June 29, 1971

PUBLIC WORKS

PETITION FOR PERMANENT CROSSING ACROSS PETIT PASSAGE, BAY OF FUNDY

IND

Lucien Lamoureux (Speaker of the House of Commons)

Independent

Mr. Speaker:

I have the honour to inform the House that the Clerk of the House has laid upon the table the sixth report of the Clerk of Petitions stating that he has examined the petition of residents of the South Western area of the province of Nova Scotia with respect to the provision of public passage from Tiverton to East Ferry across the Petit Passage, presented on Monday, June 28, 1971, and finds that it meets the requirements of the Standing Orders as to form.

Topic:   PUBLIC WORKS
Subtopic:   PETITION FOR PERMANENT CROSSING ACROSS PETIT PASSAGE, BAY OF FUNDY
Permalink

PRIVILEGE

MR. HALES-OPPORTUNITIES FOR YOUTH PROGRAM-MISREPRESENTATION CONCERNING PROJECTS IN RIDING

PC

Alfred Dryden Hales

Progressive Conservative

Mr. A. D. Hales (Wellington):

Mr. Speaker, I take this opportunity to rise on a question of privilege. My point of privilege is that I, like many other Members of Parliament, agreed to deliver cheques to the recipients of approved Opportunities for Youth programs in my riding on the basis, first, of the description of the projects as outlined by the Department of the Secretary of State, and also to familiarize myself with the aims and objectives of the programs and, second, to have the opportunity of meeting the people in charge of the programs and possibly lending some assistance.

My point of privilege is that the projects were misrepresented in the descriptions provided as verified by my own investigation. Although the cheques were to cover two projects, I was informed they were indeed for one and the same project. The programs were not checked out by personal inspection by the department, nor to the best of my knowledge was any local organization consulted as to the project's worthiness.

To the best of my knowledge the individuals to whom the cheques were made payable could not be identified as bona fide Canadian university students. As a matter of fact, according to reliable information supplied to me, for which I can obtain proof, one was a United States citizen and listed as a draft dodger.

Your Honour, I am sure, will realize that the two cheques in my possession to the amount of $5,325, just half the total contribution of $10,650, should not have been delivered under the misrepresentation that existed and also because of the lack of investigation of the projects. In view of the above I am therefore returning

the cheques to the Secretary of State (Mr. Pelletier) who is responsible for the Opportunities for Youth program.

My point of privilege is the following: First, I was misinformed by the department. Second, I accepted and the department agreed to have me deliver two cheques which covered only one project, not two as described. Third, I as a Member of Parliament was given a cheque to deliver made payable to an American draft dodger, not made payable to a Canadian citizen as was intended by the program.

Upon Your Honour ruling that there is a prima facie breach of privilege or misrepresentation I shall move, seconded by the hon. member for Lambton-Kent (Mr. McCutcheon), that the matter be referred to the Standing Committee on Privileges and Elections.

Topic:   PRIVILEGE
Subtopic:   MR. HALES-OPPORTUNITIES FOR YOUTH PROGRAM-MISREPRESENTATION CONCERNING PROJECTS IN RIDING
Permalink
IND

Lucien Lamoureux (Speaker of the House of Commons)

Independent

Mr. Speaker:

The hon. member has given the Chair notice of his intention to raise this matter. Of course the notice did not include all the details he has outlined now for the information of the Chair and the House.

Hon. members are familiar with my views as to parliamentary privilege. They are somewhat restrictive. In this regard I like to found my opinion on the tradition and practice in the British house where parliamentary privilege is seldom invoked to redress grievances of hon. members. I think this is a good practice.

I really think that hon. members sometimes have legitimate grievances or in any event grievances, without qualifying the word, which should be brought to the attention of the House and perhaps studied and considered by appropriate committees without having the matter considered under the guise of breach of parliamentary privilege. I think the matter raised by the hon. member is serious, should concern the hon. member, as it rightly does, and should be of concern to all of us in this chamber. However, I doubt very much whether this kind of grievance should be referred to the Standing Committee on Privileges and Elections where breaches of parliamentary privileges are normally sent. My thought would be that the hon. member has a legitimate complaint or grievance and there should be some way whereby the matter can be discussed and considered before one of the committees of the House in due course. I bring to the attention of hon. members that we are currently engaged in the budget debate and this might provide an opportunity for hon. members to consider the matter further and to indicate what redress they think there should be to alleviate the difficulties to which the hon. member has referred.

