September 22, 1988

NDP

Leslie Gordon Benjamin

New Democratic Party

Mr. Benjamin:

You have a lot of nerve asking for unanimous consent after what you did today.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   CANADA CHILD CARE ACT
Sub-subtopic:   ALLOCATION OF TIME TO CONSIDER THIRD READING STAGE OF BILL C-144
Permalink
PC

John Allen Fraser (Speaker of the House of Commons)

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Speaker:

The Hon. Member for Yorkton-Melville is seeking the floor on debate.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   CANADA CHILD CARE ACT
Sub-subtopic:   ALLOCATION OF TIME TO CONSIDER THIRD READING STAGE OF BILL C-144
Permalink
NDP

Lorne Edmund Nystrom (N.D.P. Deputy House Leader)

New Democratic Party

Mr. Lome Nystrom (Yorkton-Melville):

Mr. Speaker, 1 rise to complete my remarks on time allocation. Before we broke for Question Period, I was saying that it was very strange to see the Conservative Party across the way bring in time allocation on the child care Bill after only one speaker from each Party has spoken in the House. I have not seen it happen before where time allocation was brought in so quickly by the government Party. I see across the way many long time Members of Parliament who were here in the days of the Trudeau Government when time and again they complained about time allocation and closure being brought in by that Government.

There are more occasions now when time allocation is brought in than there were in the previous five or 10 years. There are more occasions when time allocation is used than we had in the days when members of the Conservative Party complained. I see the Hon. Member for Burlington (Mr. Kempling) hiding his head behind the newspaper in shame because of what his Government is doing.

I have here a copy of a speech made by the Minister for International Trade (Mr. Crosbie) on June 9, 1981, when he complained about the Liberal Government bringing in time allocation. The Minister of Justice (Mr. Hnatyshyn) is very embarrassed and shouting from his seat.

1 wish to quote something stated by the Minister for International Trade when time allocation was brought in by a Liberal Government. He said:

The same little group comes in here on every closure motion. The same little group of parliamentary eunuchs, the same group of parliamentary assassins-the House Leader, the assistant House leader, the hon. member for Ottawa Centre (Mr. Evans), the Minister of State for Finance (Mr. Bussieres)-are in here all the time, assassinating this House and removing the good from the House. That is why 1 call them the parliamentary eunuchs. The good has already been removed from them.

September 22, 1988

Time Allocation

The Hon. Member was talking about parliamentary eunuchs in the Liberal Party. I do not disagree with him. However, now that the Conservative Party is in power it is doing exactly the same thing.

Back in 1981 the Minister for International Trade further stated:

Where are all the defenders of the people on the other side of the House? They are going to come out of their trough in a few minutes. They will hear the bell and will have to break away from whatever trough they have their noses in at the moment. They will have to come into this House and say "Oink, oink". They will have to say "Aye, aye". They will have to say "Yes" to the stampeding of Parliament, to rushing this bill through the House. They will have to say "Yes" to the gutting of Parliament. They will have to do the dirty work that the parliamentary assistants, assassins and eunuchs have asked them to do.

Now the Minister for International Trade is on the government side of the House. What is he doing? He is bringing in time allocation, closure, and asking his mindless backbenchers, who are now the new parliamentary eunuchs, to get up and approve what he wants and approve what the Prime Minister wants in terms of cutting off debate on the child care legislation before the House.

I ask my friends across the way, and the Hon. Member for Burlington who is hanging his head in shame as he reads the newspaper, to get up on their hind legs and speak out in favour of parliamentary democracy. I say to my friend, the Hon. Member for Parry Sound-Muskoka (Mr. Darling), who has been here for many years, that he must rise and say the same thing now that he is in government as he said when he was in opposition, that Parliament should not be throttled, that parliamentary debate must continue, and that the people of Canada must have their say.

For years I remember John Diefenbaker sitting in the corner of the House to the left of the Speaker and rising and saying time and again that the Governments of the day were not allowing a full and complete debate, and saying that there had to be full parliamentary participation.

