Peter Adams

[Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Subcommittee, June 12th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, the Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Subcommittee has been working very diligently the last few weeks to try to hear all members who filed objections to the reports of the electoral boundaries commissions for British Columbia, Ontario and Quebec.

The subcommittee had just 30 sitting days in which to hear 10 members from British Columbia, 28 members from Ontario, and 29 members from Quebec. The reporting deadline for all three provinces is next Monday, June 16. Despite the subcommittee's best efforts, production difficulties will not allow our committee to deliver its report and evidence to the Speaker in time to meet the deadline.

In order to allow members' objections to the electoral boundaries reports to be forwarded to the commissions, I move:

That, notwithstanding the Standing Orders and the usual practices of this House, the Subcommittee on Electoral Boundaries Readjustment be empowered to file any or all of its reports with the Clerk of the House when the House is not sitting, and that any report so filed be deemed to be the report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs and to have been laid on the Table.

This would allow the subcommittee, in terms of tabling reports in the House, to act on behalf of its main committee should the House not be sitting in days ahead. Otherwise it would be necessary to call the full committee to approve the report in order that the committee could table it with you, Mr. Speaker.

[Committees of the House, June 12th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present the 39th report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs regarding the reports of the electoral boundaries commissions for British Columbia, Ontario and Quebec. Pursuant to subsection 22(1) of the act, the committee hereby recommends that the period of 30 sitting days provided for the consideration of objections to these reports be extended by a further 15 days. If the House gives its consent, I intend to move concurrence in this 39th report later this day.

I would like to thank for their work the members of the subcommittee, the staff of the subcommittee and all members who made presentations to the subcommittee on riding boundaries.

If the House concurs in this motion, this subcommittee would be able to continue its work even if the House of Commons should be suspended for the summer.

[Committees of the House, June 11th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present the 38th report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, in both official languages, regarding its order of reference of Tuesday, May 6, 2003, in relation to Bill C-34, an act to amend the Parliament of Canada Act (Ethics Commissioner and Senate Ethics Officer) and other acts in consequence. The committee has considered Bill C-34 and reports the bill with one amendment.

I would like to thank the members of the committee and also and in particular the staff of the committee and the additional staff we had for this very important legislation. This was a very fine piece of work.

[Antarctica, June 11th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, I was proud to sit with the Minister of the Environment as he introduced an act respecting the protection of the Antarctic environment.

Colleagues and I have been pressing for Canada to become more involved in Antarctica, which contains most of the world's freshwater. It is a pristine continent set aside for research and other non-military activities under a treaty involving almost 30 nations.

Canadians are active in Antarctica as researchers, businesses and tourists. Our Twin Otters, snowmobiles, mukluks, parkas and remote sensing systems are used all over the continent.

As a rich, cold weather country, we have a great deal to contribute to the proper management of Antarctica and we have a lot to gain from being there.

I congratulate the minister for this important step toward Canada taking its full responsibility for this special continent. Our thanks to the Minister of DFAIT and to the staff at Environment Canada and DFAIT who helped with this project. Our particular thanks to Students on Ice for their petitions.

I urge all members to support rapid passage of this bill.

[Canada Elections Act, June 10th, 2003]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to join this debate today.

I would like to begin by thanking the members of the committee, members from all sides of the House and the staff of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs for their extraordinary work on this legislation. Like any other important piece of legislation, this bill has created a certain amount of controversy and a great deal of discussion.

The committee heard from almost 40 witnesses from across the country. We contacted at least another 40, perhaps 50, some of whom sent us written testimony and some who felt that their testimony, although we were interested in it, would not add to the discussion the committee had so far. That gives the House an idea of how closely these people had been following this important legislation.

It seems to me that the purpose of these changes to the Canada Elections Act, which, in principle, eliminate corporate and union donations and puts something in the place of those donations, have various purposes. One of them, which is very important to everybody here, is to increase confidence in the electoral system.

I think there is a perception, and I believe that it is almost entirely a perception, that large corporations and large unions unduly influence the system and influence members of Parliament operating in their ridings or here in the House of Commons. I think the bill would help take away that particular stigma.

