Jay Hill

[Transportation of Dangerous Goods Act, 1992, March 23rd, 2009]

(Motion agreed to)

[Transportation of Dangerous Goods Act, 1992, March 23rd, 2009]

moved that Bill C-9, An Act to amend the Transportation of Dangerous Goods Act, 1992, as amended, be concurred in.

[Millennium Summit, March 13th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, as the member well knows, because our Minister of International Cooperation has clearly said this time after time, day after day, our assistance to African nations has actually increased under our government. It is continuing to increase over what the Liberals did before.

[Points of Order, March 12th, 2009]

I lose track of time.

Mr. Speaker, this morning you made a ruling as well, and his colleague, the whip for the Bloc Québécois, got up and did not challenge you—he was very careful about that—but he was seeking further clarification, as I recall. I was in the chamber at the time.

So I would just remind my hon. colleague of that, as well as my colleague from the Liberal Party who just spoke.

We are not challenging your ruling. I did not hear that from either of my colleagues. What we were doing was asking for two things.

First, we were asking that you consider looking at the past examples from all parties to make sure that in enforcing your ruling there is consistency. That is all we were asking, on one hand.

Second, I heard my colleague from Edmonton—Sherwood Park, at the close of his remarks, asking, if possible, that you might consider further clarification of where the line would be drawn in your consideration of what would be a personal attack and what would not.

I think all of us, especially those like you and me, Mr. Speaker, who have been in this chamber for a lot of years now, would have drawn the conclusion after all these years that what would be considered an insult by one member could very easily be considered a reiteration of fact by another member. Oftentimes during heated debates in this place, whether it is during statements or question period or even during normal debate, we get into a lot of argument or potential argument about that.

All I am asking on behalf of the government is that you ensure in applying the rules, as I am sure you always do, that there is consistency, that you review what is being done by all parties and that those rulings are applied in a consistent manner, in a manner that is fair from the chair and fair to all 308 members of Parliament.

[Points of Order, March 12th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, on the most recent intervention, I would respectfully point out to my hon. colleague, the House leader for the Bloc Québécois, that yesterday you made a ruling as well—

[Business of the House, March 12th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. House leader for the official opposition has many questions for the Thursday question and I will try to get to all of them.

Today we will continue debate on Bill C-14 on organized crime, which he mentioned. Following Bill C-14, we will consider Bill C-15, drug offences, and Bill C-16, the environmental enforcement act in that order.

Tonight we will complete the debate on the first report of the Standing Committee on the Status of Women.

Tomorrow we will begin debate at third reading of Bill C-2, the Canada-European free trade agreement and continue with any unfinished business that carried over from today.

When the House returns from the constituency week, we will continue with the business from this week, with the addition of Bill C-9, transportation of dangerous goods, which was reported back from committee.

You can add to the list for the week we return, Mr. Speaker, Bill C-7, marine liability, Bill S-3, energy efficiency, and Bill C-13, Canada grains, which are all at second reading and any bills that have been reported back from committee by then.

As to one of the questions that the member specifically mentioned, the last day in this supply period shall be on Tuesday, March 24, when the House will vote on supplementary estimates C, interim supply and the interim supply bill. As he noted, it is a very important day as these are the resources necessary to provide the stimulus to which we have all been looking forward and which Canadians are greatly anticipating.

Hopefully, the Senate will have passed the budget bill, Bill C-10 by then. In fact, as my colleague mentioned, my understanding is the opposition has suddenly discovered the parts of the budget bill that pertain specifically to the extension of employment insurance benefits, which will come into effect immediately upon royal assent of Bill C-10, the budget implementation act. Therefore, rather belatedly, the Liberal senators have decided to work with the Conservative senators in the other place and get the bill passed expeditiously. I hope that takes place this afternoon. It would be therefore my hope as well that royal assent could take place as early as this evening and we would see that bill enacted as quickly as possible.

As to the reiteration of my colleague's support for Bill C-14 and Bill C-15, our two latest justice bills, I welcome his support and I appreciate that. We are open to moving these bills through all stages as quickly as possible. Failing that, we would look to put up a minimum number of speakers, as we have done on many pieces of legislation already in this session, to move legislation through as quickly as possible. The problem, as my hon. colleague well knows, is not with the official opposition on or of the Conservative Party, the Conservative government, but with the other two parties, which are unwilling to do so.

[Committees of the House, March 12th, 2009]

It was still moved, Mr. Speaker.

[Committees of the House, March 12th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, there have been consultations among all parties and I move:

That, notwithstanding any standing order or usual practices of the House, during the debate tonight on the motion to concur in the first report of the Standing Committee on Status of Women, the Chair shall not receive any quorum calls, dilatory motions, or requests for unanimous consent; at the end of the time remaining for the debate, or when no member rises to speak, the motion shall be deemed adopted.

[Committees of the House, March 11th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 66(2)(a), the completion of the debate on the motion to concur in the first report of the Standing Committee on the Status of Women shall take place on Thursday, March 12, 2009.

[National Cemetery of Canada Act, March 6th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, momentarily, I will be proposing a motion by unanimous consent to expedite passage through the House of an important new bill, An Act to recognize Beechwood Cemetery as the national cemetery of Canada. However, before I propose my motion, which has been agreed to in advance by all parties, I would like to take a quick moment to thank my colleagues and the other parties for their cooperation in expediting this legislation.

This is a clear demonstration of how Parliament can work when we have set aside our partisan differences and work for the good of the Canadian people, who have entrusted us to represent them. This legislation was tabled just yesterday and, when passed, will establish for the first time ever a national cemetery for our country. Hereafter, governors general, prime ministers and Victoria Cross winners will be able to choose to be interred and commemorated there.

Once this important bill passes both houses and becomes law, we will finally have our own cemetery where Canadians can commemorate those who have dedicated themselves to the service of the public through high office or supreme military valour. I am very proud of this legislation and I am pleased that it will be expedited through the House.

Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I believe you will find unanimous consent for the following motion. I move:

That, notwithstanding any Standing Order or usual practices of the House, a member from each recognized party may speak for not more than 10 minutes on the second reading motion of Bill C-17, An Act to recognize Beechwood Cemetery as the national cemetery of Canada, after which the bill shall be deemed to have been read a second time and referred to a Committee of the Whole, deemed considered in Committee of the Whole, deemed reported without amendment, deemed concurred in at report stage and deemed read a third time and passed.