Tony Valeri

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

Mr. Speaker, our principal legislative objectives continue to be Bill C-43, the third reading vote of which will take place after question period, and Bill C-48. The government believes these bills reflect public interest and the enactment of both of these bills is required before the House adjourns for the summer. As the hon. member mentioned, if the House does not pass Bill C-48, we will be here in July and August. Consequently, we will continue to give these bills priority until they are disposed of.

We will then consider report stage of Bill C-38, the civil marriage bill; Bill C-25; Bill C-28; Bill C-52, the Fisheries Act; Bill C-47; Bill C-53; Bill C-55, the bankruptcy bill; and Bill C-37, the do not call legislation.

[Marriage, June 16th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I need not take any lessons from the hon. member. Our commitment and responsibility are to Canadians. That is why we are in the House. That is why we put forward legislation. That is why we debate legislation.

The real question is why the Leader of the Opposition continues to delay the debate on Bill C-38, and why the Leader of the Opposition continues to put forward procedural motions instead of debating budget bills and debating other issues that are important to Canadians.

[Marriage, June 16th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, it is unfortunate that the hon. member begins to play politics with such an important piece of legislation. Our approach on this bill has been consistent right from the beginning. Our commitment is to get the budget bills passed and pass as many other pieces of legislation as possible, like Bill C-38. We have demonstrated our commitment by extending the sitting hours to midnight so that we can have more legislation debated in the House.

It is the Conservatives who do not want to allow Bill C-38 to come to this House and who will not allow for the democratic process to proceed.

[Points of Order, June 15th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday I made a commitment to table copies, in both official languages, of correspondence that was referred to in question period. I would like to now table those copies.

[Points of Order, June 14th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I understand that the letter the hon. Prime Minister was quoting from is in just one official language. We would like to translate it into the other official language in order to table that letter in this House, as the hon. member has requested.

[AudioTaped Conversations, June 14th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, whether a crime has been committed or not is really the domain of the people doing the investigation. The Bloc has indicated in the House that it has sent a letter to the RCMP to determine whether an investigation is required.

The Bloc has the opportunity to let the RCMP do the work that it has asked the RCMP to do. If it has further information, it should provide that information.

[AudioTaped Conversations, June 14th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, again I am getting the same question and to that question I would suggest that if there is additional information, the Bloc should provide that to the RCMP.

Rather than conduct an investigation on the floor of the House of Commons, the Bloc members should follow up on their letter. If they have more information, I would suggest they provide that information to the RCMP.

[AudioTaped Conversations, June 14th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, what the Prime Minister knew was that the member for Newton—North Delta wanted to cross the floor. What the Prime Minister said was that no offer was to be made and no offer was made.

[AudioTaped Conversations, June 14th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, as has been repeated in this House, the member for Newton—North Delta wanted to cross the floor. The Prime Minister said that no offer was made and no offer was in fact made.

I understand that the Bloc has contacted the RCMP and I understand that the member wants to conduct his own investigation on the floor of the House of Commons. However, if he has actually written to the RCMP and if he does in fact have more information that he can share with the RCMP, I would encourage him to do exactly that.

[Member for Newton—North Delta, June 13th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I fail to understand why the hon. member and her party continue to ask these questions when they have asked the RCMP themselves to see whether an investigation is warranted.

I say again, if the hon. member does have information, she should provide it to the RCMP so the RCMP can decide whether an investigation is warranted.