We have a Bill before the House today where there has only been one speaker per Party at third reading, and down comes the guillotine; a Bill before the House today where there were only two days of hearings in the City of Ottawa by the parliamentary committee that spent hundreds of thousands of dollars, and down came the guillotine; a Bill before the House today where the Province of Saskatchewan wanted to present a position and it was not heard.

The Province of New Brunswick was not heard, the Province of Nova Scotia was not heard, the Province of Prince Edward Island was not heard, nor was the Yukon or the Northwest Territories. Those provinces were not heard because the parliamentary committee only met for two days before the Government brought in closure.

Where is democracy? I ask some of the Members opposite, who used to be rugged individuals, who used to stand up and speak for freedom of speech and ask that the democratic

process play a role, to speak now. It would be interesting to see if the Minister for International Trade was correct when he spoke in 1981 about Liberal Government back-benchers being parliamentary eunuchs afraid to get up and say their piece. He said they were parliamentary sheep who would say "bah bah" in the House of Commons as they voted in favour of the Government bringing in time allocation.

Where is the Minister of Justice? He used to pretend to be so indignant when he was on this side of the House and the Liberals brought in time allocation. Where is he now? He is a yes-man for the Prime Minister (Mr. Mulroney). How can he agree now to impose time allocation when the Province of Saskatchewan did not have its chance to present its position on child care before the parliamentary committee? How can he do that as a senior Saskatchewan Minister? I am really shocked that the Minister of Justice who at one time was progressive, another John Diefenbaker defending parliamentary freedom, freedom of speech and the dignity of this institution, would now sit back with the power which has gone to his head and watch as his Prime Minister rides roughshod over the wishes of the people of Canada.

It is with a great deal of sadness that I speak today as I watch my friends opposite. For instance, our good old friend from Parry Sound-Muskoka, who has been here a long time, is hiding behind his newspaper. His head is sort of bowed in embarrassment. He is turning a bit redder all the time. Why does that Member not get up and speak now and ask the Government to withdraw this time allocation motion? How can he justify one speaker per Party? How can he justify only one day of debate on third reading of a very important Bill? There were over 40 witnesses at the committee and every single one was in opposition to this Bill.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   CANADA CHILD CARE ACT
Sub-subtopic:   ALLOCATION OF TIME TO CONSIDER THIRD READING STAGE OF BILL C-144
Permalink
PC

William James Kempling (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Works)

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Kempling:

All arranged by the NDP.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   CANADA CHILD CARE ACT
Sub-subtopic:   ALLOCATION OF TIME TO CONSIDER THIRD READING STAGE OF BILL C-144
Permalink
NDP

Lorne Edmund Nystrom (N.D.P. Deputy House Leader)

New Democratic Party

Mr. Nystrom:

Not all arranged by the NDP. The Government of Saskatchewan could not even present a brief, and it has a Conservative Premier, Grant Devine. The Provinces of New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Newfoundland, and Prince Edward Island could not present briefs and they are not NDP Governments. We cannot arrange for Brian Peckford or Grant Devine to say anything. 1 ask you, Mr. Speaker, to allow some of my friends across the way to rise, speak their mind, and prove they are consistent in government as well as in opposition when they spoke in favour of free speech in the Parliament of Canada.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   CANADA CHILD CARE ACT
Sub-subtopic:   ALLOCATION OF TIME TO CONSIDER THIRD READING STAGE OF BILL C-144
Permalink
PC

Ramon John Hnatyshyn (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada)

Progressive Conservative

Hon. Ray Hnatyshyn (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada):

Mr. Speaker, I will be very brief. This is one of the few times I have heard the Hon. Member for Yorkton-Melville (Mr. Nystrom) speak in the House recently. I simply want to assure him that I am here and that I am fully in support of this motion which was moved in view of the obstruction of the Opposition, particularly of the New Democratic Party.

