Pierre De Savoye

[Council For Canadian Unity, March 20th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, we are talking about a cost of $27,000 for each of the 453 six month training periods that have been set up. This amounts to $12.3 million. This is a shame. And it is unprecedented.

How can the government congratulate the Council for Canadian Unity for its performance and renew its grant, when no one can explain what happened to the $12.3 million?

[Council For Canadian Unity, March 20th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, the secretary of state obviously got the wrong program. He should let competent people reply to the questions.

In addition to the $18,500 paid by Human Resources Development Canada for each training period organized by the Council for Canadian Unity, participating companies must also pay $8,500 per trainee.

My question is for the Minister of Human Resources Development. How can this government justify the fact that the Council for Canadian Unity bills a total of $27,000 for every six month training period?

[Human Resources Development, March 16th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, in spite of the mediocre results achieved by the Council for Canadian Unity and its excessive profits, and in spite of the concerns expressed by its officials, the council was just given a new $9 million grant.

On what basis was the decision to give a new $9 million grant made?

[Human Resources Development, March 16th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, in 1996, the Council for Canadian Unity received $8.4 million from Human Resources Development Canada to create jobs. Its rate of success was 30%. Worse yet, it is estimated that the council made $8 million in profits.

Can the minister tell us where the money went and what it was really used for?

[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. 370

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 October 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. 339

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 January 1, 2007.”

[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. 260

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 five years after the day on which this Act is assented to, and sections 1 and 3 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. 253

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 1 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. 236

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 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 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. 231

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

“4. (1) Every five 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.”