Jean Charest

[Employment Insurance Contributions, February 4th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister.

The federal government has very recently discovered a growing problem of poverty in Canada, including among children.

Since his government has just discovered this problem, I would ask the Prime Minister if he will not take immediate action to help overtaxed low income families on the labour market. Will he not recognize that, by overtaxing unemployment insurance contributions by $10 billion over two years, he is placing an unfair burden on them and would he not be prepared to reduce employment insurance contributions, especially for low income families, right now?

[Points Of Order, February 3rd, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, on the same point of order. I do want to support my colleague from the NDP in his point of order.

May I just add a comment that the Chair may wish to take into consideration in the way question period is conducted. Mr. Speaker, with regard to members on the government side, since you have expressed some concern about the fact that only one member from the government side was allowed to rise, one of the things we know about this place is that the members on the government side have full access to members of the cabinet and their colleagues through caucus, which is not the case for members on the opposition benches. Question period is clearly designed, as far as we know from its practice and traditions, to enable the government to be questioned and to allow the opposition to make the government accountable. I submit that maybe one question for the government side would be enough.

[Privilege, December 12th, 1996]

In this respect, Mr. Speaker, if the leaders of the respective parties are given the opportunity to debate, to decide, to influence you in your decision in regard to how question period must function, when and at what point will the individual members for whom this is a basic cornerstone of the operations of Parliament be given equal rights and equal time? Surely you can see from those remarks how the basic rights and privileges of each member are affected, in particular my own rights and privileges.

One remark, Mr. Speaker, with regard to rising or not rising. I hope the members will spare us the grand designs about members rising in this place when every day for the last three years members have been constantly designated for question period, not when they rose but actually were sitting right in their place and never rose. I hope we will be spared the great sermons about rising or not rising in their places.

[Privilege, December 12th, 1996]

Oh, please. Mr. Speaker, if I am allowed-

[Privilege, December 12th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, now that it has been confirmed that the Reform Party did enter into this agreement with the member for York South-Weston, my point of privilege is derived from the remarks that you have just made in regard to the functioning of question period.

I return to the principle that is the cornerstone of the operation of government, the principle of the recognition of the rights of the individual member elected in his or her respective constituency with all the rights and privileges associated with that election.

You have in your remarks, Mr. Speaker, just informed the House that if the House wished to review the operations or the functioning of question period, that there would be a consultation among the leaders of the recognized political parties.

What am I to draw as an individual member, considered at least in this place as an independent member, from the remarks that you have just made? If I am to understand them correctly, it means that my rights in regard to the functioning of question period is something that will be negotiated by the respective leaders of the recognized parties in the House of Commons.

Who will in that respect, Mr. Speaker, speak up for the rights of the individual member of Parliament? Who will at this point-

[Points Of Order, December 12th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I want the record to be very clear with regard to this whole episode. The Minister of Health is absolutely right with regard to the precedent that has just been set in this House. This precedent goes to the very fundamental rules of how the House works, of democracy itself within this place and of the role the Speaker plays with regard to the rights of the individual members.

As of today the record shows that a deal was entered into between the Reform Party and an independent member so that the independent member could take up a position that a Reform Party member would have held normally in question period, and that the Speaker of the House of Commons complied with that instruction.

That is what took place. I want to register the fact that this is the record. I think this is objectionable because with regard to the workings of the House of Commons this is a situation in which the Speaker of the House is yielding his responsibility to the parties, a responsibility that he must uphold and assume in the name of each member of this House and not in the interest of partisan politics within the House of Commons.

[Points Of Order, December 12th, 1996]

As I was saying, this is a direct contradiction of the role of the Speaker which consists of first and foremost of protecting the rights of the individual member of Parliament. That being said, I noticed during question period something unusual in that the member for York South-Weston, if I understood correctly, was given a position in question period by agreement with members of the Reform Party who substituted one of their members with the member for York South-Weston. With the complicity of members of the Reform Party, who are now controlling the order of questioners that you, Mr. Speaker-

[Points Of Order, December 12th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, as I was about to say, my understanding of question period is that this is very much the preserve of the Speaker. You will know that taking instructions from the party as far as I am concerned and as far as my knowledge of the rules and the traditions of this place is concerned is a direct contradiction.

[Points Of Order, December 12th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, it is on the same point of order. I was interested in the remarks made by the whip of the Reform Party about question period and how it operates. This is fundamental to the very workings of the House of Commons.

[Canadian Economy, December 9th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of Finance.

Now that we know the Prime Minister and the Minister of National Defence are completely out of touch with the real situation in Zaire, and the Minister of Finance has just announced that the agriculture industry is booming, although the price of grain is dropping, I would like to know if the Minister of Finance is aware that, under his government, Canadians are getting poorer.

I wonder whether it is because they only show him the bank statements, or maybe he only gets the news about the stock exchange or about our exports. Does he know that real incomes are going down and that the unemployment rate is the highest it has been since the depression in the 1930s? Is the Minister of Finance in touch-