Ralph Goodale

[Aboriginal Affairs, March 18th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I would remind the Prime Minister that 69% of the mass mailings that are done come from the Conservative Party and not from this side of the House.

I take it that what the Prime Minister has done is confirm the point that we are all on the same page. I hope that makes life easier for you, Mr. Speaker.

Let me ask the Prime Minister a different question.

The governance problems that have been of concern at First Nations University have been fixed. No one condones the administrative mistakes that were made in the past, but they are past. A new structure is in hand. The University of Regina is prepared to handle the money matters while First Nations University concentrates on the learning of students.

Will the Prime Minister give it a chance?

[Ten Percenters, March 18th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, the public clearly detests the practice of mass mailing millions of nasty pamphlets known as ten percenters to voters outside an MP's own riding. There is no way we can paint a moustache on that pig and call it Brad Pitt.

The House voted Tuesday to end the practice. The Conservatives voted to keep it, but yesterday, the Prime Minister seemed to indicate that he too was ready to get rid of out-of-riding ten percenters.

Would the Prime Minister confirm this point today, and are we all now on the same page for the Board of Internal Economy?

[Ten Percenters, March 15th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I am sure that it was completely inadvertent, but I want to make it clear that the hon. gentleman who just spoke must have been referring to the constituency of Saskatoon—Wanuskewin and not any constituency called Saskatoon-Waskana because there is no such constituency. It must be Saskatoon—Wanuskewin.

[Ten Percenters, March 15th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, there have been discussions among the parties and I think you will find unanimous consent for the following motion:

That, notwithstanding any Standing Order or usual practice of the House, in relation to the following motion “That the matter of the questions of privilege raised by the Member for Sackville—Eastern Shore on November 3, 2009 and by the Member for Mount Royal on November 26, 2009, be now referred to the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs and that the evidence heard and papers received in the preceding session be taken into consideration in this session.”, the motion be deemed moved and seconded; the length of speeches be two minutes maximum and the speeches be not subject to a question and comment period; and after no more than one speaker from each of the recognized parties has spoken, the motion be deemed agreed to.

[Business of the House, March 11th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, it is Thursday, so it is time to look ahead to what will be on the government's agenda for the House of Commons next week.

First, I would like to ask the government House leader how he plans to fix one of the many problems the Prime Minister created by proroguing Parliament from December until March. I specifically refer to Standing Order 81(4), which provides that the government's main estimates for the coming fiscal year are deemed to be referred for scrutiny to the various standing committees of the House of Commons on March 1 of every year. This year, of course, the House stood prorogued on March 1. There was a prime ministerial padlock on the place. MPs were prohibited from doing their jobs here. The committees of the House did not exist, so Standing Order 81(4) was violated.

What is the government's plan for getting its main estimates referred to all of the standing committees? If that does not happen, there will be no main estimates and, therefore, no money for the government to operate on.

Second, I would like to ask about the business for next week. After all of that heavy recalibration the government went through while it was AWOL from December to March, I presume that we will see an agenda for next week that is just chockablock full of new government work, I repeat, new government work.

I would remind the government House leader that next week is one of those weeks that had been specifically scheduled by the House to be a constituency week for members of Parliament. The government instead insisted on shifting next week to Ottawa for essential, urgent, momentous government business. What is it going to be? I am sure it will be much more than a series of opposition days and the continuation of a rather pointless debate about a throne speech that is 95% recycled.

[Aboriginal Affairs, March 11th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, if the minister does not reach the March 31 deadline, if certainty is not achieved by then, First Nations University will begin to disintegrate and faculty, staff, and students will need to go elsewhere. Sadly for hundreds of young aboriginal students, there is no elsewhere. Their dream of post-secondary education will simply be over.

Surely the minister will not visit upon these innocent young people the past sins of others. Will the minister ensure the problems are fixed and multi-year federal funding is in place on time?

[Aboriginal Affairs, March 11th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development met this morning with Chief Lonechild of the Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations. The chief no doubt informed the minister about the decisive action he has taken to fix the problems at First Nations University.

Chief Lonechild has worked sincerely and successfully with a new interim board of governors and CEO, with faculty and students, with the University of Regina and Premier Wall's provincial government. A strong remedial plan is in fact in place. Will the federal minister now support that plan?

[Aboriginal Affairs, March 8th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, last Thursday the Minister of Agriculture said that the federal government supports the concept of First Nations University and will work with the University of Regina on ways to save the institution. However, on Friday the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development suggested there would be no federal support for First Nations University, period.

Could the minister correct any misimpression here and confirm that some $7 million will be available to and through the University of Regina once the U of R and other partners finalize a remedial plan with First Nations University?

[Post-Secondary Education, March 5th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, this is about hundreds of aboriginal and non-aboriginal students now at First Nations University and generations yet to come. It is about treaty rights and it is about the federal minister's fiduciary responsibilities. It is about the proper administration of a genuine university and $8 million in federal funding without which a noble vision will get thrown out with the bath water.

Specifically, is that money in fact in the federal budget for 2010-11? Exactly where is it in the budget and will it be directed to the students at First Nations University?

[Post-Secondary Education, March 5th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday's budget mentions post-secondary education for aboriginal people, but there is no mention of funding and no mention of First Nations University in Regina. That institution is working hard with partners to correct its governance problems. The Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations, the University of Regina and the government of Saskatchewan are all pulling together to help.

Will the federal government fully support these combined efforts to first fix and then preserve First Nations University?