Ralph Goodale

[Privilege, February 7th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, as the various House leaders of all parties in the House know, over the last number of days there have been some extensive discussions among the parties on the outstanding privilege that has been before the House. I want to commend all of those involved in those discussions for acting seriously and in good faith to find an appropriate solution. I would particularly like to mention for our side the deputy government whip, the hon. member for Brossard--La Prairie.

I understand, Mr. Speaker, you will find unanimous consent in the House that all questions necessary to dispose of the privilege motion by the hon. member for Portage--Lisgar be immediately put and decided now without further debate.

[Budget Implementation Act, 2001, February 7th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. In light of the unusual circumstances in the House, there have been some discussions during the period the bells were ringing and I believe we have an understanding that we will not have a vote at this time with respect to the budget bill but will return to debate at second reading of the bill.

There is an understanding among the parties that we would debate Bill C-49 for the balance of the time available today and tomorrow and that we would conclude debate at the end of the day tomorrow with any votes required at that time deferred until after the week parliament is adjourned.

[Privilege, February 7th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, there are discussions continuing among the parties today. I believe you would find unanimous agreement in the House that this matter should stand adjourned for the time being. We will return to it when we are able.

[Budget Implementation Act, 2001, February 6th, 2002]

moved that Bill C-49, an act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on December 10, 2001, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

[Privilege, February 6th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I wish to advise the Chair and the House that discussions are continuing among parties with respect to this matter of privilege. While those discussions are ongoing, I believe you will find consent in the House to adjourn this matter to the next sitting. We will see what those discussions generate in the meantime.

[Golden Jubilee, February 6th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, today is February 6, 2002. Hon. members will know that this must be a bittersweet day for Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, the Queen of Canada. It was 50 years ago today that she received word of the passing of Her beloved father, thereby making today the 50th anniversary of Her accession to the throne.

The government has given notice of a motion for an appropriate humble address to Her Majesty marking this occasion and we will proceed with that motion in the very near future. At that time I am certain members will want to more fully express their best wishes.

It seems appropriate, however, that the House should take note of this event on the actual day of the anniversary. Her Majesty has travelled widely in Canada throughout Her reign and we happily anticipate another royal tour this autumn.

Her Majesty is the 40th monarch of Her line, going back to William the Conqueror. Only four of Her predecessors reigned longer than she now has. We look forward to many more happy years of Her reign.

[Points of Order, February 6th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman is correct in saying that in any conversation I have had with him or representatives of his party the Canadian Alliance has been most enthusiastic about acknowledging the anniversary of Her Majesty.

There are perhaps others in the House who have a different view but it is fair to say that it is not the Canadian Alliance. I point out that the question that was asked of the Prime Minister to which he responded in reference to the opposition did not come from the Canadian Alliance but in fact from another party in the House.

[Privilege, February 6th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, we have a dispute here with respect to statements that were made during the course of question period. It is perhaps a point of debate and rhetoric, but I do not think it constitutes a question of privilege that would be properly before the House at this time.

[Agriculture, February 6th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, there is nothing new here. These allegations have been made and investigated by U.S. authorities no fewer than eight times over the past decade. The score thus far is eight to nothing in favour of Canada.

The Canadian Wheat Board is a fair trading agency within all the rules of NAFTA and within all the rules of the WTO. If the United States wants to know the source of the problem in world grain markets, it should look in the mirror and recognize that its own unfair subsidization is the cause.

[Immigration, February 5th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. We understand this is simply a renumbering, reflecting the new statute as opposed to the old statute. Therefore the substance of the matter does not change. It is simply a clarification with respect to the numbered section. On that basis, this is perfectly acceptable.