 witnesses appeared. The member for Burlington, who is not sitting in his seat, but he is here, has spoken three times. He gave three 20-minute speeches on this issue.

The Speaker makes sure that time is shared equally on both sides of the House. I would suggest that, not only have our members spoken to the attributes of the bill, the NDP and the Liberals have had lots of opportunity to speak to its attributes as well. Apparently, they do not want to help Canadians.

[The Deputy Speaker, Denise Savoie]

The hon. member for Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles on a point of order.

[Anne-Marie Day, NDP, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

Madam Speaker, I would like to remind the hon. member that he does not have the right to point out a member's presence or absence in the House.

[The Deputy Speaker, Denise Savoie]

That is correct.

The hon. member for Dartmouth—Cole Harbour.

[Robert Chisholm, NDP, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise for a few minutes and respond to the fact that we are faced with the 24th time allocation motion by the government. If the government is so proud of what it is doing in terms of this legislation and other bills, why does it keep bringing in motions to limit debate?

Let us understand that the reason Canadians have a crisis in terms of saving is because they are not making enough money to be able to put money aside to save for their retirement. It has been shown that the best way to deal with that is through the Canada pension plan. There is less overhead, less cost and it provides more safety for retirees.

The reason we have this hatched up bill is because the Minister of State (Finance) and the Minister of Finance did not have the courage or the fortitude to deal with the provincial ministers of finance to get a deal on the Canada pension plan. That is why we are dealing with this mess right now.

[Ted Menzies, Conservative, Macleod, AB]

Madam Speaker, is that hon. member suggesting we should have rammed our views down the throats of the provincial finance ministers? That is not the way we work with our provincial partners.

We actually work with our partners. That is why we are bringing forward pooled registered pension plan options for Canadians, because the provinces all agreed it was the best framework available at this time.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Madam Speaker, I am not surprised that the government is trying to shut down debate on its bogus pension plan, because it does not have the courage to go talk to the senior citizens of the country. This is a government that went to Davos to talk to the millionaires to say it was going to make senior citizens work another two years. That kind of myopic contempt is reflected here.

I look at the member for London—Fanshawe, who has tirelessly spoken up again and again for seniors, and then I see the clowns on the backbenches laughing at them. That is completely unacceptable.

[Ted Menzies, Conservative, Macleod, AB]

I have a point of order, Madam Speaker.

[The Deputy Speaker, Denise Savoie]

On that point of order, I will hear the hon. member, but I would like to ask all members to be judicious in their use of language in the House. It is not permitted to use offensive language in speaking about other members.

I assume we can move on.

The hon. minister.

[Ted Menzies, Conservative, Macleod, AB]

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the fact that you find that sort of language offensive in this place. We are all here for one purpose, and that is to help Canadians, not to call each other names. That is deplorable, and I would ask you to ask the hon. member to apologize.

[The Deputy Speaker, Denise Savoie]

I am asking the hon. member for Timmins—James Bay to withdraw that comment.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Madam Speaker, I would be more than willing to withdraw that comment, but I want to say that we are here to represent our constituents and to debate, and what is happening with the government is a shutdown of debate because it will not do the honest thing and stand up and speak. That is what is intolerable in the House.

[The Deputy Speaker, Denise Savoie]

I consider that the hon. member has stated that he is withdrawing that statement.

I must advise all members that it is my duty to interrupt these proceedings.

On that last point of order, the hon. parliamentary secretary.

[Shelly Glover, Conservative, Saint Boniface, MB]

Madam Speaker, I have been here only a little short of four years now, and it boggles my mind that this type of behaviour continues under your watch, Madam Speaker. I would appreciate it if you would actually listen as I speak, because the member ought to apologize, which is what is required, not retract and then attack again. I would ask, Madam Speaker, to please—

[The Deputy Speaker, Denise Savoie]

Order, please.

I must interrupt these proceedings, but according to the rules of order the hon. member's comments have been accepted as the equivalent of an apology. I will close the matter now.

It is my duty to interrupt the proceedings and put forthwith the question necessary to dispose of the motion now before the House.

The question is on the motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

No.

[The Deputy Speaker, Denise Savoie]

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

[Some hon. members]

Yea.

[The Deputy Speaker, Denise Savoie]

All those opposed will please say nay.

[Some hon. members]

Nay.

[The Deputy Speaker, Denise Savoie]

In my opinion the yeas have it.

And five or more members having risen:

Call in the members.

(The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:)

Vote #274

Pooled Registered Pension Plans Act

[The Speaker, Andrew Scheer]

I declare the motion carried.

The House resumed from June 4 consideration of the motion that Bill C-25, An Act relating to pooled registered pension plans and making related amendments to other Acts, be read the third time and passed.