[English]
If the House gives its consent, I intend to move concurrence in this third report later this day.
She said: Madam Speaker, I wish to state that this bill is in the same form as Bill C-52 of the first session of the 35th Parliament at the time of prorogation. I therefore request that it be reinstated as provided in the special order adopted on March 4, 1996.
(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed.)
The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Ringuette-Maltais): The Chair is satisfied that this bill is in the same form as Bill C-52 was at the time of prorogation of the first session of the 35th Parliament.
Accordingly, pursuant to order made Monday, March 4, 1996, the bill is deemed to have been read the second time, considered by the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage, reported with amendments and concurred in at report stage with further amendments.
He said: Madam Speaker, pursuant to the standing orders and to the traditions of the House I wish to state that this bill is in the same form as Bill C-7 of the first session of the 35th Parliament at the time of prorogation. I therefore request that it be reinstated as provided in the special order adopted by this House on March 4.
(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed.)
(1510)
[Translation]
The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Ringuette-Maltais): The Chair is satisfied that this bill is in the same form as Bill C-7 was at the time of prorogation of the first session of the 35th Parliament.
Accordingly, pursuant to order made Monday, March 4, 1996, the bill is deemed to have been adopted at all stages and to have been passed by the House.
He said: Madam Speaker, I wish to state that this bill is in the same form as Bill C-106 of the first session of the 35th Parliament at the time of prorogation. I therefore request that it be reinstated as provided in the special order adopted March 4, 1996.
(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed.)
[Translation]
The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Ringuette-Maltais): The Chair is satisfied that this bill is in the same form as Bill C-103 was at the time of prorogation of the first session of the 35th Parliament.
Accordingly, pursuant to order made Monday, March 4, 1996, the bill is deemed to have been read the second time, considered by the Standing Committee on Justice and Legal Affairs, and reported with amendments.
[English]
He said: Madam Speaker, I wish to move this bill to amend the Citizenship Act with respect to the oath of allegiance.
At present, those persons who present themselves to become new citizens of Canada must pledge alliance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, her heirs and successors. This is confusing to some and objectionable to others. Many individuals are ready and willing to pledge their allegiance to Canada and to the Canadian Constitution, but not to Queen Elizabeth whom they associate with the United Kingdom, another independent country.
This bill would replace the present citizenship oath with a new oath which would read:
I swear (or affirm) that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Canada and the Constitution of Canada and that I will faithfully observe the laws of Canada and fulfil my duties as a Canadian citizen.(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed.)
He said: Mr. Speaker, it gives me pleasure to introduce this private member's bill today on behalf of the request of a number of policemen throughout the country who at various times have witnessed and seen people on parole willingly and unconditionally break all conditions of the parole they have been released on.
This bill would authorize these peace officers to arrest without warrant, which would prevent a number of crimes. They know it will. There have been a number of incidents where that kind of intervention would have prevented some very serious things from happening.
We hope this will receive the full support of the House to give the police the power to protect those we are obligated to protect.
(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed.)
He said: Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to introduce for first reading my private member's bill, an act to amend the Canadian Human Rights Act.
The purpose of the bill is to repeal section 67 of the Canadian Human Rights Act, which reads: ``Nothing in this act affects any provision of the Indian Act or any provision made under or pursuant to that act''.
Because of this section, a federal court judge in 1994 in his decision was unable, as he said, to uphold the human rights of a young Indian student from British Columbia to attend a Catholic boarding school away from her reserve.
The judge has termed the Indian Act racist and one of the causes is that the Indian Act is exempt from the Canadian Human Rights Act. The judge went on to say that if the Indian Act were not exempt from the Canadian Human Rights Act, human rights tribunals would be obligated to tear apart the Indian Act in the name and spirit of equality of human rights in Canada.
(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed.)
She said: Madam Speaker, this is a bill on self-defence. At the present time, the Criminal Code allows the instigator of a fight to claim that he acted in self-defence, even if he kills his victim. That anomaly has resulted in a controversial decision being handed down by the Supreme Court on February 23, 1995.
According to the chief justice of Canada, the decision gives illogical and absurd results, since the worse the aggression is, the more the instigator can use the wider ground of defence. Under my proposed bill, the instigator of a fight would no longer be able to use that defence when the victim dies. Only individuals who do not start the fight would be able to say that they acted in self-defence.
(Motion deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed.)
(1520)
[English]
(Motion agreed to.)
The petitioners state that whereas the Young Offenders Act fails to act as a deterrent, is abused by young people predisposed to committing crime and encourages them the manipulation of children who are too young to be subject to the act, that Parliament undertake a complete and thorough review of existing legislation and amend the Young Offenders Act to reflect the concerns of this petition.
Petitioners from Sarnia, Ontario draw to the attention of the House that managing the family home and caring for preschool children is an honourable profession which has not been recognized for its value to society. They also state the Income Tax Act discriminates against families that make the choice to provide care in the home to preschool children, the disabled, the chronically ill or the aged.
The petitioners therefore pray and call on Parliament to pursue initiatives to eliminate tax discrimination against families that decide to provide care in the home to preschool children, the disabled, the chronically ill or the aged.
The petitioners therefore pray and call on Parliament to enact legislation to require health warning labels to be placed on containers of all alcoholic beverages to caution expectant mothers and others of the risks associated with alcohol consumption.
