February 9, 1976

PC

Heath Nelson Macquarrie

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Heath Macquarrie (Hillsborough):

Mr. Speaker, under the provisions of Standing Order 43, I wish to move a motion on a matter of urgent and pressing necessity. In fairness to hon. members, I should indicate that I have taken the advice of and consulted with my hon. friend, the Secretary of State for External Affairs (Mr. MacEachen). I move, seconded by the hon. member for Esquimalt-Saanich (Mr. Munro):

That this House views with concern and anxiety the continuation of armed conflict in Angola and deplores the military involvement of foreign powers in that country. Further, that this House urges the withdrawal from Angola of all foreign combatants and military technicians engaged in the warfare, calls for the cessation of arms shipments to all fighting forces and urges the three major Angola political groups-the MPLA, FNLA and UNITA to desist from armed combat and proceed toward a mutually agreed-upon peace settlement. Finally, that the government be requested to convey these sentiments of this House to the Secretary General of the United Nations.

Topic:   EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
Subtopic:   MOTION URGING WITHDRAWAL OF FOREIGN FORCES AND POLITICAL SETTLEMENT IN ANGOLA-MOTION UNDER S.O. 43
Permalink
LIB

James Alexander Jerome (Speaker of the House of Commons)

Liberal

Mr. Speaker:

In accordance with the terms of Standing Order 43, such a motion cannot be presented without the unanimous consent of the House. Is there unanimous consent?

Topic:   EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
Subtopic:   MOTION URGING WITHDRAWAL OF FOREIGN FORCES AND POLITICAL SETTLEMENT IN ANGOLA-MOTION UNDER S.O. 43
Permalink
?

Some hon. Members:

Agreed.

Topic:   EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
Subtopic:   MOTION URGING WITHDRAWAL OF FOREIGN FORCES AND POLITICAL SETTLEMENT IN ANGOLA-MOTION UNDER S.O. 43
Permalink
LIB

James Alexander Jerome (Speaker of the House of Commons)

Liberal

Mr. Speaker:

The hon. member for Hillsborough (Mr. Macquarrie), seconded by the hon. member for Esquimalt-Saanich (Mr. Munro) moves:

That this House views with concern and anxiety the continuation of armed conflict in Angola and deplores the military involvement of foreign powers in that country. Further, that this House urges the withdrawal from Angola of all foreign combatants and military technicians engaged in the warfare, calls for the cessation of arms shipments to all fighting forces and urges the three major Angola political groups-the MPLA, FNLA, and UNITA to desist from armed combat and proceed toward a mutually agreed-upon peace settlement. Finally that the government be requested to convey these sentiments of this House to the Secretary General of the United Nations.

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the said motion?

Topic:   EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
Subtopic:   MOTION URGING WITHDRAWAL OF FOREIGN FORCES AND POLITICAL SETTLEMENT IN ANGOLA-MOTION UNDER S.O. 43
Permalink
?

Some hon. Members:

Agreed.

Topic:   EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
Subtopic:   MOTION URGING WITHDRAWAL OF FOREIGN FORCES AND POLITICAL SETTLEMENT IN ANGOLA-MOTION UNDER S.O. 43
Permalink

Motion agreed to.


PRESENCE IN GALLERY OF DELEGATION FROM MEXICAN CONGRESS

LIB

James Alexander Jerome (Speaker of the House of Commons)

Liberal

Mr. Speaker:

Before proceeding with the calling of oral questions today, I know that all hon. members will want to join with me in calling attention to the presence in our gallery of a very distinguished delegation that is visiting us and join with me in extending the warmest possible welcome in reciprocation of the welcome they extended to a Canadian delegation in their country approximately one year ago. I refer to a delegation from the Mexican congress headed by the very distinguished leader, Dr. Olivares.

Topic:   PRESENCE IN GALLERY OF DELEGATION FROM MEXICAN CONGRESS
Permalink
?

Some hon. Members:

Hear, hear!

Topic:   PRESENCE IN GALLERY OF DELEGATION FROM MEXICAN CONGRESS
Permalink
LIB

James Alexander Jerome (Speaker of the House of Commons)

Liberal

Mr. Speaker:

The co-leader of the Mexican delegation is Jimenez Morales.

Topic:   PRESENCE IN GALLERY OF DELEGATION FROM MEXICAN CONGRESS
Permalink
?

Some hon. Members:

Hear, hear!

