Mr. Speaker, in the same vein, is the minister prepared to include in his bill the amendments required to oblige Air Canada to provide basic service to the small carriers operating in the regions of Quebec?
Is he prepared to support such amendments?
House of Commons photoLost his last election, in 2011, with 35% of the vote.
Air Transportation May 3rd, 2000
Mr. Speaker, in the same vein, is the minister prepared to include in his bill the amendments required to oblige Air Canada to provide basic service to the small carriers operating in the regions of Quebec?
Is he prepared to support such amendments?
Air Transportation May 3rd, 2000
Mr. Speaker, given that air transportation in Canada is dominated by Air Canada, the small regional carriers are finding it impossible to compete with Air Canada's affiliates.
Does the minister feel that Bill C-26 provides enough protection to the small regional carriers, given the difficulties they are currently facing?
Petitions March 29th, 2000
Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to table a petition signed by 60 people, mostly from my riding of Beauport—Montmorency—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île-d'Orléans, calling on parliament to quickly pass legislation making it mandatory to label all foods that are totally or partially genetically modified.
Billboards March 27th, 2000
Mr. Speaker, the minister refers to consultations. This government constantly talks about flexible federalism, a system able to co-operate with the provinces.
How can the minister convince us of the so-called flexibility of the federal system when it cannot even agree along on an issue as simple as billboards?
Billboards March 27th, 2000
Mr. Speaker, in the very controversial issue of Mediacom billboards in the Montreal region, the Minister of Transport has stated that he will proceed and that the advertising will comply with the law.
How can the minister go against the advice of the Quebec Ministry of Transport, of the City of Montreal and of the Government of Quebec on highway safety?
House Of Commons March 16th, 2000
Mr. Speaker, I ask for unanimous consent to allow my hon. colleague from Laval Centre a short period of comments and questions for a maximum of five minutes.
An Act To Give Effect To The Requirement For Clarity As Set Out In The Opinion Of The Supreme Court Of Canada In The Quebec Secession Reference March 13th, 2000
moved:
Motion No. 389
That Bill C-20 be amended by adding after line 28 on page 5 the following new clause:
“4. This Act shall come into force on August 1, 2011.”
An Act To Give Effect To The Requirement For Clarity As Set Out In The Opinion Of The Supreme Court Of Canada In The Quebec Secession Reference March 13th, 2000
moved:
Motion No. 375
That Bill C-20 be amended by adding after line 28 on page 5 the following new clause:
“4. This Act shall come into force on February 1, 2010.”
An Act To Give Effect To The Requirement For Clarity As Set Out In The Opinion Of The Supreme Court Of Canada In The Quebec Secession Reference March 13th, 2000
moved:
Motion No. 343
That Bill C-20 be amended by adding after line 28 on page 5 the following new clause:
“4. This Act shall come into force on May 1, 2007.”
An Act To Give Effect To The Requirement For Clarity As Set Out In The Opinion Of The Supreme Court Of Canada In The Quebec Secession Reference March 13th, 2000
moved:
Motion No. 261
That Bill C-20 be amended by adding after line 28 on page 5 the following new clause:
“4. Section 2 shall come into force on the day that is ten years after the day on which this Act is assented to, and sections 1 and 3 shall come into force on the day that is seven years after the day on which this Act is assented to.”