DOCSLIB.ORG

Tuesday, November 16, 1999

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Tuesday, November 16, 1999 CANADA VOLUME 136 S NUMBER 021 S 2nd SESSION S 36th PARLIAMENT OFFICIAL REPORT (HANSARD) Tuesday, November 16, 1999 Speaker: The Honourable Gilbert Parent CONTENTS (Table of Contents appears at back of this issue.) OFFICIAL REPORT In the November 15, 1999 issue of Hansard the passage at line 5 from the bottom of the leftĆhand column at page 1252 should read: ‘‘the East Timorese. That is the real issue, not going on the kind of wild goose chases the— The Deputy Speaker: The hon. member for Brandon— Souris.’’ All parliamentary publications are available on the ``Parliamentary Internet Parlementaire'' at the following address: http://www.parl.gc.ca 1287 HOUSE OF COMMONS Tuesday, November 16, 1999 The House met at 10 a.m. certainly not a court of appeal for decisions taken by that body. Indeed, while questions can be addressed to the Board of Internal _______________ Economy representatives during question period, the House through the Parliament of Canada Act, has mandated the Board of Prayers Internal Economy as the final authority in these matters. _______________ [English] D I will however comment on the contention that the hon. mem- (1005) ber’s parliamentary privilege of freedom of speech has been [Translation] breached. Erskine May suggests on page 143 of the 20th edition that: PRIVILEGE It would be vain to attempt an enumeration of every act which might be construed into a contempt, the power to punish for contempt being in its nature discretionary. MEMBER FOR QUÉBEC EAST—SPEAKER’S RULING .It may be stated generally that any act or omission which obstructs or impedes either House of Parliament in the performance of its functions, or which obstructs or impedes any Member or officer of such House in the discharge of his duty, or which The Speaker: On Monday, November 1, 1999, the hon. member has a tendency, directly or indirectly, to produce such results may be treated as a for Québec East raised a question of privilege concerning the contempt, even though there is no precedent of the offence. breach of his privileges in relation to a civil suit launched against [Translation] him by a senator who accused him of distributing defamatory material. Any attempt to intimidate a member with a view to influencing I would like to take this opportunity to thank the hon. member his or her parliamentary conduct is a breach of privilege. Let me for raising the matter. I also want to acknowledge and thank the reiterate for all members that privilege is a fundamental principle Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, the opposi- of parliamentary law. tion House leader, the Progressive Conservative House leader, the [English] Bloc Quebecois House leader and whip of the Bloc Quebecois for their contributions on this matter. In the 22nd edition of Erskine May, page 65, parliamentary The hon. member indicated that a lawsuit was launched against privilege is defined as: him by a senator following the distribution to his constituents of a —the sum of the peculiar rights enjoyed by each House collectively as a constituent bulk mailing of 16 pages on the subject of the Senate. His question part of the High Court of Parliament, and by Members of each House individually, without which they could not discharge their functions, and which exceed those of privilege concerned the involvement of the Senate in the lawsuit possessed by other bodies or individuals. and the belief that this involvement was an aggressive act against the House of Commons and a breach of his privilege of freedom of [Translation] speech as an elected member of this House. He alleged that there had been direct or indirect involvement of the Senate in the lawsuit The position put forward by the hon. member for Québec East and that this constituted an attack on the authority and dignity of suggests that the senator has made an explicit effort to intimidate the House of Commons. him by limiting his freedom of speech. There are a number of things that I wish to deal with at this time. D (1010) First, I want to underline that I will make no comment on the civil case that is now before the courts since this would be inappropriate As all hon. members know, the privilege of freedom of speech is and not in keeping with our longstanding practices. Second, I do so fundamental that this House could not discharge its constitution- not believe that the Speaker should comment on decisions the al duties without it. May goes on to state in the 19th edition that, Board of Internal Economy may or may not have taken. I am sure ‘‘Freedom of Speech is a privilege essential to every free council or that all members will appreciate and understand that the House is legislature’’. 1288 COMMONS DEBATES November 16, 1999 Routine Proceedings All members must realize, however, that there are very real It is necessary for something to be said or done in the transaction of a limits to parliamentary privilege. Speaker Jerome, when speaking ‘‘proceeding in Parliament’’ before the Member has Parliamentary immunity. on the limits of parliamentary privilege in his ruling of February 20, 1975 added: Since the incident referred to concerns information contained in a document distributed by the hon. member to his constituents, it is The consequences of extending that definition of privilege to innumerable areas quite clear that this did not take place during proceedings in outside this chamber into which the work of an MP might carry him, and particularly parliament and is therefore not protected by privilege. to the great number of grievances he might encounter in the course of that work, would run contrary to the basic concept of privilege. In addition, with respect to the complaint the hon. member for Quebec East has against the senator, I must underline that the Let me