Mr. Speaker:

I have the honour to inform the House that a message has been received from the Senate informing this House that the Senate has divided Bill C-103 into two Bills as Bill C-103 Part 1, an Act to increase opportunity for economic development in Atlantic Canada, to establish the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency and to make consequential and related amendments to other Acts, and Bill C-103 Part 2, an Act to establish the Enterprise Cape Breton Corporation and to make consequential and related amendments to other Acts and ...

... and that it has passed Bill C-103, Part I, without amendments.

For the benefit of Hon. Members, copies of the two parts of Bill C-103 are available at the table.

Hon. Doug Lewis (Minister of State and Minister of State (Treasury Board)):

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I wish to address a brief point of order to the Message from the Senate. I advise the House that the Government, and I think every Member in the House, should take exception to the proceedings in the other place which are reflected in the message you just read.

First, the message which you have just put before us contains not the Bill that this House voted to send to the Senate but two Bills by virtue of the fact that the Senate split the Bill. To me, that means that there are two Bills originating in the Senate rather than one Bill being sent to the Senate and a reply being sent back addressing the one Bill.

There are financial provisions in the Bill that was sent to the Senate. I suggest that it is unconstitutional for the Senate to send Bills to us which have financial implications.

1 suggest that the Royal recommendation which was contained in the original Bill sent to the Senate has been breached by the Senate majority. I also suggest that the

Senate amendment to split the Bill, by not having an accompanying recommendation which is a constitutional impossibility, breaches our Standing Order 87 which states that the Commons alone can grant aids and supplies, not the Senate.

I ask you, Mr. Speaker, in your position as our Speaker, to indicate in a ruling, if you will, your position on this matter. It is no longer hypothetical, it is very real. If you would do so, the minute you do so, we will then be guided by your wisdom and will be in a position to take action in the House.

That is the procedural argument. I cannot let this go without saying that I feel that it is not beneficial to Atlantic Canada to have the Senate interfering in this way. The Western Diversification Agency deals with four provinces and it was passed by the Senate as one piece of legislation. This piece of legislation deals with the Atlantic Provinces and the Senate is excluding one particular area. For that reason, we are unable to go ahead with the legislation.

I think that what the Senate has done is an affront to Atlantic Canada. It is an affront to the House of Commons. I think it is an affront to every taxpayer in Canada. I ask you, Sir, to rule on this as soon as you can.

Mr. Russell MacLellan (Cape Breton-The Sydneys):

Mr. Speaker, the affront to which the Deputy House Leader referred has been made by the Government, not by the Senate. This Government tried to attach to a Bill that was to be primarily for the financing of important regional development projects in Atlantic Canada a portion that had absolutely nothing to do with the development of the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency. The Bill for the development of the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency is for the development of the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency and should not involve any other subject. Yet the Government put in a completely separate section to do away with the industrial development division of the Cape Breton Development Corporation. That was completely separate from what it wanted to achieve with the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency.

This is an affront to Atlantic Canadians. The Government chose to put a rider on the financing of the projects that Atlantic Canada deserves. It said that if Atlantic Canada wants this Bill, then it has to do away with the development division of the corporation. That is not fair. The people of Atlantic Canada cannot accept that rider because it is devastating to an area that needs assistance most of all.

July 8, 1988

Message from the Senate

The Government said that if the development division is done away with another agency will pick up the slack. That is not the case. Yet the Government maintains this Bill should not be separated. The Bill has to be separated because it is two separate subjects. It is not a question of new financing for the development division provisions at all. We are doing away with that division. The Government is not providing something new, it is doing away with it.

Mr. Boyer:

It has already been passed as a single Bill in this House.

Mr. Speaker:

I am going to ask the Hon. Member to complete his remarks in a moment, but I want to make it very clear to Hon. Members and the watching public what I have been asked to do here. A Bill has gone from this place to the Senate. The Senate, for whatever reason, and it is not my place to comment on that, certainly not at the moment anyway, has decided to split that Bill. That, I understand, is historically speaking unusual to say the least. What I need to know from Hon. Members is their argument as to whether it is procedurally appropriate for the Senate to do so. I have been asked by the Government to comment on whether or not it is procedurally appropriate to accept a split Bill back from the Senate, and I would like some argument directed to those two points.

I am not saying at the moment I have any particular opinion on it one way or another except to say this is certainly something unusual. The Hon. Member for Cape Breton-The Sydneys could perhaps help the Speaker.

