Ralph Goodale

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, November 14th, 2011]

Have any studies of any kind whatsoever been undertaken by any Minister or any department or agency, or any non-governmental individual or entity at the request of any Minister or government department or agency, pertaining to the impacts, consequences, costs or benefits of eliminating the single-desk marketing system of the Canadian Wheat Board: (a) what were the terms of reference of any such studies; (b) who specifically worked on those studies and what were their professional qualifications; (c) when were any such studies begun; (d) when were they completed; (e) what were their principal findings; and (f) when will they be made public?

[Petitions, November 14th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present a petition signed by a number of people across western Canada, particularly in Saskatchewan and Alberta, expressing their concern about Canadians who are suffering from the combination of multiple sclerosis and chronic cerebrospinal venous insufficiency, otherwise known as CCSVI. They point out that when the two diseases appear to occur together simultaneously, often our medical system declines to treat the multiple sclerosis or the CCSVI with the new angioplasty type of treatment.

The petitioners are calling upon the Minister of Health to consult more broadly with experts, particularly those who have experience with the new technology and treatments. They urge the Minister of Health to proceed with phase III clinical trials on an urgent basis with respect to this new treatment and to develop a follow-up system so the consequences of the treatment can be accurately tracked.

[Taxation, November 3rd, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, with the world economy in turmoil, it is no time for complacency. Standards of living are flat, disposable incomes are stagnant, household debt is high and the gulf between the very wealthy and everyone else is widening.

To make Canadians less vulnerable and to encourage growth, will the government forgo its $1.2 billion EI payroll tax increase, allow 10 million low-income Canadians to access tax credits now reserved for only the better off and help seniors whose RSPs have been devastated in the stock market? Will the government do those three sensible things?

[Veterans, November 2nd, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, just to be absolutely clear, when the point was raised by the leader of the Liberal Party that consent had been denied, a member of the Conservative Party rose to say that he had not denied consent. I think, as put on the floor now, the question is was consent denied or not.

Could we have some clarity on that point, since from our side it seemed that some Conservatives said “no”? A Conservative has risen in his place to say that this is not the case. Could we seek clarity on whether consent was or was not denied?

[Rail Transportation, November 1st, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, the government took 13 months to even start acting on its own rail service review.

What it has started is yet another review, with no deadline for actually doing anything. This process is in never-never land, while shippers of everything from grain to forest products, minerals and chemicals continue to suffer costly substandard rail service.

The Conservatives quickly slapped closure on farmers. Why not a little closure on the railways, after 13 months of lost time and who knows how many more months yet to come? Why do the Conservatives side with the railways?

[Petitions, October 31st, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present a petition signed by a number of citizens across west central Saskatchewan. They are expressing concern about their fellow Canadians who suffer from both CCSVI, which is chronic cerebral spinal venous insufficiency, and multiple sclerosis. They point out that the unfortunate occurrence of both of those serious diseases can often result in particular treatment being denied with respect to CCSVI.

The petitioners call upon the Minister of Health to consult more broadly and thoroughly with experts in Canada and around the world who actually have direct experience with the treatment of CCSVI. They urge the Minister of Health to proceed with phase 3 clinical trials on an urgent basis and to provide assistance to follow up on the experience of these patients over time so that Canada can develop the information base that is necessary to ensure that CCSVI is properly treated in Canada with the new technology that is available.

[Points of Order, October 26th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, there is one further point on this matter to draw to your attention because of the importance of the independent integrity of the committees of the House.

It would seem to me that if the chair of a committee chooses not to rise in his or her place, as the government House leader has suggested a committee chair might choose to do--that is, not answer the question--it would then be appropriate, Mr. Speaker, for you to turn not to a minister of the government, who is not in charge of the order of business before a committee, but to a vice-chair of that committee, and to invite the vice-chair to respond on behalf of the committee, because it is the committee, not the government, that is in charge of the agenda of committee business.

[Points of Order, October 26th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I am rising to seek clarification from the Chair with respect to an incident that occurred in question period today. A very specific question was addressed by a Liberal member to the chair of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs.

The chair was pre-empted from answering the question by the intervention of the Minister of Veterans Affairs. I would point out that the question did not pertain to the responsibility of the government or the minister. The question related to the work of the committee, which would be under the purview of the chair and the members of the committee.

I am seeking clarity from you, Mr. Speaker, about the proper procedure in this sort of matter. Is it now permissible in the House for ministers to effectively muzzle the chairs of committees and impose on committees the views of the government? We always take the position in the House that committees are masters of their own affairs, that they determine the time of meetings, the witness lists and the order of business. The work before the committee is under the control of the committee.

If it becomes permissible for ministers simply to pre-empt all that--to take that responsibility away from the chair and to place it under the minister--then I think we have undergone a rather profound change in our long-held traditions with respect to the proper functioning of our committees.

Mr. Speaker, I seek your clarification on that matter, because it is very important to the integrity of how our committees function.

[The Economy, October 26th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, let us be very specific. There are about 25 million Canadians who file tax returns. About 15 million report taxable income, but close to 10 million do not, because their incomes are not high enough.

However, they do have children who want to be in arts programs. They do volunteer to be firefighters. They do provide home care to sick or elderly family members.

Why are these 10 million lower-income Canadians less worthy than those who are better off? To include them would cost something less than $80 million. Why will the government not simply do this?

[The Economy, October 26th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, as the world teeters on the cusp of another downturn, with the turmoil and risk today in Europe, especially, will the government take three sensible steps to help make Canadians less vulnerable: cancel $1.2 billion in job killing EI payroll tax increases, give seniors flexibility in managing their RRSPs and RRIFs, and make tax credits equally available to low-income kids, caregivers and volunteer firefighters, not just the more wealthy?

Would the government do these three sensible things?