House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2015, with 58% of the vote.
Committees of the House February 17th, 2004
Mr. Speaker, discussions have taken place between all parties and I believe if you were to seek it, you would find consent for the following motion:
I move:
That the fourth report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs concerning membership on committees be deemed tabled and concurred in.
Business of the House February 17th, 2004
Mr. Speaker, Discussions have taken place among all parties and I believe you will find there is unanimous consent that the recorded division on the motion for second reading of Bill C-12 scheduled for Wednesday, February 18, 2004, be taken today at 5:30 p.m.
Federal-Provincial Fiscal Arrangements Act February 13th, 2004
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. There have been discussions among all the parties and I believe if you ask, you would find unanimous consent to allow the debate on mad cow disease, which was held February 4, 2004, to continue, pursuant to Standing Order 53.1, up until 2:30 p.m. today.
Federal-Provincial Fiscal Arrangements Act February 13th, 2004
Mr. Speaker, is the motion deemed to have been adopted or is the vote being deferred until Tuesday?
Federal-Provincial Fiscal Arrangements Act February 13th, 2004
Mr. Speaker, I will be brief, but I wanted to make some comments about what we just heard.
During question period, the finance minister indicated that he will be meeting his counterparts as early as next weekend to try to reach an agreement on equalization. He did not promise that an agreement would be reached, but he did not say either that it would not happen.
We have to give the provincial and territorial finance ministers as well as our own finance minister time to try to reach a new agreement to set up a new equalization scheme and hopefully meet everyone's expectations.
If a new agreement cannot be reached before the end of March, that is at the end of the current fiscal year, we would find ourselves in a situation where the current program would expire. The bill before the House would extend the equalization program for an additional fiscal year, under the same terms and conditions, so that we can continue operating without any problem. However, should an agreement be reached, it could be retroactive to the beginning of the 2004-05 fiscal year.
I do not see why some people are against this bill, since we have said that we are willing to talk with the provincial governments, with our finance minister's counterparts, to determine if an agreement is possible. There is no other way about it.
If we do not want the equalization payments to stop, then we need some kind of interim measure. This is what we are proposing, all the while hoping that a new five-year equalization agreement can be reached so that provinces can more adequately plan their operations.
I do not understand why there is so much opposition to a bill that is so badly needed and would not hurt anyone.
Questions on the Order Paper February 13th, 2004
Mr. Speaker, I would ask that all questions be allowed to stand.
Corrections and Conditional Release Act February 13th, 2004
moved for leave to introduce Bill C-19, an act to amend the Corrections and Conditional Release Act and the Criminal Code.
(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)
Points of Order February 13th, 2004
Mr. Speaker, we have been thorough and we have now had a chance to look at this.
The Senate amendments that the member refers to were never received by the House. Therefore, as far as the House is concerned, they do not exist.
The motion for reinstatement says clearly “as approved by this House”. We will double check. It is our belief that the procedure was followed absolutely as it should be. I believe the Speaker will probably be confirming that as well, but we will check again.
Points of Order February 13th, 2004
Mr. Speaker, certainly we will take a look at that.
If the member is accurate, we will correct the mistake. We have to take a look at that because both the House leader and the Speaker at the time concurred that indeed it was the same.
We welcome this. We will look at it immediately and report to the Speaker of the House as early as this afternoon.
Government Expenditures February 13th, 2004
Mr. Speaker, we take note of the question because we also wish to disassociate ourselves from the comments broadcast last night. We do not condone them in any way.
As for the funding for this program, it is one of the programs to help the city of Toronto get over the difficulties it experienced during the SARS crisis. We had no particular say over the exact use of these funds, but we completely dissociate ourselves from the comments broadcast yesterday.