• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

CANADA House of Commons Debates VOLUME 142 Ï NUMBER 069 Ï 2nd SESSION Ï 39th PARLIAMENT OFFICIAL REPORT (HANSARD) Tuesday, April 1, 2008 Speaker: The Honourable Peter Milliken CONTENTS (Table of Contents appears at back of this issue.) Also available on the Parliament of Canada Web Site at the following address: http://www.parl.gc.ca 4285 HOUSE OF COMMONS Tuesday, April 1, 2008 The House met at 10 a.m. Inspection Agency admits that unsafe food can find its way onto the market, it is crucial to base all federal regulations concerning labelling of food products on comprehensive information that allows consumers to make healthy and safe food choices. That is the goal of Prayers this bill. I call on all members to support the bill because, as protectors of ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS the public interest and as informed consumers, they are doubly accountable. Ï (1005) (Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed) [English] INTERPARLIAMENTARY DELEGATIONS *** Mr. Rob Merrifield (Yellowhead, CPC): Mr. Speaker, pursuant [English] to Standing Order 34(1) I have the honour to present to the House, in both official languages, the report of the Canadian delegation of the PETITIONS Canada-United States Inter-Parliamentary Group respecting its HUMAN TRAFFICKING participation at the National Governors Association winter meeting in Washington, D.C., from February 23 to 25. Mrs. Joy Smith (Kildonan—St. Paul, CPC): Mr. Speaker, today I would like to present petitions from across Canada. The petitioners The Speaker: I see the parliamentary secretary to the government are asking that the government continue its good work to stop the House leader rising. I think he will be asking for unanimous consent horrendous crime of human trafficking. As we know, this is a crime to revert to tabling of documents. Is that agreed? that is having a rising impact on Canadians. It is my honour to Some hon. members: Agreed. present these petitions today in this House. *** UNBORN VICTIMS OF CRIME GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO PETITIONS Mr. Ken Epp (Edmonton—Sherwood Park, CPC): Mr. Mr. Tom Lukiwski (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of Speaker, I am very pleased to again rise in the House to present the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for more petitions on Bill C-484. This bill has immense support out Democratic Reform, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Pursuant to there. Every day, I am getting a thousand or more names on petitions Standing Order 36(8) I have the honour to table, in both official in support of the bill. This time, they come all the way from Kelowna languages, the government's response to three petitions. to Kanata, from all points in between, and from points beyond. *** I am very pleased to present this petition in which the petitioners [Translation] ask that Parliament enact legislation to protect and recognize unborn children when the mother wants them. It is very clear to them what FOOD AND DRUGS ACT the meaning is. I hope parliamentarians pick up on that. Ms. Christiane Gagnon (Québec, BQ) moved for leave to introduce C-529, An Act to amend the Food and Drugs Act (durable *** life date). QUESTIONS ON THE ORDER PAPER She said: Mr. Speaker, as the Bloc Québécois' critic for health, I Mr. Tom Lukiwski (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of want to introduce today to the House a private member's bill to the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for amend the Food and Drugs Act. The bill's objective is to prohibit the Democratic Reform, CPC): Mr. Speaker, I ask that all questions be sale of prepackaged or canned food that does not indicate a durable allowed to stand. life date. The Speaker: Is that agreed? Right after Nutrition Month during which we celebrated World Consumer Rights Day, and on the very day the Canadian Food Some hon. members: Agreed. 4286 COMMONS DEBATES April 1, 2008 Business of Supply GOVERNMENT ORDERS Because we are a sovereignist party, we want to facilitate Quebec's transition from provincial to country status. That is why, unlike what [Translation] a number of federalists believe, we do not attempt to block things, as BUSINESS OF SUPPLY some of my colleagues like to joke. On the contrary, we think that the more progress Quebec makes within the Canadian federation, the OPPOSITION MOTION—COMPLIANCE WITH THE CHARTER OF THE FRENCH stronger it will become, and therefore there will be a greater appetite LANGUAGE REGARDING ENTERPRISES UNDER FEDERAL JURISDICTION LOCATED IN QUEBEC for sovereignty among the people of Quebec and within the Quebec nation. Mr. Pierre Paquette (Joliette, BQ) moved: That, in the opinion of the House, following the recognition of the Quebec nation by this House, the government should move from words to deeds and propose measures to solidify