Derek Lee

[Youth Criminal Justice Act, October 21st, 1999]

Madam Speaker, I should remind the hon. member that we have a rule here against the use of props.

The debate is going along quite well this afternoon. The hon. member touched on a number of the diverse elements behind the legislation, but I personally think the important part of the legislation is its enhanced access to what I would call adult measures.

The hon. member mentioned, as did previous speakers, the need for intervention, diversion, alternate measures and sanctions for young offenders. With the experience we have had in the last 15 years with the Young Offenders Act in many provinces but not all there has been a need, a request and an indication from Canadians that there is a need for enhanced access to new tools and firmer adult measures in some cases. That is an important readjustment in the current statute. It provides access to those even though in some provinces, and not just Quebec, there have been good results with the existing legislation.

I want to ask the hon. member if he accepts that principle. We may be running out of time and ability to respond, but I would leave the question on the floor. Does the member agree to disagree conceptually or otherwise with the thrust of the bill in providing access to courts that needed it or to judges who felt they needed access to potentially harsher and firmer adult measures?

[Privilege, October 21st, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I will, in my own small way, attempt to frame this matter of privilege that has been put forward.

The hon. member knows and all members know that they have the ability in the House to request documents through established procedures in the House. In this particular case, it appears that the member did not so request. The member chose to rely on the provisions of the Access to Information Act, an act and a procedure set up by parliament for all Canadians.

In electing to use the access to information process, the member or any member of the House who uses that process are essentially using their shoes as a citizen to make access requests to government. They are simply making access requests as citizens not as members of parliament.

There may have been a dysfunction in the process. I am advised that from time to time there are dysfunctions and there may well have been in this case. If there was a dysfunction in the process, a delay or whatever, I do not think it is correct for a member here to say that a dysfunction in a procedure becomes a matter of privilege just because he or she is a member of parliament. That would allow the House procedures inside this place to be cast out throughout the whole country. Every time there was a dysfunction on a Bell telephone line involving a member of parliament it would essentially be a case of privilege.

I would not want to deal with the issue of just what happened with the access request in this case or in other cases. There may well be a real dysfunction and the commissioner may wish to advise parliament. It may be a real issue for the House, but in my view it would be important, before it becomes a matter of privilege, that a direct parliamentary function be directly impaired by the problem that the member brings to the House's attention.

[Questions On The Order Paper, October 21st, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I ask that all questions be allowed to stand.

[Motions For Papers, October 20th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I ask that all Notices of Motions for the Production of Papers be allowed to stand.

[Questions On The Order Paper, October 20th, 1999]

I ask, Mr. Speaker, that all questions be allowed to stand.

[Government Response To Petitions, October 20th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36, I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government response to 10 petitions.

[Committees Of The House, October 19th, 1999]

Madam Speaker, I think you will find unanimous consent in the Chamber to the following motion dealing with the televised hearings of the transport committee. I move:

That the House, pursuant to Standing Order 119.1(1), authorize the Standing Committee on Transport to televise the meetings between October 20, 1999 and December 19, 1999 during its study on the future of the airline industry in Canada, in accordance with the guidelines pertaining to televising committee proceedings.

[Questions On The Order Paper, October 19th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I ask that all questions be allowed to stand.

[Committees Of The House, October 19th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, in relation to one of our standing committees I think you would find consent for me to move the following motion:

That, notwithstanding the provisions of Standing Order 106(1) the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans be permitted to meet for the purposes of electing a chair on Wednesday, October 20, 1999.

[Committees Of The House, October 19th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, if the House gives its consent, I would move:

That the associate membership of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs be as follows: Mr. Adams, Mr. Bellehumeur, Mr. Blaikie, Mrs. Dockrill, Mr. Doyle, Miss Grey, Mr. Hill, Mr. Jordan, Mr. Laurin, Mr. Lowther, Mr. Nystrom, Mr. McCormick, Mr. Ménard, Ms. Tremblay, Mr. White.