Peter Milliken

[Committees Of The House, June 8th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present the 27th report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs regarding technical amendments to the Standing Orders of the House of Commons.

[Government Response To Petitions, June 8th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's response to five petitions.

[Questions On The Order Paper, June 7th, 1994]

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

[Government Response To Petitions, June 7th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's response to petitions.

[Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Suspension Act, 1994, June 3rd, 1994]

Everyone in Quebec loves the Senate.

[Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Suspension Act, 1994, June 3rd, 1994]

Madam Speaker, I have two questions for the hon. member.

I listened to his speech with great interest. I know that the hon. member for Calgary West is something of a party expert in matters of electoral reform. The hon. member for Kindersley-Lloydminster is a member of the House committee on procedure and House affairs which is about to embark on a study as he knows pursuant to House reference of replacement arrangements for the current electoral boundaries readjustment act.

In his speech he set out a series of parameters. I thought I heard him say things to the effect that any new bill would have to comply with certain minimum demands like a freeze on the number of members if it was going to be acceptable. I could go on with a list but I do not want to repeat everything he said.

I was very surprised to hear him suggest that the committee had to comply with these demands if the Reform Party was going to agree to the bill.

The hon. member for Kindersley-Lloydminister has been impressing on me the importance of entering on this discussion with an open mind so the committee can come to its own conclusions based on the evidence that it hears from the witnesses it expects to call both next week and in July when the committee will be having hearings while other members are away.

I am wondering if the hon. member is saying we are not to enter on this discussion with an open mind but in fact are to come to the conclusions that he has recommended in his speech. If so, I hope he will communicate those views to the hon. member for Kindersley-Lloydminister who I think would be appalled if that were the case given the representations he made to me.

Second, I did not hear him mention his support for the Senate in his speech and I know in public utterances, rather pious public utterances I may say, outside this House the hon. member suggested that the Senate should block this bill.

I did not hear him mention that again in his speech here and I wonder if perhaps he could illumine the House on that point and let us hear his views on what the Senate should do, should have done, or should continue to do with Bill C-18.

[Questions On The Order Paper, June 3rd, 1994]

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

[Ways And Means, June 3rd, 1994]

Madam Speaker, I have another request of the House and I appreciate the indulgence of all hon. members in this regard. It is seeking to clean up the Order Paper to avoid unnecessary printing costs.

I am wondering if the House would give its consent to withdraw notices of ways and means motions listed on the Order Paper under Government Orders Nos. 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 11 and 12.

I am informed in respect of those ways and means motions that all have been incorporated in Notice of Ways and Means Motion No. 14 which was concurred in by the House on May 24. Therefore they are redundant, unnecessary, and could be withdrawn without any inconvenience to hon. members and at a saving of printing costs to the House.

(Government Orders Nos. 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 11 and 12 withdrawn.)

[Committees Of The House, June 3rd, 1994]

Madam Speaker, Motion No. 1 standing on the Notice Paper today under motions is a motion for concurrence in the 24th report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, presented to the House on Wednesday, June 1. The report concerned technical amendments to the standing orders consequent on recommendations made by the committee concerning the publications of the House.

I think hon. members who are interested in this fascinating subject have had an opportunity to review the report of the committee. I believe Your Honour will find unanimous consent today to proceed with concurrence in that very important report, and I so move.

(Motion agreed to.)

[Committees Of The House, June 3rd, 1994]

Madam Speaker, there have also been discussions among the parties and I believe Your Honour will find unanimous consent for the following motion. I move:

That the Standing Committee on Justice and Legal Affairs be authorized to travel to Kingston, Ontario, from June 9 to June 10, 1994 in order to visit penitentiaries in the Kingston area and that the necessary staff to accompany the committee.

(Motion agreed to.)