Controlled Drugs And Substances Act  Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the member for his question. I listened when he spoke to the bill in the House. He made some very clear points which I tried to address in my speech today. For over a decade it has been almost a precedent within jurisprudence that it has been a notion of the law that people would be sent for rehabilitation.

Young Offenders  When she confronted them they promptly stabbed her to death. When is this minister going to act by sending a clear message to violent young offenders that the experiments of the seventies were a failure and they will be treated henceforth as the vicious criminals they are?

Government Contracts  Speaker, I do not know where the hon. member gets his information with regard to the context of guidelines which are to be released by the government. I want to assure him however that the Prime Minister made a clear and unequivocal commitment to Canadians that this subject matter would be reviewed. The matter has been reviewed. We are in the throes of releasing those guidelines to the public. Members will then have an opportunity to assess their effectiveness.

Action Plan For Young People  As far as our youth program is concerned, we have carried out extensive consultations and it is clear that our program meets the current needs of young people. And we do not intend to give up our right to help Canadians in need. In the case in point, there are Canadians in need who are not getting help from any provincial program.

Members Of Parliament  I urge all MPs to vote in favour of this amendment, to vote in such a way that undoubtedly represents the majority view in each constituency. I am expecting that this evening we will see a clear indication of the Liberal Party's commitment to deliver on its promise of freer votes.

Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Process  That was to build on scheduled redistribution for 1996 when B.C.'s representation in the House of Commons was to increase by two seats. This was a clear recognition of B.C.'s severe under-representation in the House of Commons. At the risk of being branded one of those crazy BCers, here we go all over again, let me also state that I am a proud Canadian citizen.

Income Tax Act  I want to speak about that in my remarks today and where we feel the process should go in reviewing the tax collection system of Canada. I would like to make clear there are some good aspects to the bill. We would like to see the government continue with some of these programs and certainly improve on them as we proceed in the legislative session.

Income Tax Act  In my presentation I will not pretend for a minute that it would be anything but irresponsible of us to oppose these measures merely on principle because of the circumstances. On the other hand I wish to make clear there are some principles to which I am strongly opposed, as is the Reform Party. The Income Tax Act, as we all know, has become a very unwieldy monster symbolizing what many Canadians see as the problem with government in general and that in general there is just too much government for all of us.

Income Tax Act  For these measures to have legal effect new legislation must be passed now by this Parliament. Let me be clear at the start by explaining why we are going ahead with this legislation. Simply put, these past tax measures were introduced some time ago and many were said to be effective immediately when announced.

Petitions  Not only do these cards glorify murder and the criminals who commit horrific acts of violence, but they act as a daily reminder to the victims, families and friends of the brutal violence that has struck down their loved ones as well as their security and faith in humanity. A clear message must be sent to any printing company and/or distributor that this material is not acceptable to Canadians. A great number of Erie residents are opposed to this product and I join them in calling for an amendment to the laws of Canada prohibiting the importation, distribution, sale and manufacture of killer cards.

Supply  He later commented: "Anglophones have more to be worried about than francophones because of the tougher bilingual requirements for senior officers". It seems pretty clear and obvious from these completely opposed statements that the ideal and the reality of official bilingualism are two different things. I do not believe for one moment that the hon. minister of defence favours French-speaking Canadians over English-speaking Canadians, but I think the minister is faced with the problem of having to defend an inherently flawed system.

Supply  When we no longer have associations to defend our rights, it means being left without any protection whatsoever. That is what is so disappointing. Our position is clear. We respect the francophone community. We want to work as partners when Quebec becomes a sovereign nation, and we will do everything to try and defend that community as long as we are part of Canada.

Supply  What I have heard since the start of this debate convinces me more than ever that Quebec is doing the right thing. It is clear that Quebec has made the right choice to embark on its march to independence. I realize that the junior member from thirty-five kilometres away will try to cut in, but since I have listened carefully almost all day to the speeches of the other members, I would ask them to extend the same courtesy to me and to refrain from commenting while I am speaking.

Supply  It seems to be challenging the very make-up of Canada's approach to language rights and, indeed, one of the founding principles of this nation. The main purpose of the Official Languages Act, to make it clear to members opposite, is to guarantee the equality of status of French and English Canadians in the use of the two official languages in federal institutions. The act rests on the principle of institutional bilingualism, the principle that federal institutions must be able to serve Canadians and to communicate with them in the official language of the choice of the citizen.

Petitions  Mr. Speaker, on a point of order. The Standing Orders make it very clear that if a member does not agree with the substance of a petition, the member does not have to table it. We are either for or against a petition. In the latter case, we either return the petitions or ask a member who agrees with the content to table them.