Topic:   PRESENCE IN GALLERY OF DELEGATION FROM MEXICAN CONGRESS
Permalink

ORAL QUESTION PERIOD

LABOUR CONDITIONS

PC

Robert Lorne Stanfield (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Progressive Conservative

Hon. Robert L. Stanfield (Leader of the Opposition):

Mr. Speaker, in the absence of the Minister of Labour, I will direct my question to the Acting Prime Minister who, I am sure, will be fully familiar with the problems involved in view of their importance. Apparently the Minister of Labour met last Thursday with the negotiators involved in the railway dispute and apparently the negotiations have broken down. Can the Acting Prime Minister tell the House what action the government is going to take? In particular, would he tell us whether the government has clarified its position as to what constitutes the maximum permissible offer under the guidelines?

Topic:   ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
Subtopic:   LABOUR CONDITIONS
Sub-subtopic:   GOVERNMENT ACTION TO AVERT THREATENED STRIKE OF RAILWAY EMPLOYEES
Permalink
LIB

Bryce Stuart Mackasey (Postmaster General)

Liberal

Hon. Bryce Mackasey (Acting Minister of Labour):

Perhaps I might reply to that question, in the absence of the Minister of Labour. I did have an opportunity to discuss this very point with the minister and he is at the moment considering whether to name an industrial commissioner or a conciliation board. I believe he will come to a firm conclusion in the course of the next few days.

Topic:   ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
Subtopic:   LABOUR CONDITIONS
Sub-subtopic:   GOVERNMENT ACTION TO AVERT THREATENED STRIKE OF RAILWAY EMPLOYEES
Permalink

THREATENED STRIKE OF RAILWAY EMPLOYEES-POSSIBLE CONSULTATION WITH ANTI-INFLATION BOARD ON PERMISSIBLE WAGE INCREASE

PC

Robert Lorne Stanfield (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Progressive Conservative

Hon. Robert L. Stanfield (Leader of the Opposition):

supplementary relating to the second part of my question, which becomes even more pertinent in view of the complaint by the commissioner dealing with an industrial inquiry in British Columbia into the supermarket dispute, having to do with the ambiguity of the guidelines which causes confusion and delay in analyzing the dispute. May I ask the Acting Minister of Labour whether the government proposes to clarify the parameters of the negotiations in order to avoid serious industrial disputes unnecessarily paralyzing the economy of the country.

Topic:   ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
Subtopic:   THREATENED STRIKE OF RAILWAY EMPLOYEES-POSSIBLE CONSULTATION WITH ANTI-INFLATION BOARD ON PERMISSIBLE WAGE INCREASE
Permalink
LIB

Bryce Stuart Mackasey (Postmaster General)

Liberal

Hon. Bryce Mackasey (Acting Minister of Labour):

This is a valid question, Mr. Speaker. I would imagine this is the first thing an industrial commissioner would want to do in his own capacity. I do not believe we should encourage the government to dictate to the Anti-Inflation Board or ask the Anti-Inflation Board to clarify certain things which are more ambiguous to some provincial commissioners than to others. But I do believe that an industrial inquiry commission, or chairman of the board, once it is set

February 9, 1976

up, would want these areas to be clarified before negotiations continued.

Topic:   ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
Subtopic:   THREATENED STRIKE OF RAILWAY EMPLOYEES-POSSIBLE CONSULTATION WITH ANTI-INFLATION BOARD ON PERMISSIBLE WAGE INCREASE
Permalink

THREATENED STRIKE OF RAILWAY EMPLOYEES- GOVERNMENT POSITION ON ESSENTIALITY OF RAIL SERVICE

PC

Robert Lorne Stanfield (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Progressive Conservative

Hon. Robert L. Stanfield (Leader of the Opposition):

take it from what the Acting Minister of Labour says that, as the government sees it, the Anti-Inflation Board would respond to such an inquiry from the industrial commissioner and would indicate to him the parameters within which he could work. Has the government indicated to the negotiators in the dispute what the position of the government is with regard to the possibility of a railway dispute leading to a strike? Has the government taken a position with regard to the essentiality of rail service and, if so, has it indicated that position to those involved in this dispute?

Topic:   ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
Subtopic:   THREATENED STRIKE OF RAILWAY EMPLOYEES- GOVERNMENT POSITION ON ESSENTIALITY OF RAIL SERVICE
Permalink

February 9, 1976