Richard Marceau

[Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Act, March 22nd, 2000]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-455, an act to change the name of the electoral district of Charlesbourg.

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure for me today to introduce in the House a bill to change the name of the riding of Charlesbourg to Charlesbourg—Jacques-Cartier following consultation with all the inhabitants, as well as the principal organizations, of Charlesbourg, including the municipalities.

The name selected by the citizens of Charlesbourg is Charlesbourg—Jacques-Cartier.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

[Human Resources Development, March 17th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, the Experience Canada program, with its 30% success rate, is a failure.

This program of the Council for Canadian Unity is a source of considerable concern to departmental employees, but that did not stop the Minister for International Trade, when Minister of Human Resources Development, from congratulating the organization on several occasions on its so-called success.

When I write something in a letter, I stand behind it.

My question is for the Minister for International Trade. How could he praise an organization that has failed so miserably at attaining the objectives of the program for which he himself was responsible?

[An Act To Give Effect To The Requirement For Clarity As Set Out In The Opinion Of The Supreme Court Of Canada In The Quebec Secession Reference, March 13th, 2000]

moved:

Motion No. 400

That Bill C-20 be amended by adding after line 28 on page 5 the following new clause:

“4. (1) On the expiration of six months after the coming into force of this Act, the provisions contained herein shall be referred to such committee of the House of Commons as may be designated or established by Parliament for that purpose.

(2) The committee designated or established for the purpose of subsection (1) shall, as soon as practicable, undertake a comprehensive review of the provisions and operation of this Act and shall, within five months after the review is undertaken submit a report to the House of Commons thereon.”

[An Act To Give Effect To The Requirement For Clarity As Set Out In The Opinion Of The Supreme Court Of Canada In The Quebec Secession Reference, March 13th, 2000]

moved:

Motion No. 360

That Bill C-20 be amended by adding after line 28 on page 5 the following new clause:

“4. This Act shall come into force on March 1, 2009.”

[An Act To Give Effect To The Requirement For Clarity As Set Out In The Opinion Of The Supreme Court Of Canada In The Quebec Secession Reference, March 13th, 2000]

moved:

Motion No. 327

That Bill C-20 be amended by adding after line 28 on page 5 the following new clause:

“4. This Act shall come into force on December 1, 2005.”

[An Act To Give Effect To The Requirement For Clarity As Set Out In The Opinion Of The Supreme Court Of Canada In The Quebec Secession Reference, March 13th, 2000]

moved:

Motion No. 314

That Bill C-20 be amended by adding after line 28 on page 5 the following new clause:

“4. Section 3 shall come into force on the day that is three years after the day on which this Act is assented to, and sections 1 and 2 shall come into force on the day that is seven years after the day on which this Act is assented to.”

[An Act To Give Effect To The Requirement For Clarity As Set Out In The Opinion Of The Supreme Court Of Canada In The Quebec Secession Reference, March 13th, 2000]

moved:

Motion No. 289

That Bill C-20 be amended by adding after line 28 on page 5 the following new clause:

“4. Not later than March 31, 2001, the committee of the House of Commons that normally considers justice matters shall undertake a comprehensive review of the provisions and operation of this Act, and shall within a year after the review is undertaken or within such further time as the House of Commons may authorize, submit a report to Parliament thereon including a statement of any changes the committee would recommend.”

[An Act To Give Effect To The Requirement For Clarity As Set Out In The Opinion Of The Supreme Court Of Canada In The Quebec Secession Reference, March 13th, 2000]

moved:

Motion No. 282

That Bill C-20 be amended by adding after line 28 on page 5 the following new clause:

“4. Section 3 shall come into force on the day that is two years after the day on which this Act is assented to, and sections 1 and 2 shall come into force on the day that is three years after the day on which this Act is assented to.”

[An Act To Give Effect To The Requirement For Clarity As Set Out In The Opinion Of The Supreme Court Of Canada In The Quebec Secession Reference, March 13th, 2000]

moved:

Motion No. 244

That Bill C-20 be amended by adding after line 28 on page 5 the following new clause:

“4. Section 2 shall come into force on the day that is three years after the day on which this Act is assented to, and sections 2 and 3 shall come into force on the day that is two years after the day on which this Act is assented to.”

[An Act To Give Effect To The Requirement For Clarity As Set Out In The Opinion Of The Supreme Court Of Canada In The Quebec Secession Reference, March 13th, 2000]

moved:

Motion No. 190

That Bill C-20 be amended by adding after line 28 on page 5 the following new clause:

“4. Section 1 comes into force on a day to be fixed by order of the President of the Privy Council which day shall be after January 1, 2006, and sections 2 and 3 come into force on a day to be fixed by order of the Minister of Justice which day shall be after January 1, 2007.”