Mr. Mackasey:

What 1 do know is that, Mr. Chairman, you are in a very difficult position as are all Hon. Members of the House. You have before you a point of order raised by the Hon. Member for Beauharnois-Salaberry, which alleges in general terms that some Members of the House entered after the vote had begun. Of course I would remind the House that it was not necessarily to vote, their coming into the House. I do not agree that the solution to the problem is for a notice of motion to be presented and for Members to rescind the vote which took place earlier. That would make a mockery of the House and end forevermore the effectiveness of this place. We have fought for too many decades to eliminate that type of challenge to the Speaker. However, I am afraid there is no way around your dilemma, Mr. Chairman. Your dilemma cannot be put on the shoulders of Members of the House. Your dilemma is that at six o'clock you must pass judgment on a point of order. It will then be up to the House to agree or disagree with your ruling.

Mr. Mackasey:

Mr. Chairman, I will be very brief and state at the outset that I was not in the House at the time of the vote. I do not know whether 1, 10, 20 or 40 Members opposite entered the House, nor do I know whether 1, 10, 20 or 40 Liberals entered the House at the inappropriate moment.

Mr. Mackasey:

Madam Speaker, you would agree that your statement was quite logically lengthy, and legalistic, as it should be, and very important to all Members. I specifically rose from my seat a week ago-this is not debate-and at that time pointed out what I thought to be the allegations which, to me, were libellous. I specified them and Your Honour read them out. If any Hon. Members of the House think that I am guilty of anything beyond those two points which have been raised, they are perfectly free to rise in the House and refer any allegations which may occur to them, beyond those set out in the motion, to the Standing Committee on Privileges and Elections. I welcome them, if Hon. Members are prepared to do so. It is an entirely different issue. I want that motion to be read before the House today, as Your Honour has suggested is my right.

I repeat that this in no way prevents any Hon. Member opposite who wants to widen the matter from rising tomorrow to say anything which bothers them about the Hon. Member for Lincoln.

Hon. Bryce Mackasey (Lincoln):

Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the Hon. Member for Don Valley East (Mr. Smith):

March 22, 1983

That the allegations in the Montreal Gazette on March 10, March 11 and March 12 of 1983 that the Hon. Member for Lincoln owned 109609 Company Canada Limited and, through that company, while being a Member of the House of Commons, was a paid lobbyist, be referred to the Standing Committee on Privileges and Elections.

Hon. Bryce Mackasey (Lincoln):

Madam Speaker, in a series of articles beginning last Thursday in the Montreal Gazette, it was repeatedly stated that I owned a numbered company, 109609 Canada Limited, and that I was a paid lobbyist. A Member who is a paid lobbyist, soliciting the Government, is breaking the law and has no right to be sitting in the House of Commons.

I have, of course, and I say this with great satisfaction, spent most of my 20 years in public life lobbying. I have lobbied for the elderly, for the underprivileged and for the unemployed. I have lobbied for businessmen, for companies and for industries from one end of Canada to the other, and so has every Member of the House of Commons. Lobbying for constituents and for other Canadians is very certainly not against the law. It is, in fact, a vital part of the responsibility we have as Members.

But, of course, that is not the issue before the House. That is not the accusation. That, of course, is not why I am standing here at this moment. I am standing here because I have been accused of being a paid lobbyist. If I were a paid lobbyist, I would be in violation of the Senate and House of Commons Act. In short, Madam Speaker, I would be a lawbreaker who has no right to be sitting in this House. That is the accusation, and I wish to deal with it right here and now.

Madam Speaker, do I own or have I ever owned this famous numbered company, 109609? My answer is categorical, and my answer is no.

Did I ever directly or indirectly own any share of 109609? My answer is categorical, and my answer is no.

Madam Speaker, was I ever paid or promised payment to lobby for 109609 or for any other company or companies associated with it? My answer is categorical, and my answer is no.

Finally, did I promise, in exchange for payment, direct or indirect, to lobby at some future time for 109609, for Les Ateliers d'usinage Hall Ltee., or for any other company or companies associated with it? My answer is categorical, and my answer is no.

Did I ever agree to be financially rewarded, directly or indirectly, for lobbying on behalf of a numbered company, 109609 Canada Limited, namely, Les Ateliers d'usinage Hall Ltee, or any company associated with it? The answer is no, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker, these false and slanderous accusations in the Montreal Gazette, Quebec's only English daily, have humiliated my family, tarnished my reputation and, if left unchallenged, could even blemish the reputation of this institution and those who serve in it; for as I noted just two

weeks ago in debate, the reputation of the House reflects the individual and collective integrity of its Members.

The privileges of this House, of its Members, are privileges which have been accumulated through the centuries, privileges which we guard jealously in this House. One of those privileges which is mine as a Member is to ask the House, my fellow colleagues from all Parties, to accept my word as an honourable gentleman. That is a privilege which is mine, but it is a privilege which I do not intend to abuse or hide behind. I have too much respect for this institution to abuse its privileges.

To remove the blemish on myself and on my family, and any possible reflection on this institution which I respect so much, which dishonesty on my part could cause, I wish to move the following motion:

That the allegations in the Montreal Gazette on March 10, March 11 and March 12 of 1983 that the Hon. Member for Lincoln owned 109609 Company Canada Limited and, through that company, while being a Member of the House of Commons, was a paid lobbyist, be referred to the Standing Committee on Privileges and Elections as soon as possible.