Lost his last election, in 2006, with 35% of the vote.
Agriculture February 13th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, I believe that if you were to seek it you would find unanimous consent for the following motion:
That until the end of the debate, no dilatory motion such as quorum calls or motions to extend debate under Standing Order 26(1) shall be introduced.
Committees Of The House February 9th, 2001
moved:
That the associate membership of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs be as follows: Bill Blaikie, Barry Breitkreuz and Marcel Proulx.
(Motion agreed to)
Privilege February 9th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, it is obvious that all members have the same privileges and are entitled to express their views as they see fit in the House.
What the government House leader did was to point out that a premise in the question was fundamentally inaccurate, and this is something the Canadian public needs to know, that is that the government is not under investigation. The fact that certain grants are under investigation does not mean the government is under investigation.
All the government House leader did was say that if the members opposite have any proof that the government is under investigation, which is not now the case, they should step outside the House and say so publicly to all Canadians. This is an entirely legitimate attitude. The Government of Canada is not under investigation.
Business Of The House February 6th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, I think you would find unanimous consent for the following motion:
That, notwithstanding any standing order or usual practice, statements pursuant to Standing Order 31 may be made this day from 1:55 p.m. to 2:15 p.m. and, after 2:10 p.m. a Minister of the Crown may be permitted to make a statement pursuant to the said standing order.
Supply June 8th, 2000
If he takes the time to read the official transcript of my speech, he will find that I gave many examples that apply to the country as a whole.
The 1-800 number is not for Quebec alone. The Y2K bug workshops were not for Quebec alone.
His question is warped and self-serving, and I condemn it for what it is.
Supply June 8th, 2000
Madam Speaker, if my hon. colleague had been kind enough to listen when I was speaking—
Supply June 8th, 2000
Madam Speaker, I listened with great attention what my honorable colleague just said. I must say that I was surprised by the tone he used when he spoke of the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, because I know that it is not the tone he usually uses.
I find it absolutely fascinating to hear the hon. member talk about propaganda whereas I just said, and he may not agree with me, that informing the public about government activities is an indispensable condition of democracy.
If a government does not explain to the public what it is doing, it lacks openness. If a government does not explain to the public what it is doing, it is not providing people with the means to avail themselves of all the programs and services that are available to them. If a government does not explain to the public what it is doing, it prevents people from knowing what it is the government is doing with their tax money.
I repeat, informing the public is a basic principle of democracy. I would like to know if members opposite agree or not with this principle. I would like to know if they think that any information coming from the government is necessarily propaganda, but when but when it is condemned by the opposition doing its job as the opposition, it becomes legitimate information.
I would like to know where this double standard is coming from.
Supply June 8th, 2000
Madam Speaker, I think before such comments are made, an effort should be made perhaps to not play the looking glass game.
Supply June 8th, 2000
As far as the contracts are concerned, because it is easy to make allegations without necessarily being able to support them, I would like to confirm for my colleague quite earnestly, as did the minister in his response in the House on several occasions in this regard, that all the contracts awarded in the context of the terms of reference of the CIO were awarded according to treasury board standards.
These standards are very similar to those found in each of the provinces of our country. To criticize treasury board standards or their application is to move onto very slippery terrain, I would suggest, because these standards were established to ensure a certain transparency—
Supply June 8th, 2000
Madam Speaker, once again I see that when the party over there is talking about something, it is called information, but when I do, it is called propaganda. It is always very interesting to see the imbalance.
My hon. colleague over the way faults me for moaning. I did not. I merely pointed out that I kept getting interrupted.
I picked up one extremely interesting thing in what my colleague just said, and it was repeated in the question. It was the word dismantled. It is remarkable that they want to dismantle the Canada Information Office, Human Resources Development Canada and Canada itself. What we have here in this House is the dismantling party. Quite remarkable, that.