stress that, in order to have a breach of the hon. member’s House has no authority over the Senate. In the 22nd edition of May, privileges, the matter complained of must be directly related to a on page 149 it is stated and I quote: proceeding in parliament. If a member is indeed subjected to Since the two Houses are wholly independent of each other, neither House can threats and intimidation, he or she is clearly hindered in the claim, much less exercise, any authority over a Member or officer of the other, and thus cannot punish any breach of privilege or contempt offered to it by such Member fulfilment of the parliamentary responsibilities for which he or she or officer. If a complaint is made against a Member or officer of the other House, the was elected. appropriate course of action is to examine the facts and then lay a statement of the evidence before the House of which the person complained of is a Member or officer. The crucial question that must be determined is ‘‘What consti- tutes proceedings in parliament?’’ D (1015) For the reasons stated above, I must rule that the matter does not [English] constitute a prima facie case of privilege, nor a contempt of parliament. Erskine May in the 19th edition, at page 87, characterizes ‘‘proceedings of parliament’’ in the following manner: _____________________________________________ An individual Member takes part in a proceeding usually by speech, but also by various recognized kinds of formal action, such as voting, giving notice of a motion, etc., or presenting a petition or a report from a Committee, most of such actions being time-saving substitutes for speaking. ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS [Translation] [English] Joseph Maingot clearly states on page 315 of his book Parlia- COMMITTEES OF THE HOUSE mentary Privilege in Canada, and I quote: HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT It may be pointed out that in regard to this privilege, a Member’s privilege of freedom of speech concerns speaking in the House or Assembly or in a committee. In addition, the Member is also protected when carrying out those duties, as a Mr. Derek Lee (Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the Member of the House, that have a nexus with a parliamentary proceeding. However, Government in the House of Commons, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, on when the Member performs such duties to his constituents and his party the behalf of the Minister of Human Resources Development and fulfilment of which do not involve a parliamentary proceeding, the Member is not so protected. pursuant to Standing Order 109, I have the pleasure to table, in both official languages, the government’s response to the recommenda- tions of the fourth report of the Standing Committee on Human I believe that my predecessor, Speaker Fraser, stated matters Resources Development and the Status of Persons with Disabili- succinctly on June 10, 1993: ties, entitled ‘‘Beyond the Numbers: The Future of the Social Insurance Number System in Canada’’. What a Member says outside the House about anyone is subject to the laws of the land relating to libel or slander as it would be for any other Canadian—if indeed the comments are actionable. What Members say in the Chamber, however, is protected * * * by privilege. GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO PETITIONS Although I view the types of charges raised by the hon. member with great importance, my role as Speaker is limited to dealing Mr. Derek Lee (Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the strictly with breaches of privilege that occur during proceedings in Government in the House of Commons, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, parliament. In the words of Joseph Maingot on page 105 in his pursuant to Standing Order 36(8), I have the honour to table, in book Parliamentary Privilege in Canada: both official languages, the government’s response to six petitions.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Core 1..104 Hansard (PRISM::Advent3b2 6.50.00)
    CANADA House of Commons Debates VOLUME 138 Ï NUMBER 116 Ï 2nd SESSION Ï 37th PARLIAMENT OFFICIAL REPORT (HANSARD) Wednesday, June 11, 2003 Speaker: The Honourable Peter Milliken CONTENTS (Table of Contents appears at back of this issue.) All parliamentary publications are available on the ``Parliamentary Internet Parlementaire´´ at the following address: http://www.parl.gc.ca 7131 HOUSE OF COMMONS Wednesday, June 11, 2003 The House met at 2 p.m. challenged clients received a donation from Sun Country Cable, a donation that will enable the centre to continue its work in our Prayers community. Sun Country Cable donated the building. This building is next to Kindale's existing facility and both properties will eventually lead to construction of a new centre. In the meantime, the Ï (1405) building will be used for training and respite suites. [English] I am proud to be part of a community that looks out for those less The Speaker: As is our practice on Wednesday we will now sing fortunate. Charity does begin at home. O Canada, and we will be led by the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre. *** [Editor's Note: Members sang the national anthem] [Translation] SOCIÉTÉ RADIO-CANADA STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS Mr. Bernard Patry (Pierrefonds—Dollard, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I would like to share some of my concerns about the recent decision [English] by Société Radio-Canada to cancel its late evening sports news. CHABAD Hon. Art Eggleton (York Centre, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I rise to I am worried, because last year this crown corporation had also decided to stop broadcasting the Saturday night hockey games, La pay tribute to Chabad Lubavitch which is the world's largest network Soirée du hockey.
