House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 1997, with 47% of the vote.
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. 229
That Bill C-20 be amended by adding after line 28 on page 5 the following new clause:
“4. (1) Every four years, after the coming into force of this Act, a comprehensive review and assessment of the provisions and operation of this Act must be undertaken by the committee of the House of Commons that normally considers justice matters.
(2) The committee must submit a report to Parliament within a reasonable time after the completion of its review and assessment.”
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. 226
That Bill C-20 be amended by adding after line 28 on page 5 the following new clause:
“4. Section 1 shall come into force on the day that is seven 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 five 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. 159
That Bill C-20 be amended by adding after line 28 on page 5 the following new clause:
“4. This Act comes into force seven years after it 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. 132
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 years 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 eight 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. 122
That Bill C-20 be amended by adding after line 28 on page 5 the following new clause:
“4. (1) On the expiration of four years 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 three years 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. 69
That Bill C-20, in Clause 2, be amended by deleting lines 4 to 17 on page 4.
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. 43
That Bill C-20, in Clause 1, be amended by replacing line 35 on page 2 with the following:
“33 to 60 days after the government of a province”
Motion No. 44
That Bill C-20, in Clause 1, be amended by replacing line 35 on page 2 with the following:
“34 to 60 days after the government of a province”
Bill C-20 March 13th, 2000
Mr. Chairman, for the past few days, the government House leader has been suffering from proceduritis, and has been trying to change the rules of Parliament through trickery.
Not content to have limited the debates on Bill C-20 in committee, and not content to have rammed Bill C-20 through, the specialist in dirty tricks and double-dealing has added insult to injury with Motions Nos. 8 and 9, in order to change the rules of the game in the midst of the debate.
How shameful, particularly for the Liberal members, who do not want to voice their opinions on Bill C-20. We can understand that the sole intent of the latest trick of the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons was to allow his colleagues to avoid their duty as parliamentarians.
When the voting on Bill C-20 takes place, the people of Quebec will finally know who is prepared to stand up to defend its rights and who is prepared to stand up to defend democracy.
Human Resources Development March 3rd, 2000
Mr. Speaker, we learned from the list obtained on September 9, 1999, under the Access to Information Act, that a $20,000 grant had been given to Moustiqu'Air Top Net, to create 25 jobs.
Then, in the list provided by the minister on February 15, we discovered that the grant was in fact in the amount of $200,000, to create 27 jobs. We also know that Moustiqu'Air Top Net went out of business.
When will the government realize that the information provided by the Department of Human Resources Development is not at all reliable and that only an independent public inquiry can shed light on this issue?
Petitions March 1st, 2000
Mr. Speaker, I am tabling in this House a petition signed by 216 people.
The petitioners call on parliament to quickly pass legislation to make it mandatory to label all foods that are totally or partially genetically modified.