September 22, 1988

I want the people of Canada to remember that here is a Party that likes to hold itself out as being the social conscience of Canada, but when we bring in the first child care program in the history of this country the NDP is out there blocking every move in order to thwart this program for the people of Canada. The New Democratic Party of Canada should be ashamed of itself. I think the next time the Member goes back to Saskatchewan-and we are all waiting for him to come back soon because we only see him there once in a while and it is a great pleasure for us-he will have some explaining to do. When he goes from Aylmer back to Saskatchewan I want him to tell the people of Saskatchewan why he, now the great defender of the Government of Saskatchewan, is blocking this legislation. Why is he standing shoulder to shoulder with the Senate of Canada, with Allan J. MacEachen, to block this legislation so that the people of Canada will be denied the largest input of money in the history of this country for child care? This program was brought forward by a Government which has a social conscience, which does not only speak about it, does not wear it on its shoulder, but in fact demonstrates it by actions.

I want the Hon. Member for Yorkton-Melville to go to Saskatchewan and explain to the people there why he has tried to block this particular legislation. I have listened to a lot of speeches in my day. When I was in opposition, 1 used to write my own speeches. I never had to resort to quoting speeches from, for instance, the Minister for International Trade (Mr. Crosbie). We were more creative when we were in opposition. This is a sham, a faqade. The New Democrats are reading our old speeches in support of their position. What has happened to the New Democratic Party? Where is the spirit of J. S. Wordsworth? He must be rolling in his grave because the New Democratic Party of Canada is blocking child care.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   CANADA CHILD CARE ACT
Sub-subtopic:   ALLOCATION OF TIME TO CONSIDER THIRD READING STAGE OF BILL C-144
Permalink
NDP

Lorne Edmund Nystrom (N.D.P. Deputy House Leader)

New Democratic Party

Mr. Nystrom:

Point of order.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   CANADA CHILD CARE ACT
Sub-subtopic:   ALLOCATION OF TIME TO CONSIDER THIRD READING STAGE OF BILL C-144
Permalink
PC

Ramon John Hnatyshyn (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada)

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Hnatyshyn:

1 will conclude my remarks to allow the Member to get up on a specious point of order.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   CANADA CHILD CARE ACT
Sub-subtopic:   ALLOCATION OF TIME TO CONSIDER THIRD READING STAGE OF BILL C-144
Permalink
NDP

Lorne Edmund Nystrom (N.D.P. Deputy House Leader)

New Democratic Party

Mr. Nystrom:

It is just very embarrassing, Mr. Speaker, as a fellow Saskatchewaner and university graduate, to point out that it is Mr. Woodsworth, not Mr. Wordsworth.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   CANADA CHILD CARE ACT
Sub-subtopic:   ALLOCATION OF TIME TO CONSIDER THIRD READING STAGE OF BILL C-144
Permalink
LIB

Herbert Eser (Herb) Gray (Official Opposition House Leader; Liberal Party House Leader)

Liberal

Hon. Herb Gray (Windsor West):

Mr. Speaker, Canadians watching this debate might well be asking themselves why the Government is so desperate to force through this time allocation motion after so little debate on what the Government is claiming is such an important measure. I think the answer is obvious. The answer is that in spite of the Government's claims that this is progressive, forward looking legislation, it is just the opposite. This legislation is grossly inadequate.

The Government says that this Bill will provide 200,000 more day care spaces, but in this country we need 1.6 million

Time Allocation

day care spaces. We not only need 1.6 million day care spaces, but we need them in centres which meet the same basic national standards right across this country so that every child who needs day care will not only receive it but it will be in up-to-date, modern centres with well trained, well paid staff. We need national standards and this Bill does not provide for national standards. In fact, this Bill will provide fewer spaces than if the Government had done nothing and just left the Canada Assistance Plan in place.