    [Show full text]
  • Core 1..170 Hansard
    CANADA House of Commons Debates VOLUME 137 Ï NUMBER 182 Ï 1st SESSION Ï 37th PARLIAMENT OFFICIAL REPORT (HANSARD) Friday, May 3, 2002 Speaker: The Honourable Peter Milliken CONTENTS (Table of Contents appears at back of this issue.) All parliamentary publications are available on the ``Parliamentary Internet Parlementaire´´ at the following address: http://www.parl.gc.ca 11161 HOUSE OF COMMONS Friday, May 3, 2002 The House met at 10 a.m. We must, however, take care not to go to the opposite extreme and enact legislation with potential negative impact on the rights and freedoms of those we wish to protect, under the guise of fighting Prayers terrorism. We do not have to go far back in time to recall the late unlamented Bill C-42, so criticized for its negative effects on Ï (1010) fundamental rights and freedoms. [English] At the time, the government was busy boasting right and left of BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE what an ardent promoter of public security it was, rejecting the criticisms that were being made from this side of the House. Now The Deputy Speaker: It is my duty pursuant to Standing Order here we are again, starting off a new debate on a similar bill, 81 to inform the House that the motion to be considered Monday although a few changes have been made. during consideration of the business of supply is as follows: That, in the opinion of this House, the government should cease and desist its Why are we having this new debate? Simply because the public, sustained legislative and political attacks on the lives and livelihoods of rural Canadians and the communities where they live.
    [Show full text]
  • Friday, April 29, 1994
    VOLUME 133 NUMBER 060 1st SESSION 35th PARLIAMENT OFFICIAL REPORT (HANSARD) Friday, April 29, 1994 Speaker: The Honourable Gilbert Parent HOUSE OF COMMONS Friday, April 29, 1994 The House met at 10 a.m. showed that Canadians had lost complete faith in its approach to the situation. _______________ Because of the magnitude of Pearson airport and because it was the only profitable airport in the country, the Conservatives Prayers decided they would take a different approach. They entered into negotiations which were behind the scenes and not public tender _______________ to lease, sell and give away property belonging to the taxpayers. It seems ironic they would choose their friends and those of GOVERNMENT ORDERS other political parties to come forth and negotiate with the government behind the scenes. The agreement would allow them to take charge of one of the prime federal assets in this [English] country, hundreds of acres of property close to downtown Toronto. They would have a sweetheart lease on it for many PEARSON INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT AGREEMENTS years which guaranteed them income, all at the taxpayers’ ACT expense. The House resumed from April 26 consideration of the motion When the situation blew up in their faces during the last that Bill C–22, an act respecting certain agreements concerning election this government decided it was time to do something the redevelopment and operation of terminals 1 and 2 at Lester about it and said to stop the deal from going forward. Of course B. Pearson International airport, be read the second time and the government did not heed the cries and concerns of the referred to a committee; and of the amendment; and of the electorate and the last government in its dying days signed a amendment to the amendment.
