Michel Gauthier

[Business of the House, May 16th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, we have all agreed to do everything in our power to ensure that the House functions properly. I hope that the message also reached the Liberal side, so that we can speak freely here.

I just wanted to point out that the motion put forward is rather interesting. I believe that, under our standing orders, it is very likely that we would be able to split a bill. This would ensure that, whatever happens following Thursday's confidence vote, the people of Newfoundland and Labrador and certain provinces and territories can enjoy the proposed benefits.

If the government objects, that will go against the interests of these people.

[Government of Canada, May 13th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, let us be more specific. Canada's image abroad has been coloured—even the dollar has lost a cent in the past three days—because the Prime Minister is undemocratic. He is clinging to power and refusing to look at the facts. They alone fail to see the reality.

My question is for the government. Will the Prime Minister finally come to his senses, affirm his respect for democracy and confirm the vote of confidence in his government on Monday, when all members—

[Government of Canada, May 13th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has lost control of the situation. Before putting his government to a confidence vote, he is trying to organize a pre-election tour. Yesterday, the premier of New Brunswick told him he wanted nothing to do with the Prime Minister's partisan game.

The message is coming from all over in no uncertain terms. Is the Prime Minister not getting it? He has lost the confidence of this House, the media and the public.

[Privilege, May 11th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I wish to draw the attention of the House to a motion. I believe you would find consent for the following order:

That the proceedings on the motion for second reading and referral to the Standing Committee on Finance of Bill C-43 conclude at 4:30 p.m. this afternoon;

That all questions necessary to dispose of second reading of this bill be deemed put;

That a recorded division be deemed requested and deferred until 5:30 p.m. today;

That the proceedings on the motion for second reading and referral to the Standing Committee on Finance of Bill C-48 conclude at 5:29 p.m. this afternoon;

That all the questions necessary to dispose of second reading of this bill be deemed put;

That a recorded division be deemed requested and deferred until 5:30 p.m. today.

I therefore seek the consent—

[The Budget, May 11th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, if the government's budget and add-ons are as great as the Liberals claim, we will offer them this deal. If they do not want the government to fall as a result of a motion of censure, we are proposing that the budget bill be debated today and voted on today, so that the government can resolve this crisis it has created for itself.

[The Budget, May 11th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister must understand that he himself has plunged his government into an unprecedented political crisis. That is so true that, in an effort to defuse the crisis, after sleeping on it, he decided today to call an election eight months earlier than planned.

He has no right keeping government in limbo all week long. A motion of non-confidence was voted on yesterday. If he wants to recognize it, now is the time, whether it deals with his budget or not.

[Government of Canada, May 10th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, earlier during oral question period, the leader of the government attempted to demonstrate that the 1926 example was completely different from the motion on which the House will be voting this evening. In a ruling last week, Mr. Speaker, you said the following:

--in reviewing the precedent from June 22, 1926, ....which can be found in the Journals at pages..., an amendment containing assertions clearly damaging to the government of the day was successfully moved to a motion for concurrence in the report of a special committee. I find this example to be not markedly different from the one the House is faced with now.

How can the leader of the government try to tell us this is totally different, when you, Mr. Speaker, with objectivity and after analysis, have stated that it was similar?

[Government of Canada, May 10th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, this evening the Prime Minister will find himself having to rise above partisan considerations and recognize that he no longer enjoys the confidence of Parliament.

Does the Prime Minister intend to honour this democratic vote or to plunge Canada into an unprecedented political and constitutional crisis by clinging to his job?

[Government of Canada, May 10th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, the substance of the motion this evening is very clear. The intentions are obvious. Parliament will have an opportunity to withdraw its confidence in this government.

Will the Prime Minister acknowledge that the rules of Parliament, while providing some guidance on the matter of confidence, leave the Prime Minister with some responsibility to demonstrate his judgment and his sense of democracy, and that in this regard he must consider tonight's vote a vote of confidence?

[Committees of the House, May 9th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to add an argument, which occurred to me as I was listening to my honourable colleague. The parties had concluded an agreement today. The leaders of the four parties are absent. They went to pay tribute to the veterans and to take part in the celebrations for VE Day, 60 years ago.

It was agreed that no vote would be held here in this House, since the four party leaders were absent. We are keeping our word, as are the Conservatives. I am sure the NDP is doing so as well. If the Liberals do not want to keep their word, we will inform their Prime Minister that they broke the non-aggression pact in order to allow the—