Mr. MacLellan:

Mr. Speaker, it is perfectly acceptable for the Senate to split this Bill.

Oh, oh!

Mr. MacLellan:

What the Senate is saying is that it wants the people of Atlantic Canada to have the benefit of the provisions governing ACOA.

Mr. Boyer:

What is your procedural argument in support of your position?

Mr. MacLellan:

Mr. Speaker, if we are going to have the nincompoops howling, I am not going to be able to make the point that you want made.

Mr. Speaker:

Without necessarily accepting the description of the Hon. Member, I will ask other Hon. Members to be quiet and hear the Hon. Member out.

It seems to me that because the Bill originated in this place, the question of whether it should be accepted back as split by some other place is the issue I have to face. The substantive arguments, which I know are very important to Hon. Members on both sides, are not helping the Chair very much.

Mr. MacLellan:

Mr. Speaker, I think essentially the principal point here is that there is nothing in this Bill which

has come back to the House that was not in it when it was passed by the House initially. Nothing.

Mr. Boyer:

Then why split it?

Mr. MacLellan:

The Senate wanted to send back the provisions relating to the title of the Bill. The benefit intended under the Bill has not been changed in any sense. All the Senate has done is delete the portions related to the Cape Breton Development Corporation which have absolutely nothing to do with the spirit of ACOA. Nothing whatsoever. It was a complete red herring. It was an attempt by the Government to try and piggyback the destruction of the development division of the corporation onto this Bill, believing that Atlantic Canada wants regional development assistance so much that they would accept the devastation of the corporation as well. It was a catch-22 situation that the Government tried to perpetrate on the people of Atlantic Canada.

The Senate is saying that we should call it what it is, a Bill for the development of ACOA, nothing more. The provisions governing the spirit of the Bill have not been violated. All that has been taken away is the clandestine aspect of the Government's intention to devastate the Cape Breton Development Corporation.

Mr. Rod Murphy (Churchill):

Mr. Speaker, I agree with the sentiment of the Hon. Member for Cape Breton-The Sydneys (Mr. MacLellan) with respect to what the Senate is trying to do and the concerns that the people of Cape Breton have over the Government's ill-conceived move. Having said that, 1 must state that we cannot accept any move by the Senate to fundamentally alter legislation in a procedural way which destroys the ability of this House of Commons to make decisions.

Hear, hear!

Mr. Murphy:

Despite the applause from across the way I am going to continue.

If the Senate is allowed to do this, we could be stuck with legislation in the future where the Senate has decided to split it into 15 or 20 or 30 different pieces in a way that would completely hamstring the House of Commons and democracy. I suggest to the Speaker that the Government should just move back to its original Bill, have the motion come back to the House, and then send it back to the Senate again.

Mr. Pat Nowlan (Annapolis Valley-Hants):

Mr. Speaker, 1 could not agree more with my hon. friend from Churchill (Mr. Murphy). I am absolutely amazed my hon. friend from Cape Breton-The Sydneys (Mr. MacLellan) whose geographical base has obviously blinded him to any sense of reason. The House of Commons makes the laws. We democratically decide to put things in Bills or remove things from Bills. We had Bills here yesterday which did not find favour with all Members. This is the House of Commons and these things are done here. We do not go to the place down the hall

July 8, 1988

and hide behind the skirts of the Senator from "Lake Anno", or whatever you call that lake up there in Cape Breton. I am just absolutely shocked as a Nova Scotian that this could happen. I was hoping that the ACOA legislation would be in place before the bureaucracy and administration has to close down and thus put in jeopardy many of the applications which will provide jobs in Atlantic Canada. That is what will happen if the Senate keeps playing tic-tac-toe with Bills from this House, especially this Bill.

I have the highest respect for my hon. friend from Cape Breton personally, but for him to stand here on a Friday morning and suggest that the Senate can do anything with the Bills that this democratically elected place sends it and then hide behind the skirts of the Leader of the Liberal majority, the Senator from "Lake Anno", was too much. I could not believe my ears.

Obviously the Hon. Member for Churchill is completely correct. We do not accept something back from the Senate in a half-baked way. Let MacEachen play his little games. His myopia over Devco has put in jeopardy the whole ACOA program for Atlantic Canada and even he should not be able to get away with it and we should not condone it for one more minute.

Hear, hear!