Mr. Speaker, we already have a central agency. We have the federal government which stands up for the rights of all Canadians everywhere in this country, not like the Bloc québécois.
House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2000, with 54% of the vote.
Canada's French-Speaking Community May 27th, 1994
Mr. Speaker, we already have a central agency. We have the federal government which stands up for the rights of all Canadians everywhere in this country, not like the Bloc québécois.
Canada's French-Speaking Community May 27th, 1994
Mr. Speaker, we are focusing our efforts on keeping this country together, and that is the best way to prevent the assimilation of francophones in this country wherever they happen to be.
National Forum On Health May 27th, 1994
Mr. Speaker, I wish to repeat that it is the federal government's intention to work with the provinces in having a better and stronger health care system for Canadians. That is why the federal government is consulting with the provinces both on the terms of reference and on the membership for the national forum on health care. No members have as yet been appointed to the forum. Before this is done there will be further consultation with the provinces on membership.
As I have said before, the purpose of the forum is to give advice to federal and provincial governments on strengthening our health care system. That is the way we are going to proceed. Our objective is not to weaken the system but to make it better. That is why we think that the Bloc, as is the case for all the parties in this House, should be supporting the federal government in its efforts to create the system, and I am not referring to provincial members but to the Bloc, instead of asking questions which suggest that the Bloc does not have the same commitment as the Liberal government to having a better health care system for all Canadians.
National Forum On Health May 27th, 1994
Mr. Speaker, the provinces have a very important role in the field of health which is recognized by the federal government. That is why there has been and continues to be very close consultation with the provincial governments on the terms of reference and the membership of the forum on health which the federal government is committed to create.
We certainly have in mind to continue these consultations both on the terms of reference and on the membership of the national forum on health. We should also bear in mind that it is not intended that this forum be a decision making body. If there are decisions to be made at the federal-provincial level there is an ongoing committee of federal and provincial health ministers for that purpose.
Instead, the purpose of this forum is to look at medium and long term concerns with respect to our national health programs and systems and to give advice to both federal and provincial governments on how we can deal with these problems.
I do not see why this in itself is a problem for the Bloc Quebecois. Surely the Bloc, as is the case with all other Canadians, wants to maintain and improve our health system. I do not know why as a result it is asking these questions.
National Forum On Health May 27th, 1994
Mr. Speaker, the federal government maintains very close consultations with the provinces on the terms of reference and the membership of the National Forum on Health.
I want to add that the proposed forum will not be a decision-making body; its only mandate will be to advise the government. I think we will be able to make decisions on the forum in close consultation with the provinces. It is not our intention to exclude them from our consultations.
National Library Act May 27th, 1994
moved that Bill C-26, an Act to amend the National Library Act, be read the second time and referred to a committee.
Business Of The House May 26th, 1994
Mr. Speaker, with the weekly business statement, today we are debating the report stage of Bill C-17, the budget implementation bill.
Tomorrow the House will consider a number of bills. First, we will consider Bill C-26 regarding the National Library. Then we will move on to Bill C-30 regarding assistance to workers and then to Bill S-2 regarding certain international tax agreements.
If we make progress very quickly we could also look at the bill introduced today by the Minister of Canadian Heritage to deal with support for the Canadian Film Development Corporation.
On Monday the House will continue the report stage of Bill C-17 and on Tuesday the House will deal with third reading stage of that bill. On Wednesday the House will consider legislation, to be confirmed later, although I expect that Bill C-18 will be one of the items for discussion that day. Thursday, June 2 shall be an allotted day.
Finally I want to dispose of the rumours that seem to abound every year around this time with respect to the date for the adjournment for the summer.
As usual, the rumours are not well founded. They keep talking about June 10 as a possible date of adjournment, but I want to say it is the present intention of the government to follow the parliamentary calendar set down in the rules and adjourn on June 23.
I should point out we have more than a dozen and a half bills to be dealt with by that date and members therefore can expect the House to sit during the evenings as provided in the rules for the period made up of the last 10 days before the adjournment.
That is my statement.
Electoral Boundaries May 26th, 1994
Mr. Speaker, the suggestion of the hon. member is one that deserves to be looked at by the House of Commons procedure committee.
Before one makes a decision on that, one has to consider the impact of capping or reducing the number of seats on the expectations of people in certain parts of Ontario where populations have grown and the expectations of people in the province of British Columbia where populations have grown for additional seats.
It is interesting for the people in British Columbia to hear from the Reform Party that it does not want additional representation for the people in that province.
Electoral Boundaries May 26th, 1994
Mr. Speaker, the government supports the concept of an independent arm's length setting of riding boundaries.
We have said however that the process for doing this has not been thoroughly reviewed since it was created in 1964 and that is why the House has agreed with our proposal that this be looked at by the procedure committee of the House of Commons. I look forward to the early report of that committee.
Penitentiaries May 24th, 1994
Mr. Speaker, I will draw the hon. member's point to the attention of the commissioner of corrections so that it can be taken into account in the national inquiry which is going on. I understand this is already intended, but I will make sure it is not overlooked in the inquiry. I think the inquiry is much needed and I look forward to its results.