However I think the bill would also increase confidence in the system and increase participation in the electoral system in some other ways.

With regard to participation, I think all members know that there has been a decline, not a large decline, but a significant decline in participation of voters in recent federal elections. That is almost entirely explained by a reduction in the number of people under the age of 30 participating. The age groups over the age of 30 are participating more or less as they always have, but younger people are not. I think that is a particularly unhealthy sign.

It is my hope that the legislation would encourage confidence and interest in those people. I will try to explain why. Sometimes in an election people come up to me and say that they simply cannot vote for me this time. They say that they do not believe it is worth their while voting for one of the other parties, so they will not be voting at all. Those people drop out of the system.

When I am faced with that kind of situation I always try to encourage them, first, to vote for a candidate who is in the race, but failing that I encourage them to go to the poll and to officially refuse their ballot. I explain to them that if they do that the numbers are recorded and at least someone knows that they went to the poll and refused the ballot, presumably because there was nobody for whom they could vote. If someone does not show up at the polls it is difficult to tell whether they were just sick or just disinterested. Only if they go to the polls and are recorded do we know if they have participated in the electoral process.

When I am faced with that situation in the future I will be able to say to voters that if they vote for one of the minor parties--with due respect, I am not using that in a pejorative sense--one of the smaller parties in the election, even though they will only get a handful of votes they will truly be helping them because in the future, between now and the next election, they will get a small amount of money for every vote that they receive across Canada. These would be parties like the Green Party, which appeared before our committee.

All 13 registered federal parties were invited to appear before the committee, parties like the Communist Party of Canada (Marxist-Leninist). Those parties, if they run a candidate, wherever they get a vote they will receive some support between elections.

Although I disagree with some of those parties, I strongly agree with the idea that a parliamentary system should generate new parties and there should be different parties in play out there. I believe the legislation would assist with that.

[Canada Elections Act, June 10th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, like many other members here, I really am concerned about the decrease in participation in federal elections.

I have a private member's item that deals with youth voting. It is my hope that the virtual banning of corporate and union donations will help somewhat toward the perceived problem there.

When people come to me during an election and say that this time they really feel they cannot vote at all, although members opposite may find it very difficult, since they cannot vote for me I try to get them to vote for one of the other parties. However, failing that, I tell them to go to the poll and officially destroy or reject their ballot so that they can become a statistic in the electoral process.

However, with the new legislation it seems to me that I have an additional argument. I can say to those people that if they vote for one of the smaller parties, the non-parliamentary parties, they will, through this subsidy, be able to help them over the next three or four years to keep their campaigns going locally and nationally.

Does the minister not agree that this is a useful argument that would encourage people to participate in the electoral process?

[Petitions, June 10th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, if I may, I again will rise to present a petition on the matter of the importance of kidney research. Kidney disease is a huge and growing problem in Canada. Real progress is being made in various ways of preventing and coping with kidney disease, but these citizens of Peterborough call upon Parliament to encourage the Canadian Institutes of Health Research to explicitly include kidney research as one of the institutes in the system, to be named the institute of kidney and urinary tract diseases.

I would like to thank Ken Sharp of Peterborough and his colleagues and friends for developing this petition and working so hard on this important issue.

[Petitions, June 10th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, I rise to present two petitions, one from people in the Orillia-Midland area of Ontario and one from the Prince Edward—Hastings area of Ontario. These petitions are from people who have concerns about the definition of marriage. I am pleased to present them for the MPs of those ridings.

[Committees of the House, June 10th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, if the House gives its consent I move that the 37th report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs presented to the House earlier this day be concurred in.

[Committees of the House, June 10th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present the 36th report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs regarding political financing. In this report we set out issues and concerns that the committee, or some of its members, had during consideration of Bill C-24. The intent is to signal possible areas for legislative change or future study.

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to also present the 37th report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs regarding the associate membership of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights. If the House gives its consent, I intend to move concurrence in this 37th report later this day.

I would like to thank the staff and researchers of our committee for their extraordinary work in recent weeks on legislation that has been before our committee.