Tony Valeri

[Business of the House, May 13th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 56.1, I move:

That, notwithstanding any Standing Order or usual practice, the second reading stages of Bill C-43, an act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on February 23, 2005, and Bill C-48, an act to authorize the Minister of Finance to make certain payments, shall be disposed of as follows;

1. Any division thereon requested before the expiry of the time for consideration of government orders on Thursday, May 19, 2005 shall be deferred to that time;

2. At the expiry of the time for consideration of government orders on Thursday, May 19, 2005, all questions necessary for the disposal of the second reading stage of (1) Bill C-43 and (2) Bill C-48 shall be put and decided forthwith and successively, without further debate, amendment or deferral.

[Business of the House, May 13th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 56.1, I move:

That, notwithstanding any Standing Order or usual practice, the second reading stages of Bill C-43, an act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on February 23, 2005, and Bill C-48, an act to authorize the Minister of Finance to make certain payments, shall be disposed of as follows:

1. Any division thereon requested before the expiry of the date for consideration of government orders on Thursday, May 19, 2005, shall be deferred to that time;

2. At the expiry of the time for consideration of Government Orders on Thursday, May 19, 2005, all questions necessary for the disposal of second reading stages of (1) Bill C-43 and (2) Bill C-48 shall be put and decided forthwith and successively, without further debate, amendment or deferral.

[Government of Canada, May 13th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, repeating the question does not make it any more valid. In fact, I have to say that Thursday is a very reasonable date. I do not understand why the hon. members will not take yes for an answer.

It will be a clear question. It is a money bill. It is a budget vote. It does respect the investments that have been made by both the people and the provinces of Saskatchewan and Alberta.

The real question is whether the members opposite will respect the result of that vote. The Prime Minister has said he will. Will they?

[Government of Canada, May 13th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, the Ottawa Citizen is saying “constitutional experts say that while the recent events on Parliament Hill may be attention grabbers”--and I would have to suggest that the hon. member has no interest except trying to grab more attention--“there is no suggestion that it adds up to a constitutional crisis. We are at an impasse. We are not at war. The economy is booming”. “The situation would be a crisis only if the government refused to have a confidence vote”. That vote will be on Thursday. It will be a clear vote and a clear question. What I want to know is whether the members opposite will respect the results.

[Government of Canada, May 13th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, first, it is quite unfortunate that the Leader of the Opposition had misinformed these hon. members who were not well to get here on Tuesday for what was a procedural vote. That is point number one.

Since the hon. member across the way actually interpreted the vote on Thursday as a confidence motion, I wonder why, when he knew the Minister of Justice was away at a funeral for his family and the Minister of Natural Resources was away for personal reasons, he did not come forward and say, “Oh please, let's allow members to be in this House and let's postpone a vote on Tuesday”. The hypocrisy is killing me.

[Government of Canada, May 13th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, now it is not only the official opposition who in the last 48 hours is using the health of members of Parliament, which is very unfortunate. Certainly the thoughts and prayers of all members of Parliament in this place are with those who are not well. I wish the hon. member very well.

Thursday is a reasonable date and it is unfortunate that once again this type of discussion and this type of approach is being used in the House. There has to be more respect for each other in the House.

[Government of Canada, May 13th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, we set a reasonable date for a confidence vote. In the meantime, there is an opportunity to debate the budget. Bill C-48 is in the House.

The key point is and the real question is that on the vote on Thursday, which is a confidence vote, the Prime Minister has said that he will respect the results. What I would like to know is whether the leader of the official opposition and his separatist friends will respect the results.

If we fail on Thursday, the Prime Minister will visit the Governor General and there will be an election. If we succeed, will the hon. members across the way allow this Parliament to function and function in the interests of Canadians?

[The Budget, May 13th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, let us point to some of the accomplishments in the House just in recent days. The DNA bill has passed. The veterans bill has passed. The WTO ruling with respect to agriculture has come through. There is the aid to Africa which has also been passed.

What I might want to say to the hon. member is that Bill C-48 is before the House today. It is a budget debate. I would like to know how many members across the way will get up on this debate.

By the way, Mr. Speaker, I would like to welcome all of the members across the way here on a Friday. I have never seen so many of them here. It has to be the first time that they have actually shown up on a Friday.

[The Budget, May 13th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I actually had the opportunity, and I know many members in this place oftentimes do have an opportunity, to watch CPAC. I think it was very clear on that particular program that if the hon. members wanted to debate the budget, they would have adjourned the debate, not adjourned the House to have the afternoon off at taxpayers' expense.

[The Budget, May 13th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, it is quite obvious I have struck a chord of truth.

Again, I say that Thursday is a very reasonable date for a vote, and constitutional experts agree.