The hon. member has referred to both misrepresentation and breach of privilege. It has to be one or the other.

June 29, 1971

Business of the House

I do not think the hon. member can suggest that a matter of misrepresentation should be sent to the Standing Committee on Privileges and Elections. It is either a breach of parliamentary privilege or it is not, and in my understanding and interpretation of parliamentary privilege I do not think that the matter can be studied by the House or by one of its committees under this heading.

Topic:   PRIVILEGE
Subtopic:   MR. HALES-OPPORTUNITIES FOR YOUTH PROGRAM-MISREPRESENTATION CONCERNING PROJECTS IN RIDING
Permalink

ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS

EXTERNAL AFFAIRS AND NATIONAL DEFENCE


Fourth report of Standing Committee on External Affairs and National Defence-Mr. Lachance. [Editor's Note: For text of above report, see today's Votes and Proceedings.]


LIB

Gaston Clermont

Liberal

Mr. Gaston Clermont (Gatineau):

Mr. Speaker, I wish to make a correction in Hansard of June 25.

Topic:   ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
Subtopic:   EXTERNAL AFFAIRS AND NATIONAL DEFENCE
Permalink
IND

Lucien Lamoureux (Speaker of the House of Commons)

Independent

Mr. Speaker:

Order. I regret having to interrupt the hon. member, but this correction should be made on the order for motions and not when reports of committees are presented. We will come back to the matter in a moment.

Topic:   ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
Subtopic:   EXTERNAL AFFAIRS AND NATIONAL DEFENCE
Permalink

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

LIB

Allan Joseph MacEachen (President of the Privy Council; Leader of the Government in the House of Commons; Liberal Party House Leader)

Liberal

Mr. MacEachen;

Mr. Speaker, with respect to the business of the House to be dealt with this evening, it may be recalled that last night I called Bill C-176 as the first item of government business. As a result of discussions held since and because of the desire to complete Bill C-243, an act to amend the Judges Act, I am now proposing that we deal with Bill C-243 at eight o'clock on the understanding that all decisions relating to the disposition of that bill will be completed not later than nine o'clock and that that understanding be now embedded in a House order so that we will not have any difficulties later this day.

Topic:   BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE
Permalink
PC

Gerald William Baldwin (Official Opposition House Leader; Progressive Conservative Party House Leader)

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Baldwin:

Mr. Speaker, we are always prepared to help the government out when it gets into difficulties and needs assistance.

Topic:   BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE
Permalink
NDP

William Arnold Peters

New Democratic Party

Mr. Peters:

Mr. Speaker, I would like to make one inquiry. Does the House leader intend to have a vote on completion of discussion of Bill C-243?

Topic:   BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE
Permalink
LIB

Allan Joseph MacEachen (President of the Privy Council; Leader of the Government in the House of Commons; Liberal Party House Leader)

Liberal

Mr. MacEachen:

Mr. Speaker, my suggestion is that all decisions, including a vote if required, be completed by nine o'clock. If there is a vote we ought to get it going before nine o'clock.

Topic:   BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE
Permalink
NDP

William Arnold Peters

New Democratic Party

Mr. Peters:

Mr. Speaker, I have an amendment to that bill, and the minister has a number of amendments. I would be agreeable to end the discussion at nine o'clock,

but I think there may be votes on a number of amendments.

Topic:   BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE
Permalink
IND

Lucien Lamoureux (Speaker of the House of Commons)

Independent

Mr. Speaker:

There appears to be some difficulty as to how this decision should be embedded. My impression is that it might be difficult to make a decision of the House to complete the discussion and the votes by nine o'clock. In fact this would be extremely difficult and in practice I really do not see how it could be done. My own thought is that we should adopt the suggestion made by the hon. member for Timiskaming that any votes be called at nine o'clock. This is the only suggestion I can make to the House. Otherwise I do not see how we could make an order of the House, but of course I am in the hands of hon. members.

Topic:   BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE
Permalink
LIB

Allan Joseph MacEachen (President of the Privy Council; Leader of the Government in the House of Commons; Liberal Party House Leader)

Liberal

Mr. MacEachen:

Mr. Speaker, I am afraid I will have to have further consultations in order to resolve this difficulty.

Topic:   BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE
Permalink

June 29, 1971