Ralph Goodale

[Business of the House, May 17th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the government House leader would be good enough to outline the business that he has in mind for tomorrow and for the week of May 28, when the House returns.

Could he also advise the House of the business specifically that he hopes to see completed in that next sitting period, which would be the last one before the longer summer break? It would be useful for members to know the particular items the government House leader is anxious to see completed in that timeframe.

Finally, could he enlighten the House as to how he thinks the business of Parliament is expedited by the constant filibustering in a number of committees by members of the government.

[Points of Order, May 17th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, my point of order arises out of question period. During the course of question period, the Minister of Human Resources and Social Development repeatedly referred to and read from a list of projects pertaining to the summer jobs for students program.

Since he has that list in his hands at this moment and since he referred to it repeatedly and read from it explicitly in question period, would the minister be good enough, under the rules, to table that list now in the House of Commons?

[Privilege, May 16th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, there can be no doubt that the physical accosting of one member of Parliament by another amounts to contempt of Parliament and it amounts certainly to a question of privilege.

It does not matter what members think of the questions asked or the answers given. When the reaction of a member of Parliament amounts to a physical approach in an intimidating manner and a physical accosting, that does cross the line.

Mr. Speaker, I do not think this matter can rest where it is at the present time. I think it is important that you review the record, including the tapes of the proceedings, not only because this involves a dispute between two members of Parliament, but because one of those members of Parliament is in fact an officer of the House, an officer responsible, at least in part, for the decorum in the House.

If what has been alleged here in fact transpired, although I was not a personal witness to it but obviously many members of Parliament were, I believe, therefore, it is absolutely unacceptable to leave this situation hanging in the air. It must be further adjudicated by you, Mr. Speaker, and I would simply want to advise the Chair that if you do find that there is here a prima facie case of privilege, then the member for Ottawa South would be prepared to move the appropriate motion.

[Points of Order, May 15th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, during question period, the Prime Minister made a remark suggesting that the official languages action plan, which was implemented by the now Leader of the Opposition was a failure. However, I draw to the attention of the House the website version of the report of Mr. Fraser. Page 14, chapter 2, clearly indicates the plan was indeed a success.

[Equalization, May 15th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, in the vote on the budget bill tonight, the Conservative promise to Saskatchewan about equalization will be broken. The Conservatives will impose a cap on Saskatchewan, a cap they promised never to impose, and that cap kills their promise. No amount of double-talk will change that reality.

The Conservative MP for Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre said, “If you want to say we didn't fulfill the commitment or keep our promise, fair enough”. But it is not fair enough.

The premier of Saskatchewan is asking all Saskatchewan MPs to vote against the budget bill. Will the chief government whip allow them the freedom to do so?

[Business of the House, May 10th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order with respect to one specific item the government House leader referred to, the legislation having to do with the Vancouver Olympics.

I think this will be the first time the House has had the opportunity to consider that matter. I wonder if he might undertake some consultations among House leaders to see if there is a will in the House to expedite that item.

I understand there are some timing considerations pertaining to that legislation and we might be able to arrive at some understanding to move it expeditiously in the interests of the Olympics.

[Business of the House, May 10th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the government House leader would be good enough to describe the agenda that he has in mind between now and next week and the time that the House will rise for the May adjournment.

In his answer could also specifically indicate if he has been able to make a decision yet on the designation of the days for the consideration of estimates on the floor of the House of Common?

Could give us his assurance, pertaining to certain matters arising out of question period, if there is in fact an announcement related to taxation that the Minister of Finance proposes to make outside the House of Commons, that before the announcement is made, there will be the tabling in the House of the ways and means motion?

[Equalization, May 9th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, another example of Conservative flim-flam is the Conservatives' treatment of Saskatchewan on equalization.

During the last election, to buy votes the Conservatives promised Saskatchewan $800 million more per year, but their budget capped Saskatchewan at only one-quarter of that amount for this year and then nothing thereafter.

Saskatchewan people feel betrayed. The premier has said that he may now take this Conservative government to court.

At least five provinces are outraged about this budget. Is this the new era of peace and harmony the federal finance minister bragged about?

[Foreign Affairs, May 2nd, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I think that consent is indeed forthcoming. However, might I suggest that we just take a moment to make sure we are absolutely agreed upon the language and make sure there is no mistake. It is only a matter of moments.

[Points of Order, May 2nd, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I just want to confirm what the Minister of the Environment has, in effect, now admitted. He has admitted that the language he referred to in question period was in fact in the Calgary Herald, not in quotation marks and, therefore, not attributable to the Leader of the Opposition.