Tom Lukiwski

[Federal Accountability Act, June 20th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, this is a general comment. It has been mentioned a number of times before by my colleagues on the committee, both from the Bloc and the Liberals, that we were rushed through committee and we did not have adequate time to examine and discuss all the legislation contained in it.

I would merely remind my esteemed colleagues that we had passed a motion in committee to extend the sitting time of that committee for the entire summer, if need be. In other words, we were not putting any restrictions on the length of time that we required to examine the bill with rigour and to give it its full examination and the due diligence required. We were quite prepared to sit as long as it took.

Because of the extended hours and because of the complete and sincere motivation of all members to ensure that the bill was as strong as possible, we were able to complete the examination of clause by clause last week, but it was not because we were rushed. We had the ability to sit as long as we wanted. It was the decision of the committee to pass the bill clause by clause when we did.

[Questions on the Order Paper, June 20th, 2006]

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

[Government Response to Petitions, June 20th, 2006]

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

[Business of Supply, June 19th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I find the comments disturbing by not only my hon. colleague, who has just completed his speech, but by many members of the opposition who spoke earlier today. They continue to allude to the fact that they believe that all native organizations and all native leaders are firmly in support of what the opposition members call the Kelowna accord.

I want to give an example to my hon. colleague of a well known, well respected aboriginal leader who holds a differing view. The gentleman's name is Jim Sinclair. For the benefit of my hon. colleague, should he not be familiar with Mr. Jim Sinclair, I will give a brief synopsis of his history and his contribution to Canada.

Mr. Sinclair has been a leader of two aboriginal national organizations. Mr. Sinclair has advised prime ministers. Mr. Sinclair has spoken at the United Nations on aboriginal issues and has dined with the Queen. Mr. Sinclair sat at the constitutional table for five years. In fact, he is widely acclaimed as being the individual most responsible for ensuring that aboriginal rights were recognized in the Constitution.

I hear comments from my colleagues opposite and I would love to engage them in a debate about the contribution Mr. Sinclair has made to aboriginal rights in Canada.

My point is, Mr. Sinclair is highly critical of what he calls a joke, the Kelowna accord.

How does my hon. colleague respond to leaders like Mr. Sinclair, who are critical and hold a completely different opinion of what benefits if any would come out of that so-called accord?

[Questions on the Order paper, June 19th, 2006]

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

[Committees of the House, June 19th, 2006]

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

That, in relation to its study on biofuel strategy, 12 members of the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food be authorized to travel to Ville Ste. Catherine, Quebec on June 20 and that the necessary staff do accompany the committee.

(Motion agreed to)

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, June 16th, 2006]

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

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, June 16th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, if Questions Nos. 22 and 23 could be made orders for return, these returns would be tabled immediately.

[Starred Questions, June 16th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, would you be so kind as to call Starred Question No. 30. I ask that the question and answer to Question No. 30 be printed in Hansard as if read.

[Questions on the Order Paper, June 16th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, the following questions will be answered today: Nos. 26, 29, 34, and 38.