Committee
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 1 - 15 of 1100
View Claude Bachand Profile
BQ (QC)
I was supposed to get the floor before Mr. Hawn.
View Claude Bachand Profile
BQ (QC)
I do not want to repeat the comments of my colleague from the NDP.
First of all, I have here a document which has been handed to me by Mr. Hawn but in English only. I already have enough difficulty with legalese and lawyers, despite my great admiration for them. It is not easy to deal with these issues, so just imagine having to deal with such complex matters in a language which is not my first language. I know my English is good, but I would have liked getting the document in French.
Secondly, there is something intriguing in this document: it answers questions from the Liberals. It means that Liberals have had the document and asked questions they probably communicated to the parliamentary secretary, while we ourselves have not been consulted. I find improper this process where two parties consulted with each other while the other two parties were kept in the dark.
Consequently, I am not ready either to pass amendments to these clauses today, not before we are given some time to consider this document in French. Question period is not the best time to examine a legal document, especially in a language that is not mine. Therefore, we are not willing either today to pass these amendments that would put the final touch to our consideration of Bill C-41.
View Claude Bachand Profile
BQ (QC)
When was that?
View Claude Bachand Profile
BQ (QC)
Was it in French?
View Claude Bachand Profile
BQ (QC)
View Claude Bachand Profile
BQ (QC)
But it is in English only, so we refuse to discuss it. I need a French version, otherwise I refuse to discuss it.
View Claude Bachand Profile
BQ (QC)
Mr. Chair, I find this situation totally ridiculous and unacceptable. Two parties consulted with each other and freely exchanged about the content of letters, of explanations and various options. On our side, we were handed this document at 2 p.m., in English only, during question period, which was very raucous today, and we are expected to study this very quickly. I don't agree. What the lawyers are submitting are rather straightforward amendments, it seems to me. One line would be replaced by a whole list of sections. But we did not get any time to review them. This is unacceptable.
Mr. Hawn, we are presently checking if we received this e-mail. It seems we did not. We could discuss it later, but right now I note that members of an opposition party have been briefed, gave answers, have even expressed preferences. Compared to them, Mr. Harris and myself are placed in an unfair situation. I don't know what we are going to do. I am presently consulting our whip. There certainly has been a breach of procedures that makes this situation unacceptable.
View Claude Bachand Profile
BQ (QC)
I am directing this comment to the lawyers here. I am not a lawyer and I know very little about law. I imagine a situation where a crown attorney would table a series of documents that are in one language only.
The Chair: These here are in both languages.
Mr. Claude Bachand: Yes, but the explanations are not. Even Mr. Hawn said that I should take my document and throw it into the recycling bin. This document here is in both languages but we also need the explanations. We have them here but are told not to use them.
To continue with my reasoning, let us imagine a crown attorney who submits new documents at the last minute to support his charges. Do you think that the defence lawyer would just trust him and accept these documents without reviewing them? Certainly not.
We have here a situation where new aspects have been added without us being consulted. Furthermore, these documents have not been tabled in both official languages, except for these motions which contain a list of numbers. So I cannot go along with this process which is contrary to the principle of fairness, in my view.
View Claude Bachand Profile
BQ (QC)
I am now ready to look at each of the sections.
I would like Mr. Gleeson to state which offences are related to sections 86, 87 and so on. Once we have that, maybe Mr. Harris, who moved amendments NDP-8 and NDP-9 will be satisfied. It might also allow us to have a more thorough discussion.
Mr. Gleeson, could you explain for each offence what the punishment might be?
View Claude Bachand Profile
BQ (QC)
I for one would have liked to find out what is happening in Libya. As you know, I have a motion and I would probably have introduced it at the time of the debate. However, I understand that we must finish our parliamentary and legislative job. I would be willing to continue. Is this a half-hour bell?
View Claude Bachand Profile
BQ (QC)
How much time do we have left?
If you wish, we could continue for 10 minutes.
View Claude Bachand Profile
BQ (QC)
Me neither.
Results: 1 - 15 of 1100 | Page: 1 of 74

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
>
>|
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data