    [Show full text]
  • Thursday, November 24, 1994
    VOLUME 133 NUMBER 130 1st SESSION 35th PARLIAMENT OFFICIAL REPORT (HANSARD) Thursday, November 24, 1994 Speaker: The Honourable Gilbert Parent HOUSE OF COMMONS Thursday, November 24, 1994 The House met at 10 a.m. Guarnieri Hanger Hanrahan Harb _______________ Harper (Calgary West) Harper (Simcoe Centre) Harris Hart Harvard Hermanson Prayers Hickey Hill (Macleod) Hoeppner Hopkins _______________ Hubbard Ianno Irwin Jackson Keyes Kilger (Stormont—Dundas) GOVERNMENT ORDERS Kirkby Knutson Kraft Sloan Lee Lincoln Loney [English] MacAulay MacDonald MacLaren (Etobicoke North) MacLellan (Cape/Cap Breton—The Sydneys) DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES ACT Malhi Manley Marchi Marleau The House resumed from November 23 consideration of the Massé McClelland (Edmonton Southwest) McGuire McKinnon motion that Bill C–48, an act to establish the Department of McLellan (Edmonton Northwest) McTeague Natural Resources and to amend related acts, be read the third McWhinney Meredith time and passed. Mifflin Milliken Mills (Broadview—Greenwood) Mitchell The Speaker: Pursuant to Standing Order 45(5)(a) the House Morrison Murray Nault Nunziata will now proceed to the taking of the deferred division on the O’Brien O’Reilly motion at third reading stage of Bill C–48, an act to establish the Ouellet Pagtakhan Parrish Penson Department of Natural Resources and to amend related acts. Peters Phinney Call in the members. Ramsay Reed Regan Richardson (The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the Rideout Ringuette–Maltais Robichaud Rock following division:)
    [Show full text]
  • Friday, October 2, 1998
    CANADA VOLUME 135 S NUMBER 131 S 1st SESSION S 36th PARLIAMENT OFFICIAL REPORT (HANSARD) Friday, October 2, 1998 Speaker: The Honourable Gilbert Parent CONTENTS (Table of Contents appears at back of this issue.) All parliamentary publications are available on the ``Parliamentary Internet Parlementaire'' at the following address: http://www.parl.gc.ca 8689 HOUSE OF COMMONS Friday, October 2, 1998 The House met at 10 a.m. An hon. member: Let us not exaggerate. _______________ Hon. Don Boudria: —in its supposed wisdom, to resort to a procedural mechanism so as to prevent the bill from going forward. Prayers The opposition has asked that consideration of the bill to help small businesses be postponed for six months. _______________ Hon. Lucienne Robillard: What a contradiction! GOVERNMENT ORDERS Hon. Don Boudria: The Minister of Citizenship and Immigra- tion points out how contradictory this is. She is, as usual, right on the mark. D (1005) It is important that this bill to help small businesses go ahead. [English] [English] CANADA SMALL BUSINESS FINANCING ACT It is important that the opposition not cause delays on this bill by The House resumed from September 29 consideration of the moving dilatory motions, hoist motions or other procedural tricks motion that Bill C-53, an act to increase the availability of to stop this bill from going ahead. I do not think procedural tricks financing for the establishment, expansion, modernization and should be going on. Therefore I move: improvement of small businesses, be read the second time and That the question be now put. referred to a committee.
    [Show full text]
  • Wednesday, April 24, 1996
    CANADA VOLUME 134 S NUMBER 032 S 2nd SESSION S 35th PARLIAMENT OFFICIAL REPORT (HANSARD) Wednesday, April 24, 1996 Speaker: The Honourable Gilbert Parent CONTENTS (Table of Contents appears at back of this issue.) The House of Commons Debates are also available on the Parliamentary Internet Parlementaire at the following address: http://www.parl.gc.ca 1883 HOUSE OF COMMONS Wednesday, April 24, 1996 The House met at 2 p.m. [English] _______________ LIBERAL PARTY OF CANADA Prayers Mr. Ken Epp (Elk Island, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, voters need accurate information to make wise decisions at election time. With _______________ one vote they are asked to choose their member of Parliament, select the government for the term, indirectly choose the Prime The Speaker: As is our practice on Wednesdays, we will now Minister and give their approval to a complete all or nothing list of sing O Canada, which will be led by the hon. member for agenda items. Vancouver East. During an election campaign it is not acceptable to say that the [Editor’s Note: Whereupon members sang the national anthem.] GST will be axed with pledges to resign if it is not, to write in small print that it will be harmonized, but to keep it and hide it once the _____________________________________________ election has been won. It is not acceptable to promise more free votes if all this means is that the status quo of free votes on private members’ bills will be maintained. It is not acceptable to say that STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS MPs will be given more authority to represent their constituents if it means nothing and that MPs will still be whipped into submis- [English] sion by threats and actions of expulsion.