that recognition, including compliance with the language of labour relations of Quebec’s Charter of the French language regarding enterprises under Unlike what some columnists and members of this House think, federal jurisdiction located in Quebec. the Bloc Québécois, the Quebec nation, and all of Quebec have an He said: Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to open the debate on this interest in making progress within Canadian Parliament, and this is motion, which I will read again—and I thank the member for what the Bloc has been working towards since 1993. Having the Québec for her support. House of Commons recognize Quebec as a nation on November 27, That, in the opinion of the House, following the recognition of the Quebec nation 2006, was a victory for the Bloc Québécois, for Quebec and for all by this House, the government should move from words to deeds and propose Quebeckers, federalists and sovereignists alike, and it also helps measures to solidify that recognition, including compliance with the language of Quebec's transition towards sovereignty. labour relations of Quebec’s Charter of the French language regarding enterprises under federal jurisdiction located in Quebec. In bringing forward this motion, the Bloc Québécois is doing again today the work for which, since 1993, election after election, I remind members that during discussions, people ask us why the Quebeckers have been sending a majority of Bloc members to House of Commons recognized the Quebec nation. First of all, the Ottawa, that is to represent them in the House of Commons. Quebec nation did not need to be recognized by the House of At the outset, let me remind members of this House and everyone Commons in order to exist. who is watching us that we are sovereignists. The Bloc Québécois is convinced that the best way for the Quebec nation to take control of its overall development, be it from a political, economic, social, environmental or cultural point of view, is to achieve sovereignty. Ï (1010) Being sovereignists, we are the only ones in this House who can defend without any compromise the interests and values of the Quebec nation. This work performed by the Bloc Québécois is directly related to our party's mandate, which is to promote Quebec's It existed already. All of Quebec's civil society is well aware of sovereignty. All other parties in the House, whether it is the Liberal that fact. The National Assembly had already adopted motions to this Party, the Conservative Party or the New Democratic Party, are effect. We did not need the House's recognition in order to exist. I am Canadian parties that represent the interests and values of the always delighted to say, since it is the truth, that the Canadian Canadian nation. The only party capable of representing exclusively government is the first foreign government to have recognized the the interests and values of the Quebec nation is the Bloc Québécois. Quebec nation. When Quebeckers make a decision about their future, I expect the Canadian nation, through its Parliament, to It happens sometimes that both the Canadian and Quebec nations accept the democratic choice Quebeckers have made and not to share common interests and it is indeed possible for a Canadian party interfere with the democratically expressed will of the Quebec nation to agree with the Bloc Québécois, or vice versa, to defend a to achieve sovereignty. In that context, the decision made on particular cause, whether it deals with social, political or environ- November 27, 2006 is very important for the Bloc Québécois. mental issues. I know that the debates within the Canadian parties reflect the debates going on within the Canadian nation. For example, the Liberals and the NDP have been able to work with the Bloc We now need to give this motion tangible form, and that is where Québécois on some measures concerning compliance with the Kyoto the problems begin. Clearly, many of the members who voted for protocol. But when the interests of the Quebec nation differ from this motion—265 voted in favour of the House recognizing the those of the Canadian nation, it is amazing to see how the three Quebec nation, and 16 voted against—thought it was a symbolic Canadian parties can unite, despite their ideological differences, to recognition, except obviously the Bloc members. In fact, it is not defend the interests and values of the Canadian nation, at the really clear. Who did we recognize? Did we recognize the Quebec expense of the interests and values of the Quebec nation. We must nation, French Canadians in Quebec or the whole Quebec nation as remember that in this House, we are the only exclusively Quebec Quebeckers perceive it? That debate seems to have taken place party that represents the Quebec nation and that is able to defend its amongst the federalists, but not amongst the Quebec federalists and interests and values.

Load more

  78

Copy Link