Refine by MP, party, committee, province, or result type.

Results 138826-138840 of 141941
Sorted by relevance | Sort by date: newest first / oldest first

Law Commission Of Canada  Mr. Speaker, on a point of order I want to make it clear that I do not support Bill C-106.

October 19th, 1995House debate

Dick HarrisReform

Law Commission Of Canada  Every amendment that we ever put through to the Minister of Justice has been defeated by the government. This indicates that the Liberals have a clear agenda that they are going to follow regardless of what arguments the opposition members bring up in the House. The idea of the law commission being accountable to Parliament through the minister really is just a smoke and mirrors thing.

October 19th, 1995House debate

Dick HarrisReform

Coastal Fisheries Protection Act  Madam Speaker, I thank the member for his question. It is a very good question and gives me an opportunity to make a couple of things clear that are perhaps less than clear. The legislation gives Parliament of Canada the authority to designate any class of vessel for enforcement of conservation measures. The legislation does not categorize whom we would enforce against.

May 11th, 1994House debate

Brian TobinLiberal

Endangered And Threatened Species Act  The bill also seeks to establish Canadian controls over the purchase, sale and international trade in endangered species. To me it is quite clear that Canadians want the maximum penalty imposed on anyone who tries to make money by unlawfully importing or exporting endangered species. The committee on the status of endangered wildlife in Canada, an arm's length scientific body, would assess the species at risk on an annual basis.

October 18th, 1995House debate

Pierrette Ringuette-MaltaisLiberal

Canada-United States Tax Convention Act, 1984  Every single business organization in the United States that appeared before the Congress of the United States made one point clear. Of the seven treaties that were being passed in the U.S. Senate, only the Canadian treaty was truly a one-sided affair with the majority of the benefits going to the United States. Let me quote from probably the biggest business organization, the National Foreign Trade Council, Inc., 1914 representing 500 U.S. multinationals, Mr.

October 18th, 1995House debate

George BakerLiberal

Canada-United States Tax Convention Act, 1984  There is nothing for me to add to this. I know there was a lot of confusion. I hope I have cleared up some of that confusion, why our party supports it. I hope I have addressed those constituents of the member for Kamloops. Also I hope I have put to rest this business about picking on the rich all the time, because the rich do pay their fair share.

October 18th, 1995House debate

Jim SilyeReform

Canada-United States Tax Convention Act, 1984  Nevertheless, I will make my best stab at it and if there are some areas where I am a bit off the mark hopefully I will not be too far off. I will say so if I am not clear. One question we are getting from B.C. constituents is: Why do we favour reductions in the rate of withholding tax on interest and dividends? I covered that in my opening remarks. This works both ways and will attract investment in Canada as well as investment in the United States.

October 18th, 1995House debate

Jim SilyeReform

Privilege  I told him how he could do this. I permitted him to make the one statement which he made. It is on the record and it is clear. I ruled on a point of order earlier and, colleagues, I wish you would accept that point of order. I have ruled on the point of privilege by saying that it was not a point of privilege.

October 18th, 1995House debate

The Speaker

Dairy Industry  The clearest, best, strongest answer for preserving all these benefits for the dairy industry in Quebec and for the dairy industry in Canada is a clear and decisive no on October 30.

October 18th, 1995House debate

Ralph GoodaleLiberal

Child Care Services  Mr. Speaker, we made it very clear that we are prepared to provide cost sharing over a five-year period and that it is the jurisdiction of the provinces to decide how that money would be allocated. I am simply waiting for a response.

October 18th, 1995House debate

Lloyd AxworthyLiberal

Stabilization Program  Beaudoin has already come and presented her problem. In our opinion, there is nothing owing, nothing to pay. The regulations are clear: the Province of Quebec, in this case, is not entitled to payment, and we have told Quebec that we were prepared to let it go to court, that we would provide whatever assistance it needed to go to court and that it should get a decision from a court of law.

October 18th, 1995House debate

Marcel MasséLiberal

Government Contracts  The minister should know how internal probes feel by now. This summer he asked his employees to clear him of charges of steering lucrative contracts to a campaign contributor who just happened to be the golfing buddy of the Prime Minister. The internal whitewash declared the minister clean even though a letter from the minister's office blatantly directed a government agency to do business with this sole bidder and then asked the agency to confirm progress.

October 18th, 1995House debate

Randy WhiteReform

Agriculture  Canada will continue the dialogue as long as necessary in order to reach a satisfactory conclusion. It has been made very clear to the United States that if it proceeds with recent threats regarding unilateral actions Canada will have no choice but to respond in kind. We are fully prepared to follow through in this area.

May 10th, 1994House debate

Susan WhelanLiberal

Agriculture  This would allow the FCC to assist in getting foreclosed farmers back on their feet. It is clear that farmers do not want us to repeat the policies of the past. They want to be masters of their own fate. They want government to help them with the tools that they need to be successful.

May 10th, 1994House debate

John MurphyLiberal

Canada Labour Code  The obvious result would be to strengthen the position of organized labour while simultaneously weakening management's position, with clear implications for the outcome of their private contractual negotiations. Government interference of this sort would violate the most basic principles of equity and fair play. It would be highly disruptive and entirely inconsistent with our open market economy.

October 17th, 1995House debate

Bob NaultLiberal