    [Show full text]
  • Food on Store Shelves Not Safe
    Wednesday, June 28, 2000 Media Release For Immediate Release Press Contacts: Stephanie Coburn (506) 433-4885 Ron Fournier (506) 246-5572 / (506) 392-7645 - cell Gabrielle Kretzschmar (506) 488-2407 Food on Store Shelves Not Safe "Right now, all across Canada, there is food on our grocery store shelves containing genetically modified organisms. This food has not been proven safe. Nor has it been labeled so that consumers can choose not to eat it. As a citizen and a consumer, this is not acceptable.", according to Stephanie Coburn, Sussex-area farmer and volunteer director of the Conservation Council of New Brunswick. Today, 17 groups sent a letter addressed to the federal Ministers of Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Environment Canada and Industry, Trade and Commerce. The letter demands that the Federal government impose a moratorium on and the retraction of commercial permits/licences of cross-species GMO substances. This moratorium would be effective until sufficient third party research is conducted to determine if these substances have any negative impact on the health of people, animals or soil microorganisms. Gabrielle Kretschmar of NB Partners in Agriculture states, "It is astonishing that no government itesting on the long-term health effects of these foods has been conducted. The government has not used the precautionary principle. Companies promoting GMO products should be required to prove their safety, instead of injured consumers having to prove harm." Ron Fournier, consultant in ecological agriculture, says, "Some of these organisms can be injurious to soil health. The Federal Government has caved into pressure from multi-national companies to put GMO’s on the shelf without adequate testing.
    [Show full text]
  • Thursday, April 22, 1999
    CANADA VOLUME 135 S NUMBER 213 S 1st SESSION S 36th PARLIAMENT OFFICIAL REPORT (HANSARD) Thursday, April 22, 1999 Speaker: The Honourable Gilbert Parent CONTENTS (Table of Contents appears at back of this issue.) All parliamentary publications are available on the ``Parliamentary Internet Parlementaire'' at the following address: http://www.parl.gc.ca 14189 HOUSE OF COMMONS Thursday, April 22, 1999 The House met at 10 a.m. I thank all of my colleagues on the standing committee, from both sides of the House, for the dedication and energy which they _______________ have put into this very important and comprehensive study. Prayers * * * _______________ CANADA FOOD SAFETY AND INSPECTION ACT Hon. Lyle Vanclief (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS Lib.) moved for leave to introduce Bill C-80, an act to revise and consolidate certain acts respecting food, agricultural commodities, D (1005) aquatic commodities and agricultural inputs, to amend the Cana- dian Food Inspection Agency Act, the Agriculture and Agri-Food [Translation] Administrative Monetary Penalties Act, the Health of Animals Act, the Plant Protection Act and the Plant Breeders’ Rights Act, and to GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO PETITIONS repeal and amend other acts in consequence. Mr. Peter Adams (Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the (Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed) Government in the House of Commons, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government’s response to nine peti- * * * tions. INCOME TAX ACT * * * Mr. Peter Stoffer (Sackville—Musquodoboit Valley—East- [English] ern Shore, NDP) moved for leave to introduce Bill C-496, an act to amend the Income Tax Act (medical expenses).
    [Show full text]
  • Wednesday, May 8, 1996
    CANADA VOLUME 134 S NUMBER 042 S 2nd SESSION S 35th PARLIAMENT OFFICIAL REPORT (HANSARD) Wednesday, May 8, 1996 Speaker: The Honourable Gilbert Parent CONTENTS (Table of Contents appears at back of this issue.) OFFICIAL REPORT At page 2437 of Hansard Tuesday, May 7, 1996, under the heading ``Report of Auditor General'', the last paragraph should have started with Hon. Jane Stewart (Minister of National Revenue, Lib.): The House of Commons Debates are also available on the Parliamentary Internet Parlementaire at the following address: http://www.parl.gc.ca 2471 HOUSE OF COMMONS Wednesday, May 8, 1996 The House met at 2 p.m. [Translation] _______________ COAST GUARD Prayers Mrs. Christiane Gagnon (Québec, BQ): Mr. Speaker, another _______________ voice has been added to the general vehement objections to the Coast Guard fees the government is preparing to ram through. The Acting Speaker (Mr. Kilger): As is our practice on Wednesdays, we will now sing O Canada, which will be led by the The Quebec urban community, which is directly affected, on hon. member for for Victoria—Haliburton. April 23 unanimously adopted a resolution demanding that the Department of Fisheries and Oceans reverse its decision and carry [Editor’s Note: Whereupon members sang the national anthem.] out an in depth assessment of the economic impact of the various _____________________________________________ options. I am asking the government to halt this direct assault against the STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS Quebec economy. I am asking the government to listen to the taxpayers, the municipal authorities and the economic stakehold- [English] ers. Perhaps an equitable solution can then be found.