The Government does not want the Canadian people to find out the truth about its so-called national day care legislation. It is not a truly national piece of legislation. It does not provide day care for Canadian children who need it. Therefore, we must defeat this motion and go on to defeat this Government so that we can have truly accessible, affordable, universal day care for Canadians. We are not going to get it from this inadequate Conservative Government. Let us defeat this motion.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   CANADA CHILD CARE ACT
Sub-subtopic:   ALLOCATION OF TIME TO CONSIDER THIRD READING STAGE OF BILL C-144
Permalink
PC

Marcel Danis (Deputy Speaker and Chair of Committees of the Whole of the House of Commons)

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Deputy Speaker:

It being 3.27 p.m., the two hours provided for the consideration of a motion now before the House have expired under the provisions of Standing Order 117. Accordingly, under the terms of the Standing Order, it is my duty to interrupt the proceedings and put every question necessary to dispose of the motion. Mr. Lewis moved:

That, in relation to Bill C-144, an Act to authorize payments by Canada toward the provision of child care services, and to amend the Canada Assistance Plan in consequence thereof, not more than one further sitting day be allotted to the third reading stage of the Bill; and

That fifteen minutes before the expiry of the time provided for government business on the day allotted to the consideration of the third reading stage of the said Bill, any proceedings before the House shall be interrupted, if required, for the purpose of this Order and, in turn, every question necessary in order to dispose of the stage of the Bill then under consideration shall be put forthwith and successively, without further debate or amendment.

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

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   CANADA CHILD CARE ACT
Sub-subtopic:   ALLOCATION OF TIME TO CONSIDER THIRD READING STAGE OF BILL C-144
Permalink
?

Some Hon. Members:

Agreed.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   CANADA CHILD CARE ACT
Sub-subtopic:   ALLOCATION OF TIME TO CONSIDER THIRD READING STAGE OF BILL C-144
Permalink
?

Some Hon. Members:

No.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   CANADA CHILD CARE ACT
Sub-subtopic:   ALLOCATION OF TIME TO CONSIDER THIRD READING STAGE OF BILL C-144
Permalink
PC

Marcel Danis (Deputy Speaker and Chair of Committees of the Whole of the House of Commons)

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Deputy Speaker:

All those in favour of the motion please say yea.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   CANADA CHILD CARE ACT
Sub-subtopic:   ALLOCATION OF TIME TO CONSIDER THIRD READING STAGE OF BILL C-144
Permalink
?

Some Hon. Members:

Yea.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   CANADA CHILD CARE ACT
Sub-subtopic:   ALLOCATION OF TIME TO CONSIDER THIRD READING STAGE OF BILL C-144
Permalink
PC

Marcel Danis (Deputy Speaker and Chair of Committees of the Whole of the House of Commons)

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Deputy Speaker:

All those opposed will please say nay.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   CANADA CHILD CARE ACT
Sub-subtopic:   ALLOCATION OF TIME TO CONSIDER THIRD READING STAGE OF BILL C-144
Permalink
?

Some Hon. Members:

Nay.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   CANADA CHILD CARE ACT
Sub-subtopic:   ALLOCATION OF TIME TO CONSIDER THIRD READING STAGE OF BILL C-144
Permalink
PC

Marcel Danis (Deputy Speaker and Chair of Committees of the Whole of the House of Commons)

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Deputy Speaker:

In my opinion the nays have it.

And more than five Members having risen:

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   CANADA CHILD CARE ACT
Sub-subtopic:   ALLOCATION OF TIME TO CONSIDER THIRD READING STAGE OF BILL C-144
Permalink
PC

Marcel Danis (Deputy Speaker and Chair of Committees of the Whole of the House of Commons)

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Deputy Speaker:

Call in the Members.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   CANADA CHILD CARE ACT
Sub-subtopic:   ALLOCATION OF TIME TO CONSIDER THIRD READING STAGE OF BILL C-144
Permalink
PC

Carole Jacques

Progressive Conservative

Ms. Jacques:

Mr. Speaker, on a point of order. Our seating arrangements were changed recently, and I am not in the right seat. I therefore move for unanimous consent of the House to have my vote accepted.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   CANADA CHILD CARE ACT
Sub-subtopic:   ALLOCATION OF TIME TO CONSIDER THIRD READING STAGE OF BILL C-144
Permalink

September 22, 1988