Dick Harris

[Motions For Papers, September 23rd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I would like Motion No. P-31 to be called.

Motion No. P-31

That a Humble Address be presented to His Excellency praying that he will cause to be laid before this House a copy of the Prime Minister's ethics code for ministers.

[Supply, September 22nd, 1998]

Just answer the question.

[Supply, September 22nd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, just so we can bring some truth and honesty to this debate, the question that was asked on the Liberal poll was: “Would you support gun control considering it would cut crime and save lives?” What Canadian would not vote yes for a question like that?

As this members knows, because he was here in the last parliament when the former minister of justice brought in the bill, day after day after the bill was introduced Reform Party members asked the minister and his cohorts to give us one historical piece of evidence, one substantive fact or one honest description of how Bill C-68 would cut crime in this country and we would vote for it. All through that debate the minister could not comply with that request. His parliamentary secretary could not comply with that request. Not one Liberal on that side could tell us how Bill C-68 would cut crime and save lives in this country.

Have things changed? Has the former minister of justice changed his mind about it? We cannot see any evidence and we are still asking that of the Liberal government.

[Supply, September 22nd, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. In the hon. member's comments he is referring to poll numbers. In order that we might be better informed, could he perhaps tell us clearly what the poll question was?

[Supply, June 9th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. In view of the fact that the hon. member was asked a specific question on three occasions and was not able to respond, I would like to ask for unanimous consent that we extend this question and comment period for another three minutes.

[Supply, June 9th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, we endured the rantings of the member opposite for the last 20 minutes. It seemed like a lifetime. However, he did make two very interesting and truthful points in his last statement.

First, he said that the justice system cannot survive without strong leadership. We agree with that. That is why we have been encouraging the Liberals to take some leadership and put some justice back into the legal system that they created for their lawyer friends out there in legal land.

The other thing the hon. member said was that there is no justice and then he went on to rant about something else. But I caught that phrase and he is absolutely right. There is no justice in this country.

If he believes that we have a workable justice system in this country, then why on earth are we hearing this huge outcry from Canadians from coast to coast to coast, railing against the justice system at every opportunity, at every town hall meeting, at every rally where they can possibly make their voices heard? Why do we have that all across this country if, in his opinion, we have a justice system that works?

[British Columbia, June 9th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, we have continually asked the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development exactly what the government's position is on land claims and whether she understands how this uncertainty impacts on the people of British Columbia.

For two days the only clear thing is that the minister has no idea what we are talking about. She does not know how to do her job and she is way over her head.

I ask her very simply and slowly so that her friends can help her, what exactly is the federal government's position, what is her position, on the issue of land claims in British Columbia. Does she know the impact on the people of British Columbia?

[Business Of The House, June 9th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, talking about human rights in response to that nonsense, I only need to say that if the Liberal government cared so much about human rights why was it so anxious to jump in and sell a bunch of Candu reactors to the country of China without first discussing human rights with that country?

[Business Of The House, June 9th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I enjoyed the hon. secretary of state's comments, but I would like to point out very clearly to the Secretary of State for International Financial Institutions who has a long title and does a good job, I am sure, that it was his party that brought forward the motion we are debating right now. He may not know that because I think he just got here.

He accuses our party of procedural wrangling but it was his party that brought the motion forward. His House leader brought in the motion that we are to sit until 4 a.m.

[Business Of The House, June 9th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to point out to the hon. member that it was in fact—