How much money have Canadian farmers lost due to crop loses since the government's ban of the 2% and 5% solutions of strychnine left them unable to effectively control the gopher populations?
House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2011, with 80% of the vote.
Questions On The Order Paper March 29th, 2000
How much money have Canadian farmers lost due to crop loses since the government's ban of the 2% and 5% solutions of strychnine left them unable to effectively control the gopher populations?
Privilege March 28th, 2000
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I have presented the situation as I see it. I have pointed out some concerns I have with the way the committee is operating. I have also heard the ruling of the Speaker.
Since I have examined the ruling of the Speaker, it is clear that the Speaker said that a motion should be put forth to refer the matter to the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs because I had violated some rules.
Because of that ruling by the Speaker, I do apologize. I would never intentionally breach the rules of this House. I do apologize. I hope that the committee can move forward in a much more democratic fashion in the future.
Privilege March 28th, 2000
Mr. Speaker, the member from Winnipeg said to the Bloc critic that it is important that members respect the rules of the House. I believe that to be true.
I would like to ask the member why it is that Liberal members on committees routinely leak reports? We know that is true. We have brought forward questions of privilege on this issue time and again and the Speaker has said that they really should not do that, that they are naughty and to go on with it from there.
I have a direct question for the Bloc critic. He commented on the need to respect the rules.
I want to ask him questions about the committee respecting the rules. First, I want to ask the Bloc member whether or not it is a rule of committee that a vote be passed in committee before the committee goes in camera. Second, was there a vote passed at committee to have the committee go in camera?
I have two straightforward, simple questions and I would really appreciate my colleague from the Bloc answering them.
Privilege March 28th, 2000
That is scary stuff.
Privilege March 28th, 2000
Mr. Speaker, all of this is talk, but the real issue is the behaviour of the chair of the committee and the committee and how it could decide to break the very rules which the committee had set for itself and which the House has set for committees. That is the issue.
Across the floor they laugh about breaking those rules. They think it really is not that important. The member brings up all of this fluff, much of it inaccurate, and seems not to understand the importance of respecting the democratic process and respecting the rules of committee, which they routinely break.
As the procedure and House affairs committee reviews this issue I hope it will look at the behaviour of this chair and of this committee, because it is important.
Privilege March 28th, 2000
Mr. Speaker, this member is truly very talented. He can say all of these things, but he seems to ignore completely the reality of the matter. His version of what happened at committee is suspect at best. He is a very talented member of parliament, but it would be much appreciated if he would stick to fact and reality.
If I misunderstood the ruling of the Speaker, and if the Speaker did rule that something I did was wrong, then I certainly apologize for that. I understood that the Speaker had referred the matter back to the committee for the committee to decide. That was my understanding.
Again, I want to make it very clear that I respect the Speaker, and if the Speaker ruled that I had done something improper, then I apologize for that. If the Speaker said that this will go to committee, then we will deal with it at committee. I believe that is what he said.
That I will find out. I will look over Hansard later. I want to show no disrespect for the Speaker.
The memory of the member who has just spoken is very interesting. First, he referred to the March 2 meeting, and what he said about that meeting was absolutely incorrect. He said at the time of the March 2 meeting that we were discussing a draft of the committee report. We were not. At that time we were discussing notes put together by the researcher about what the witnesses had said. All we were doing was discussing that to rehash what the witnesses had said. The chair decided to go in camera to discuss that. I raised a fuss about it at the meeting and the chair agreed that it was improper and he made it a public meeting after that. That is what really happened at that meeting.
The member is very talented, but not very factual. I would prefer that he work on his memory and make it a little less selective. I think that would be beneficial.
Privilege March 28th, 2000
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I made it very clear that I respect your ruling. I do not see a contradiction.
Privilege March 28th, 2000
Mr. Speaker, what the member says is absolutely incorrect. At the meeting where the chair improperly went in camera, I was not even in attendance. How could I have left? To my knowledge, I never left the committee when a member was trying to present such a motion. There was never any talk of such a motion. I invite the member to review the record because that is absolutely not what happened.
Privilege March 28th, 2000
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for his question. I would like to clarify that in fact the committee had agreed I believe it was at the start of the fall session pursuant to the normal rules of committees, that before going in camera there would be a vote. That should not have to be reconfirmed by a committee, but I have seen those rules breached often enough that I wanted it to be reconfirmed. My memory says this was done back in the fall but I cannot say for sure. However it was reconfirmed when the committee went in camera when we were discussing not even a draft of the report, but just what the witnesses had said.
That meeting improperly went in camera. I made a point of bringing that issue before the committee and asking why we were in camera and that we should go public. There was no vote held to have the committee go in camera. Therefore it should have been a public meeting. Through my pressure the committee agreed that the meeting was improperly in camera and it was going to be made a public meeting and it was.
It was at that time I tabled a motion that before going in camera again there will be a vote of committee members. The Chair brushed it aside and said there was no need for that, that we all knew the rules. At the very next meeting the chair took the committee improperly in camera. I was not at that meeting. I was on other parliamentary business. All of the members of the committee allowed it to happen. Not one member raised his or her voice to stop it. That is improper.
The other thing from that meeting is the minutes of the meeting said that the draft report was to be discussed publicly. I would argue that issue should not even be a particularly important one because the committee had agreed not to go in camera without a vote and there was no vote.
I brought the improper procedure before the committee. I said there was no way we should be in camera that we should be holding the meetings in the open. The chair continued to call it an in camera meeting. That is when I decided it was improper. The rules were not being respected. It was not truly an in camera meeting and therefore the discussion should not be considered to be confidential.
That was my decision at the time. It was a decision which I made considering the evidence before me. I would suggest that it was a good decision. I would be interested to hear from other members of the committee. I would like them to answer the question as to why they did not prevent the committee from improperly going in camera and why they did not ask for a vote. I would suggest that one of the reasons might be that there is seldom quorum at this committee. We cannot hold a vote when there is no quorum. We often have three or four Liberal members at committee out of a possible seven or eight. The attendance of the Liberal members is not exactly something I would think they would want to brag about.
Privilege March 28th, 2000
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for that question. She again expresses the concern about the document marked confidential.
I explained why I believe the document was not confidential. The committee had improperly gone in camera. I would like to ask the member about her lack of respect for the rules of the committee. I assume she was at the meeting where the committee went in camera. At that time the member did not say to the chair, “It is improper that we are going in camera. We discussed this at the last meeting”. Why did she not do that? Unfortunately I was not at that meeting. I was away on other matters of parliamentary business.
She talked about my not being at some of the meetings. I challenge her to have my attendance records at those committees compared with those of any other member of the committee. I have taken part in most of the meetings of the committee. I have been involved. I took part in the debate.
When I found out that a copy of the new immigration act had been leaked, I realized we had all been taken for fools. That bothered me. My co-operation at that point dwindled somewhat because this is a serious issue.
I would like to ask the member why at that committee she did not stand and say, “This is improper. I am going to have no part of it. I am going to respect the rules of the committee. I am not going to allow you, Mr. Chair, to go in camera on this issue without a vote. Mr. Chair, I am not going to allow you to go against the minutes of that March 2 meeting and now decide to have the discussion on the draft report in camera, in secret”.
I would like to ask the member why she has so little respect for the rules that she did not stop that.