    [Show full text]
  • Friday, April 30, 1999
    CANADA VOLUME 135 S NUMBER 219 S 1st SESSION S 36th PARLIAMENT OFFICIAL REPORT (HANSARD) Friday, April 30, 1999 Speaker: The Honourable Gilbert Parent CONTENTS (Table of Contents appears at back of this issue.) All parliamentary publications are available on the ``Parliamentary Internet Parlementaire'' at the following address: http://www.parl.gc.ca 14527 HOUSE OF COMMONS Friday, April 30, 1999 The House met at 10 a.m. [Translation] _______________ This year is the fourth anniversary of the Open Skies Agreement and the 25th anniversary of the 1974 Air Transport Preclearance Agreement. Prayers These two agreements have worked hand in glove to transform _______________ air passenger travel between Canada and the United States. [English] In the past, travelling from Canada to the United States was long GOVERNMENT ORDERS and arduous because the airlines were often prevented from providing efficient routings by the outdated air agreement. Because of open skies, some 60 U.S. destinations can now be reached D (1005 ) non-stop from 19 Canadian cities and many more can be reached [English] by convenient connections at U.S. hubs. D (1010 ) PRECLEARANCE ACT Parenthetically, I should point out that in transporter traffic, Hon. David M. Collenette (for the Minister of Foreign since the open skies agreement has come in, Canadian carriers Affairs) moved that Bill S-22, an act authorizing the United States dominate that market. Canadian carriers carry more passengers in to preclear travellers and goods in Canada for entry into the United the transporter market than do U.S. carriers. That is a testament to States for the purposes of customs, immigration, public health, the efficiency of Canada’s various airlines.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2004 Canada Forward and Acknowledgements
    ANNUAL REPORT 2004 CANADA FORWARD AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The year 2004 was a very important one for the IICA and Canada relationship. IICA went through a rigorous review of its image, networking capacity and program delivery in Canada, ending in an enhancement of their partnership. A great effort was made within IICA Canada to increase its program delivery in the internships, expertise networking, and in support of events. Additionally, an evaluation of the Internship programs and a review of expenses were carried out. The Honorable Lyle Vanclief, ex-Minister of Agriculture and Agri-food Canada, was invited as a key speaker at the inauguration of the IICA Representative’s Meeting in August, where he addressed the challenges and opportunities for investment and financing strategies in agriculture. In September, I was appointed Acting Representative and was actively involved in an external review process and coordinated a visit to Canada by high level IICA personnel. The review process began in October 2004, with an assessment study carried out by Hill and Knowlton Consultants that included interviews government and private stakeholders in Canada. The survey covered a diversity of issues that went from awareness and knowledge of IICA, to an evaluation of its effectiveness and personal experiences, and suggestions on how to improve its commitment with Canada. The study report was presented to the Director General at the end of the month. This study was followed by a trip in November of Mario Seixas, Associate Director General, who made courtesy calls to officials from AAFC, CFIA, CIDA and DFA, as well as private organizations familiar with IICA.
    [Show full text]
  • Computational Identification of Ideology In
    Computational Identification of Ideology in Text: A Study of Canadian Parliamentary Debates Yaroslav Riabinin Dept. of Computer Science, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5S 3G4, Canada February 23, 2009 In this study, we explore the task of classifying members of the 36th Cana- dian Parliament by ideology, which we approximate using party mem- bership. Earlier work has been done on data from the U.S. Congress by applying a popular supervised learning algorithm (Support Vector Ma- chines) to classify Senatorial speech, but the results were mediocre unless certain limiting assumptions were made. We adopt a similar approach and achieve good accuracy — up to 98% — without making the same as- sumptions. Our findings show that it is possible to use a bag-of-words model to distinguish members of opposing ideological classes based on English transcripts of their debates in the Canadian House of Commons. 1 Introduction Internet technology has empowered users to publish their own material on the web, allowing them to make the transition from readers to authors. For example, people are becoming increasingly accustomed to voicing their opinions regarding various prod- ucts and services on websites like Epinions.com and Amazon.com. Moreover, other users appear to be searching for these reviews and incorporating the information they acquire into their decision-making process during a purchase. This indicates that mod- 1 ern consumers are interested in more than just the facts — they want to know how other customers feel about the product, which is something that companies and manu- facturers cannot, or will not, provide on their own.
    [Show full text]