CANADA VOLUME 136 S NUMBER 036 S 2nd SESSION S 36th PARLIAMENT OFFICIAL REPORT (HANSARD) Tuesday, December 7, 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 2245 HOUSE OF COMMONS Tuesday, December 7, 1999 The House met at 10 a.m. [English] _______________ PETITIONS FAMILIES Prayers Mr. Randy White (Langley—Abbotsford, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, _______________ I have a petition to table before the House. It indicates that the primary role of parents in the raising and discipline of their children is most important these days. ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS The petitioners request parliament to affirm the duty of parents to responsibly raise their children according to their own con- science and beliefs and to retain section 43 in Canada’s criminal D (1005) code as it currently is worded. [English] [Translation] GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOODS GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO PETITIONS Mr. Stéphan Tremblay (Lac-Saint-Jean, BQ): Mr. Speaker, Mr. Derek Lee (Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the the world is rapidly changing, and elected representatives are not Government in the House of Commons, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, always up to speed on these changes. pursuant to the standing orders, I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government’s response to four petitions. Fortunately, citizens participate in political life by initiating important debates. This is the situation with the petition I am * * * tabling today, a petition started as part of an awareness campaign by Biotech Action Montréal, as well as by Nadine Bachand and [Translation] Pascal Martel. The petition, signed by 20,000 people, calls for the mandatory ELECTORAL BOUNDARIES READJUSTMENT ACT labelling of foods containing genetically modified organisms, commonly called GMOs. I wish to mention the hard work done by Mr. André Harvey (Chicoutimi, PC) moved for leave to my agronomist colleague from Louis-Hébert who spoke this introduce Bill C-397, an act to change the name of the electoral morning. district of Chicoutimi. D (1010) He said: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to introduce this bill, the purpose of which is to change the name of my riding of Chicoutimi VIOLENCE to Chicoutimi—Le Fjord. My riding is undergoing rapid changes and its second largest city will soon take on the name of Cité du Mr. Guy St-Julien (Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik, Lib.): Fjord. The new riding name would be Chicoutimi—Le Fjord. Mr. Speaker, I would like to table a petition from the people of Val-d’Or, Senneterre and Dubuisson, opposing violence on televi- I want to assure the House that all the citizens of my beautiful sion and in the media. riding are in favour of this change. I would like to take this opportunity to thank my colleague from Madawaska—Restigouche In view of the massacre at the École polytechnique in Montreal, for his support with respect to this bill. I am sure that I will have the the increase in violence in the schools—both primary and secon- support of all members of the House. If there any exceptions, I dary—the excessive media exposure of violence, murder and rape, don’t want to know about them. for all these reasons, the petitioners pray and call upon Parliament to regulate the broadcast of news containing violence, the defini- (Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed) tion of violent programs and films, the sale of toys and computer 2246 COMMONS DEBATES December 7, 1999 Speaker’s Ruling programs of a violent nature, and the sale of books and comics [English] illustrating violence. The other motions will be grouped for debate. [English] The Chair however is not yet ready to give a full ruling on the CHILD PORNOGRAPHY groupings of the motions and the voting patterns. Mr. Ken Epp (Elk Island, Ref.): Mr. Speaker, the residents in [Translation] my constituency and in the surrounding areas continue to flood this place with petitions on the issue of child pornography. They are We can start with Group No. 1, which includes Motions num- incensed that the justice minister is not doing anything about it. bered 1, 87 to 101, 103 to 105, 109, 111 to 123, 125, 128 to 135, I am very honoured today, on behalf of these people, to present 139 to 141. another 473 names adding to the over 300,000 that have been D tabled in this place for this gutless, spineless government to do (1015) something that is so fundamentally right. The hon. member for Verchères—Les-Patriotes informs me he FAMILIES will not proceed with Motion No. 125. Mr. John Bryden (Wentworth—Burlington, Lib.): Mr. Speak- [English] er, I have the honour to present a petition imploring the government to take no action to remove section 43 of the criminal