Bob Ringma

[Indian Affairs, March 27th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, a preliminary agreement has been signed transferring a B.C. highway to the Nisga'a people.

Given the number of conflicts that have arisen in both British Columbia and Quebec these past few years around road access, signing this agreement with the Nisga'as sets a precedent that will be a source of conflict and will cause more roadblocks to be erected.

Thus far, the Bloc Quebecois has been supportive of the agreement with the Nisga'a. However, if a similar agreement were negotiated in Quebec, they would have a problem with that and would probably not go along with it. Why does the Minister of Indian Affairs support this irresponsible precedent and how can the Bloc be in favour?

The Bloc has supported every major government initiative regarding aboriginal people outside Quebec. Interestingly enough,

the Bloc supports the minister on agreements concerning other provinces, when it would object to similar agreements being signed in Quebec.

[Department Of Public Works And Government Services Act, March 26th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, Reform members will vote no to this, except those who might wish to vote otherwise.

[Canada Transportation Act, March 25th, 1996]

Madam Speaker, Reform members will vote no, except those who wish to do otherwise.

[Canada Transportation Act, March 25th, 1996]

Madam Speaker, if the Chair will confirm that we are voting on Motion No. 4, the Reform Party votes no, except for those who might vote otherwise.

[Canada Transportation Act, March 25th, 1996]

Madam Speaker, we do not give unanimous consent to apply to Motion No. 38 or Motion No. 27. We would like a standing vote on those two, please.

[Canada Transportation Act, March 25th, 1996]

The Reform Party votes no on this motion.

[Canada Transportation Act, March 25th, 1996]

Madam Speaker, Reform members, except those who do otherwise, will vote against the motion.

[Canada Transportation Act, March 25th, 1996]

Madam Speaker, I have a problem. The Reform Party would like to support Motion No. 2 but it has been tied to Motion No. 29 which we do not support. I wonder if you would pry these apart and give us separate votes on Motion No. 2 and Motion No. 29.

[Canada Transportation Act, March 25th, 1996]

Madam Speaker, except for those who might wish to vote otherwise, we will vote yes to this motion.

[Newfoundland, March 22nd, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, that open approach sounds pretty vague and very typically Liberal. The Deputy Prime Minister should be aware that many Quebec provincial maps do not recognize the Quebec-Labrador border. All that is required to change the name of the province according to section 43 of the Constitution is simply a bilateral agreement between the federal government and the province.

I will ask the Deputy Prime Minister again, will she commit the federal government today to accepting this provincial initiative?