House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2006, with 53% of the vote.
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I think you will find there is unanimous consent in the House for the following motion.
That notwithstanding any standing order and the usual practices of the House, Bill S-18, an act respecting the Alliance of Manufacturers & Exporters Canada, be now called for second reading; and that the House do proceed to dispose of the bill at all stages without debate, including committee of the whole.
Canadian Broadcasting Corporation March 10th, 1999
Mr. Speaker, for the past three weeks 3,000 technicians have been on strike at the CBC. What is the Minister of Labour doing to resolve the issue?
Grammy Awards March 1st, 1999
Mr. Speaker, we will move along briskly from sports to culture. Allow me to join all Canadians in congratulating our artists for their success at last week's 41st annual Grammy Awards in Los Angeles.
Congratulations to Céline Dion, who won two awards, one for best pop song of the year, and the other for best recording.
Let me congratulate Alanis Morissette for winning both best rock song and best female vocalist of the year. Let me also congratulate Shania Twain for winning both the best country song and best female country vocalist of the year.
I would also like to congratulate Luc Plamondon on winning the awards for best musical of the year and best song of the year at the Victoires de la musique in Paris on February 20 for his hit show Notre-Dame de Paris .
Canadian artists are our best known cultural ambassadors.
National Child Day November 18th, 1998
Mr. Speaker, Friday, November 20 marks the sixth anniversary of National Child Day, a day to increase awareness and understanding of healthy child development.
As chair of the National Children's Agenda Caucus, I believe that by providing a warm, loving and responsive environment for young children our society can provide a better and more promising future for children.
November 20 was chosen as National Child Day because it is the anniversary of two historic events for children: the United Nations Declaration of the Rights of the Child in 1959 and the United Nations adoption of the Convention on the Rights of the Child in 1989. The convention recognizes children's basic human rights, protects them from harm and addresses the important role of the family in bringing up children.
But National Child Day does something else. It reminds us that all children need love and respect to grow to their full potential. That is why healthy child development is everyone's concern and responsibility.
Foreign Publishers Advertising Services Act October 29th, 1998
Mr. Speaker, I was deeply affected by the story the member told about the little boy and the dog, but he left us dangling. My question to the member is very simple. What happened to the dog?
Literacy September 22nd, 1998
Mr. Speaker, September 8 was International Literacy Day. Recent data shows that 22% of Canadians have extremely limited literacy skills and another 26% lack sufficient skills to do their jobs properly or participate fully in Canadian society.
What is this government doing to improve the literacy skills of the 48% of Canadians who need our help?
Parks Canada Act May 28th, 1998
Madam Speaker, at the risk of driving the last member a bit crazy, I am going to agree, at least in part, with what he said.
There was a lack of clarity in the amendment, which we recognized and which we dealt with, but which does not seem to have been recognized by the members of the Reform Party who have spoken to it. That is to say, we are simply in this modified amendment restating the principles of the Official Languages Act because we are concerned when we hear from others that Parks Canada may be perceived as not following through on all of its obligations. We believe that Parks Canada is doing so, but for greater certainty we want to state that it is a commitment of the Government of Canada to provide services to its citizens, to the public, in both official languages.
The amendment concerns services which are involved in direct contact with the public. It does not cover painters. It does not cover garbage collectors. It does not cover ranch men and ranch women in Saskatchewan. It is simply those people who deal with the public who would be covered under the Officials Languages Act as employees of Parks Canada.
If we subcontract to other people who deal with the public in the parks, the rules of the Official Languages Act apply. That is all it does. It provides greater certainty. It does not change anything, but it does make the point that Parks Canada is attentive and concerned about this issue.
Parks Canada Act May 28th, 1998
Mr. Speaker, we are against this amendment. We are, of course, in favour of involving local communities as users of the parks and sites of great value to Parks Canada. We certainly have nothing against local communities.
However, Parks Canada already offers incentives such as annual passes and early bird specials at many parks and sites. Such incentives usually benefit local people the most.
This approach reflects the intent of the proposed change without legalizing a discriminatory clause that would treat one group of Canadians differently from another.
Parks Canada Act May 28th, 1998
Mr. Speaker, I will attempt to address all five motions and deal with the various arguments put forward by my hon. colleague.
I begin with the first motion that was just proposed. We oppose this amendment, because we feel it is redundant. The proposed amendment reflects what is already contained in paragraph (1) and the new paragraph (m) in the preamble. More to the point, the intent behind the proposed amendment is already captured in clause 6.(1), which states, and I quote:
6.(1) The Agency is responsible for the implementation of policies of the Government of Canada that relate to national parks, national historic sites and other protected heritage areas and heritage protection programs.
By and large, such policies are already addressed in Parks Canada's Guiding Principles and Operational Policies , a document that was tabled in Parliament and approved in 1994.
This document addresses Parks Canada's key responsibilities in terms of respecting ecological and commemorative—not cultural—integrity, and how these are addressed at the park and site level in concert with accommodating visitor use, tourism and park development.
We also oppose Motion No. 3 because we find it redundant as well. The Parks Canada Agency is defined as a departmental corporation under the Financial Administration Act. As such, it must comply with Treasury Board's contracting policies and with the Government Contracts Regulations. Contracting limits and procedures are clearly set out in these regulations.
It is to be noted that clause 9 merely allows the agency to procure, with the approval of the Treasury Board and the governor in council, goods and services from organizations other than the government's common service organizations, such as PWGSC, when this is beneficial from an economic point of view.
All the agency's contracting activities, whether with common service organizations or with other bodies, will still be subject to the government contract regulations.
As for the second motion, we are proposing that Bill C-29 be amended to reflect better the concerns of various people who appeared as witnesses before us, that every two years the minister will convoke a round table of persons interested in matters for which the agency is responsible to advise the minister on the performance by the agency of its responsibilities under section 6 and that the minister must respond within 180 days to the comments made by the round table.
This section replaces former subsection 12(4). The change really means in ordinary language that this is no longer a forum convened by the chief executive officer of the new Parks Canada agency but by the minister. It provides certainty that a round table will occur at least every two years. It also says that the recommendations will be responded to in a timely fashion. We chose 180 days because that is to be found in other responses to environmental proposals.
That takes me to Motion No. 4 in which we are proposing:
That Bill C-29, clause 12, be amended by replacing lines 37 to 43 on page 7 and line 1 on page 8 with the following:
“(4) The Chief Executive Officer may dele-”
This is simply designed to delete subsection 12(4) in favour of the new clause which I just discussed in terms of convening round tables at least once every two years. That simply makes it possible.
Motion No. 5 is consistent with the two motions to which I have just spoken. As I mentioned earlier it means that there is a report back within 180 days which is consistent with the way we do things, for example, under the environment assessment act. I think that covers the group.
Option Canada April 3rd, 1998
Mr. Speaker, we have responded to the criticisms, of the auditor general for instance, by saying that changes will have to be made in future. We then answered the questions asked.
But we also have our own questions. We could also ask the Bloc Quebecois about Plan O, a plan to spend billions of dollars in the event of Quebec's separation. This question should be put to the representatives of Mr. Parizeau in this House.