code which, The voting patterns for Group No. 1 are available at the table. Mr. Speaker, as you realize, is that section of the criminal code that The rest of the ruling will follow shortly. sanctions reasonable force in the disciplining of children by [Translation] parents. I shall now propose motions numbered 1, 87 to 101, 103 to 105, * * * 109, 111 to 123, 128 to 135, 139 to 141 to the House. QUESTIONS ON THE ORDER PAPER [English] Mr. Derek Lee (Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the Mr. Ken Epp: Mr. Speaker, in this list you failed to mention Government in the House of Commons, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I ask Motion No. 125. Was that intentional or was that an accident? that all remaining questions be allowed to stand. The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland): Is that agreed? The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland): No, I am sorry. My French probably was not up to snuff. We removed Motion No. 125. Some hon. members: Agreed. It was removed by the mover. _____________________________________________ [Translation] Mr. Stéphane Bergeron: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. GOVERNMENT ORDERS Far from me the idea of questioning in any way the Speaker’s ruling regarding the grouping of motions, but I respectfully submit [Translation] that in our opinion Motion No. 1 should have been included in a different group since all the other amendments deal with issues that CANADA ELECTIONS ACT are totally unrelated to the object of Motion No. 1. The House proceeded to the consideration of Bill C-2, an act respecting the election of members to the House of Commons, I believe the Speaker deemed it appropriate to include Motion repealing other acts relating to elections and making consequential No. 1 in the same group simply because the legislation currently amendments to other acts, as reported (with amendments) from the regards volunteer labour provided by a self-employed person committee. during an election as a contribution, and Motion No. 1 seeks to allow a self-employed person to participate in an election cam- SPEAKER’S RULING paign without such participation necessarily being regarded as a contribution. The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland): There are 142 motions in amendment standing on the notice paper for the report stage of By its very nature, this motion must absolutely be considered Bill C-2. separate from the motions concerning contributions, reimburse- ments and expenses. Motions numbered 106, 107, 108, 110, 124, 126, and 127 cannot be proposed to the House because they are not accompanied by the [English] recommendation of the governor general. Standing Order 76(3) requires that notice of such recommendation be given no later than The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland): I will respond in the sitting day before the beginning of report stage consideration of English to the question of my hon. colleague because other than a bill. that we will just not be able to understand my response. December 7, 1999 COMMONS DEBATES 2247 Government Orders We have heard the argument and it will be considered. As I ‘‘370. (1) An eligible party becomes a registered party if its applica-’’ mentioned earlier, this is a partial ruling. We will take that into consideration when the motion is voted upon. It may be moved into Mr. John Solomon (Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, NDP) another grouping for voting purposes, but for now we will moved: introduce it and debate it. If it is to be moved it will be moved, and Motion No. 88 that is not a promise. It will be looked at and if the motion is to be That Bill C-2, in Clause 370, be amended by replacing line 42 on page 152 with moved into another grouping for voting purposes, it will be done. the following: ‘‘nomination has been confirmed in 12 electoral’’ D (1020) D (1025) [Translation] Mr. Ken Epp (Elk Island, Ref.) moved: Mr. Stéphane Bergeron: Mr. Speaker, I fully understand your argument and I must say that I agree up to a point. Still, I Motion No. 89 respectfully submit once again that for the purposes of the debate, That Bill C-2, in Clause 370, be amended by replacing lines 2 to 5 on page 153 this motion should be separate from the others because its object with the following: has nothing to do with that of the other motions currently contained ‘‘tion to become registered becomes a registered party for the next following in that group. general election if it satisfies the requirements of subsection (1).’’ Consequently, it would not do justice to Motion No. 1 to Hon. Raymond Chan (for the Leader of the Government in consider it as part of a group that includes motions on contribu- the House of Commons) moved: tions, expenses and reimbursements, since it does not deal with any Motion No.