Peter Milliken

[Questions On The Order Paper, February 24th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, the following questions will be answered today: Nos. 104 and 110.

Question No. 104-

[Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Act, 1995, February 24th, 1995]

This is unbelievable.

[Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Act, 1995, February 24th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in support of second reading of this bill.

Under the procedures the House adopted a little over a year ago, we changed the rules with respect to the drafting of bills. As I indicated in my speech on the concurrence in the report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs on February 9, this bill has been drafted by the committee and has now been introduced by the government in response to the committee's recommendation which was adopted by the House.

The order of the House constituted a direction to the government to bring in this bill. The bill is in substantially the same form as what the committee recommended. There have been some minor changes in technical aspects of the language and one earth shattering change that brings the bill into force on royal assent rather than on the date of proclamation. That I am sure has not upset anyone. It is a very minor technical change and one that the committee considered but opted for what it thought was the more convenient. It turns out that the government felt the other was more convenient and made the appropriate change in the bill.

I am looking forward to the study of this bill in the committee on procedure and House affairs.

At our meeting this week, the Leader of the Opposition indicated that the Bloc Quebecois would like an opportunity to speak during second reading of this bill. We accept their request and hope that today's speech will mean a saving in time later on during consideration of the bill.

This is why we are allowing the debate today, although the Standing Orders do not provide for debate at the second reading of a bill, as a general rule.

I am happy to have agreed to the debate today. I look forward to the speech of the hon. member from the Bloc who will be speaking on this matter. I recommend the bill to the House as I did on February 9. As I said everything that I think could be said about this good bill on that date I see no need to prolong my remarks today. I support the bill and invite the House to do the same.

[Motions For Papers, February 22nd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I would ask that the notice of motion for the production of papers be allowed to stand.

[Questions On The Order Paper, February 22nd, 1995]

Yes, I am sure, because I made inquiries regarding this question on Monday before the hon. member raised his point of order, and I am certain that we will soon have a response for the hon. member, which I will table here in this House.

[English]

Once again, I thank the hon. member for raising this issue ad nauseam. I am delighted he is able to pursue it in this way. I look forward to having the response soon, as I indicated the other day.

I request that all questions be allowed to stand.

[Questions On The Order Paper, February 22nd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, as I indicated to the hon. member-I think it was on Monday and also last Friday- the government considered his representations. We are in the process of drafting a response to this question. I am certain that there are people now working on the response.

[Questions On The Order Paper, February 22nd, 1995]

I ask, Mr. Speaker, that all questions be allowed to stand.

[Private Members' Business, February 22nd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, there is a slight difficulty on the Order Paper for Private Members' Business since tomorrow is not a normal sitting day and there will be no private members' hour.

The hon. member for St. Albert has graciously agreed to allow his item, No. 2 on today's Order Paper, to be dropped to the bottom of the order of precedence. Therefore, the private members' hour will proceed as usual today and on Friday, No. 3 on today's Order Paper, in the name of the hon. member for Skeena, would be the item for discussion in private members' hour.

I would like to thank the hon. member for St. Albert for agreeing to do this. It is very kind of him. I think there would be consent in the House to allow that item to be dropped to the bottom in accordance with his wishes and to preserve the order of the other private members' hours for the next couple of weeks.

[Foreign Affairs And International Trade, February 22nd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I move, with the unanimous consent of the House:

That the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade be authorized to travel to Washington, D.C., from March 15 to 17, 1995, for the purpose of meeting officials from international financial institutions and other appropriate individuals as part of the Committee's examination of the upcoming Halifax G-7 Summit Agenda and, in particular, reforms to international financial institutions, and that the necessary staff do accompany the Committee.

(Motion agreed to.)

[Bill C-69, February 22nd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I move, with the unanimous consent of the House:

That, notwithstanding the provisions of Standing Order 68(7)(a), when the order of the day is called for consideration of the second reading of Bill C-69, an act to provide for the establishment of the Electoral Boundaries Commissions and the readjustment of the electoral boundaries, a representative of each party or group in the House may make a statement of not more than 20 minutes in relation thereto before the question is put, provided that when the question is put it shall be deemed to have been carried on division.

(Motion agreed to.)