Points Of Order  Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, I do not want to interrupt my hon. friend from the Reform Party. I just wanted to respond to my Bloc critic who said that it was his understanding that he was to get the documents at noon. I believe my officials delivered them at one o'clock.

Points Of Order  I think the hon. member is absolutely correct. I had assumed because of the positioning of the member that he was a member of the Reform Party. The issues that I raised still stand, but I stand corrected.

Points Of Order  Mr. Speaker, prior to the tabling of the minister's statement, I would like to make you aware that by agreement of the House leaders we had hoped to have a copy of the statement three hours prior to its introduction in the House. That was not forthcoming and we are very concerned.

National Defence  Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of National Defence. Late last year the minister announced that he will undertake a major review of the Canadian military to determine what defence forces Canada needs in the new world order. Our party supports the need for such a review.

Labour Dispute  Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Transport. The longshoreman's labour dispute on the west coast has taken a devastating toll on the agricultural sector in western Canada. Canadian grain and alfalfa industries are losing products, customers, sales and millions of dollars because of this dispute.

Labour Dispute  Mr. Speaker, my supplementary question is for the Minister of Human Resources Development. If mediation is not successful I would like to remind the minister that back in 1986 the government legislated the longshoremen back to work. The hon. member then represented Winnipeg-Fort Garry, now Winnipeg South Centre.

House Of Commons  Mr. Speaker, it is a matter of record that the British Parliament defeated the Maastricht treaty without any disastrous results or damage to the democratic process. Would the Prime Minister tell Canadians why they should settle for any less democracy than the people of Britain?

Board Of Internal Economy  Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. whip for his response to the question. For the edification of the House, the reason I bring this matter to the House-

Board Of Internal Economy  Would the hon. whip not agree it is better to present information in the House openly like this rather than through our party representative? In that way it is presented to the public as a whole and not hidden in messages.

Board Of Internal Economy  Mr. Speaker, my question is for the representative on the Board of Internal Economy. In view of the Speaker's ruling on January 31, will the representative on the board undertake to discuss the subject of extra salaries with the board with a view to doing three things. First, agreeing on a procedure for making all such expenditures-

Board Of Internal Economy  Mr. Speaker, I am sorry that I cannot phrase it generally because it is quite specific. It goes back to the discussion we had in this Chamber on Friday, January 28, which was ruled on-

Board Of Internal Economy  Mr. Speaker, to reiterate I would ask the representative on the board to do three things. First, to agree on a procedure with that board for making all such expenditure decisions public. Second, to rule that June 9, 1993 decision of the Board of Internal Economy to pay those extra salaries to members not entitled to them was wrong.

Canada Elections Act  Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister. Last year the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench struck down the parts of the Canada Elections Act that restrict spending on election advertising by anybody other than political parties to just $1,000. The court ruled that these restrictions could not be justified in a free and democratic society.

Canada Elections Act  Mr. Speaker, does the Prime Minister believe the restrictions imposed in the act as it presently stands are compatible with a fair and open political process?

Taxation  Mr. Speaker, I have a supplementary question for the Prime Minister. Thousands of participants in RRSPs-contributors, financial institutions and recipients-wish to make direct and effective representation to the government to dissuade it from reducing contribution levels. Is the government willing to receive and respond to these representations prior to finalizing the 1994-95 budget?