Derek Lee

[Deceased Parliamentarians, June 5th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, this morning our flag on the Peace Tower flew at half-mast and present and former parliamentarians gathered together for a memorial service to honour parliamentarians who have passed away in the last year.

We who are now in parliament wish to publicly acknowledge their passing in a public and appropriate fashion. In the year 2000 we invited the Canadian Association of Former Parliamentarians to organize this annual memorial service to recognize all deceased parliamentarians, and they now do so.

This year we celebrated the memory and contributions of 19 Canadian parliamentarians, one of whom was a former prime minister. Their legacy is their immense commitment and contribution to this place and to their much loved country, Canada.

Also recognized today by our former parliamentarians with a distinguished service award is the outstanding contribution of Mr. Douglas Fisher for his promotion of the understanding of Canada's parliamentary system of government.

I am honoured to stand here today, and also with former parliamentarians, to pay tribute on behalf of all Canadians to the service of these respected and warmly remembered Canadians who have served us all.

[Committees Of The House, June 5th, 2001]

Yes, it is. It is perhaps unfortunate that it needed to happen today in the views of some members when the government response is only a couple of days away. It would be preferable, I think, for all in the House to have the government response before we engage in a debate of this nature.

However I could not help but note that a lot of the debate that has occurred here had to do with a statute that is not even the subject matter of the motion. It had to do with a bill we call Bill C-15, a bill to revise the Criminal Code of Canada.

I suggest that the debate we are engaging in on the 14th report of the standing committee is not really what the mover wanted to talk about at all. In fact there are other agendas in place. I have to note as well, as we all will, that we are moving toward the end of a sitting of the House. We are moving toward the end of our work. We are not all finished yet but we certainly have an obvious short list of items that we want to complete within the next week or two. As a result, there are any number of other political agendas being put forward by individual members or political parties.

I heard earlier the oft repeated mantra from across the way that the government is somehow arrogant. Of course, sitting with the government I reject that totally. The government is simply pursuing its legislative agenda, 90% of which has been on the order paper for a very long time. Members opposite know that. I do not mind hearing the mantra of arrogance repeated but I also have to point out that most of the members opposite, in the sense that they continue with the mantra, are simply continuing their membership in the ranks of the perpetually indignant. We all accept that in opposition they do have a role and that they are doing their best to fulfil it today.

I encourage members, if they are interested in the progress of Bill C-15 amending the criminal code, that they direct their attention to that outside the debate here. I do not think it is particularly relevant to the privilege matter that was discussed in the 14th report. I direct members' attention again to the fact that a government response will be tabled in the House within a couple of days and that the reported had been adopted unanimously at committee.

Having said that, I think it is appropriate to move:

That the House do now proceed to orders of the day.

[Committees Of The House, June 5th, 2001]

Madam Speaker, I just want to let the hon. members opposite know that my speaking here is just as democratic as their speaking over there. I have been listening to the debate and so far have not intervened. I am pleased to do so now.

This debate is on a motion for concurrence in a report of the procedure and house affairs committee which was tabled in the House just a few weeks ago. That report dealt with the matter of privilege that was referred to the committee from the House through the Speaker. The report, known as the 14th report, was adopted unanimously at the procedure and house affairs committee so there should be no doubt here in the House that there is cross party support for the report as tabled.

Members will also be aware that it is if not routine at least customary for the government to respond to reports of committees. I can advise the House that it is the government's intention to respond. In fact, response to that unanimous report has been prepared and will be introduced into the House on Thursday. In some respects it is regrettable that the debate now put forward—

[Government Response To Petitions, June 5th, 2001]

Madam Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's response to three petitions.

[Questions On The Order Paper, June 4th, 2001]

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

[Government Response To Petitions, June 4th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's response to six petitions.

[Questions On The Order Paper, June 1st, 2001]

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

[Committees Of The House, June 1st, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present the 23rd report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs regarding the membership of the special committee on non-medical use of drugs.

Mr. Speaker, I also have the honour to present the 24th report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs regarding the membership of the Standing Joint Committee on Scrutiny of Regulations.

[Government Response To Petitions, June 1st, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8) I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's response to five petitions.

[Committees Of The House, May 31st, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, I move:

That, in relation to its examination of Softwood Lumber, six (6) members of the Sub-Committee on International Trade, Trade Disputes and Investment of the Standing Committee of Foreign Affairs and International Trade and the necessary staff be authorized to travel to Washington, D.C., for a period of two (2) days with travel taking place at some time during the period of June 1 to July 31, 2001.