The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Ringuette-Maltais): Could hon. members please be brief in their presentations.
[Translation]
I take pride in joining with several colleagues in presenting a petition bearing 94,000 names, at least 2,000 of those from the riding of Gaspé. The petitioners are calling upon the government to take steps to enable Québec Téléphone to have access to a broadcasting licence. This is essential for the economic development of Quebec. Despite its foreign ownership, Québec Téléphone is managed by Quebecers and the language of work is French. Québec Téléphone is an needed agent of regional development.
(1525)
The petitioners are calling for the grandfathering of Québec Téléphone. Québec Téléphone has always been a key figure in the economic and technological development of the regions it serves.
[English]
They draw to the attention of the House that the Canadian nuclear industry provides enormous benefits to Canadians for safe and environmentally sound power and research and development. Atomic Energy Canada is the government agency responsible for Whiteshell in Manitoba and Chalk River in Ontario. Whiteshell makes substantial contributions to the economy in eastern Manitoba.
Therefore the petitioners pray that the Government of Canada will not close or downsize the Whiteshell facility and make a public declaration of that support.
The petition has to do with families and children of divorced parents. The petitioners call on Parliament to pass legislation incorporating rights of children and principles of equality between and among parents.
They are asking the House of Commons and the government to set up an energy price review commission to keep gasoline pricing and other energy products in check.
My second petition is also from many constituents in Regina-Lumsden. It pertains to the tax increases on gasoline. Fifty-two per cent of the cost of gas is taxes.
The petitioners are asking the House of Commons and the Government of Canada not to increase the taxes on gasoline in the upcoming federal budget.
Therefore the petitioners request that Parliament lobby and advocate to the United States judicial system on behalf of Leonard Peltier for a new trial and that justice be done in this case.
[Translation]
This is essential to Quebec's economic development and, although foreign owned, Québec Téléphone is managed by Quebecers. French is the exclusive language of work, and Québec Téléphone is a major instrument of regional economic development in Quebec.
[English]
(1530 )
The first two petitions state that the availability of a low cost energy source is a natural advantage Canadians have to oil. Over the past 10 years, the excise tax on gasoline has risen by 466 per cent. They request that Parliament not increase the federal sales tax on gasoline in the next federal budget.
The petitioners state that our dental and health care has contributed to Canadians enjoying one of the highest standards of health care in the world. The petitioners call upon Parliament to refrain from implementing a tax on health and dental benefits and to put on hold any future considerations of such a tax until a complete review of the tax system and how it impacts on the health of Canadians has been undertaken.
[Translation]
Mrs. Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral (Laval-Centre, BQ): Madam Speaker, were you to request it, you would no doubt find there is unanimous consent to extend the time usually allowed for petitions by ten minutes.
The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Ringuette-Maltais): Is that agreed?
Some hon. members: Agreed.
[English]
The petition deals with the issue of corporal punishment of children and more specifically with section 43 of the Criminal Code of Canada.
[Translation]
Social and economic logic demands that the grandfathering Québec Téléphone was previously granted be now broadened to take into account modern technology. Preventing Québec Téléphone from keeping up with technology would significantly hamper Quebec's social and economic development.
In order to give others a chance, I will now sit down.
(1535)
[English]
The petitioners call upon Parliament to stop the use and sale of synthetic bovine growth hormone in Canada until the year 2000, or extend the existing moratorium until health and economic questions can be answered.
Island who are bringing to this House a very sincere request to not increase taxes. Taxes on gasoline have gone up many times. The increase was 1.5 cents per litre last time. The petitioners are saying not to include another 2 cent per litre tax in the budget.
I am pleased to present this petition.
Mrs. Sharon Hayes (Port Moody-Coquitlam, Ref.): Madam Speaker, on behalf of 63 constituents and backed by an overwhelming feedback from many more, on this the day the government presents its budget I would like to present a petition which requests that Parliament not increase the federal excise tax on gasoline. I trust the government will heed the petitioners' sincere request.
Mr. Bob Ringma (Nanaimo-Cowichan, Ref.): Madam Speaker, I too have a petition concerning the price and the taxes on gasoline. Given that 52 per cent of the price of gasoline is composed of taxes and that taxes have increased by 566 per cent over the past decade, the petitioners request that Parliament not increase the federal excise tax on gas and that the government strongly consider reallocating its current revenues to rehabilitate Canada's crumbling highway system.
Mr. David Chatters (Athabasca, Ref.): Madam Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36, I would like to add another 4,000 names to the larger petition presented by myself and others asking the government not to further increase the excise tax on gasoline.
Mr. Paul Forseth (New Westminster-Burnaby, Ref.): Madam Speaker, I am pleased to present a petition on budget day on behalf of my constituents. They want to remind the finance minister that he still has time to change the text of his budget. The petitioners are upset that 52 per cent of the price of gasoline is composed of taxes and that the federal excise tax on gasoline has already increased by 566 per cent in the past decade.
The petitioners request that Parliament not increase the federal excise tax on gasoline and that the government strongly consider reallocating its current revenues to rehabilitate Canada's national highways.
The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Ringuette-Maltais): Is that agreed?
Some hon. members: Agreed.