Mauril Bélanger

[Privilege, April 1st, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, the question our colleague has raised is very serious indeed. It is up to you and to the House to deal with it accordingly. We are certain that you will review all the circumstances, exactly what was said, by whom and when. There is more to it than second-hand reports; there is what really was said, and you will draw your conclusions.

Perhaps you will have to take into consideration what was already in the public domain, in connection with what is now alleged to be a breach of in camera confidentiality. I am sure you will review these facts judiciously, as you always do, and make a decision.

There are two points I would like to raise, nevertheless. Perhaps it is for the committee or for the House itself—since it is the House that makes such decisions—to decide if it should sit. The terms of the motion may be rather strong, if you were to agree with the hon. member opposite.

In particular, the second point I would like to make is that this is very much a theoretical question, since the decision to make this testimony public has already been made.

[Motions for Papers, March 31st, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Discussions have taken place among the parties concerning the extension of the time for government orders. If you were to seek it, I think you would find consent to proceed to private members' business at 5:30 p.m. today.

[National Security, March 31st, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, I wish to table in the House, in both official languages, documents to help form the creation of a committee of parliamentarians to review national security.

[National Security, March 31st, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I would seek the consent of the House to revert back to tabling of documents in order to table on behalf of the government the documents we have been talking about for the last few minutes?

[Business of the House, March 30th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, discussions have taken place between all parties and I believe that you will find consent for the following order. I move:

That at the conclusion of today's debate on Ways and Means Motion No. 1, all questions necessary to dispose of this motion be deemed put, a recorded division deemed requested and deferred to 3:00 p.m., Wednesday, March 31, 2004.

And that immediately following the recorded division on Ways and Means Motion No. 1, the following recorded divisions will take place: Ways and means Motions No. 7 and No. 8, Motion M-475 in the name of the member from Charlevoix and the motion for second reading of Bill C-439 in the name of the member from Sudbury.

[Sponsorship Program, March 25th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, we have been told many times that committees are masters of their own destiny.

A committee makes a request for information. Whatever is pertinent to chapters 3, 4 and 5 of the Auditor General's report will be reviewed and provided.

[Sponsorship Program, March 25th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, some of these questions are starting to be rather interesting in terms of the rules of the House.

My understanding is that some of these matters are to be debated only if a report has been tabled. We are quite happy that this morning the committee adopted a motion stating that it will be looking at an interim report by mid-April.

[Sponsorship Program, March 25th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, the committee is requesting information. Whatever is requested that is relevant to chapters 3, 4 and 5 of the Auditor General's Report will be provided.

[Sponsorship Program, March 24th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister did no such thing.

[Sponsorship Program, March 24th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the following motion was adopted, “That the committee request that a copy of the daily agendas of Guité, Quail and Gagliano between November 1993 and December 2003 be forwarded to the committee's counsel for his review”. That will be done.