Debates of May 28th, 1999

Stéphane Bergeron Verchères, QC

Mr. Speaker, since the members of this House do not have access to the ethics counsellor, in light of the good faith shown by the Minister of Finance, can the minister commit right now, out of a concern for transparency, to make public the entire report of the ethics counsellor concerning his apparent conflict of interest in the tainted blood matter?

Herb Gray Deputy Prime Minister

Mr. Speaker, the matter is being looked into by the ethics counsellor. The release of his report is a matter for the ethics counsellor and the Prime Minister. I am sure they will carry out their duties in the most appropriate and complete way.

Inky Mark Dauphin—Swan River, MB

Mr. Speaker, this has been quite a week. We have a government claiming it won the trade war. That is a rather premature claim. We are not out of the woods yet, and we all know that.

What we witnessed this past week was a face-saving exercise for the heritage minister. The fact is that she was the one who created this mess. Now even the Americans want a subsidy.

How much will this face-saving exercise cost the taxpayers?

Sheila Copps Minister of Canadian Heritage

Mr. Speaker, I would hope that the hon. member in examining this dossier would understand that the fight around Canadian magazines is a fight that has existed in this country for many years.

In fact, Bill C-55 was passed through the cabinet and will be amended and passed through the House as a result of the WTO decision which preceded my term as minister.

Inky Mark Dauphin—Swan River, MB

Mr. Speaker, the Reform Party was the only party standing up for Canadian jobs over this mess.

It is time for a reality check. The government went to bat for the magazine publishing industry over this bill and at the same time it excluded the advertising sector. Is that fair?

What kind of deal was struck with the magazine publishers and how much will this cost the taxpayer?

Sheila Copps Minister of Canadian Heritage

Mr. Speaker, my only comment would be, thank God the Reform Party was not doing our negotiations.

Monique Guay Laurentides, QC

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance is still maintaining that he does not recall discussing the Red Cross's contract with Connaught, a subsidiary of the Canada Development Corporation, on whose board of directors he sat at the time. However the minister's name appears at the end of the CDC's 1984 annual report.

Does the minister still stand by his statement that he does not recall discussing blood, Connaught, and its contract with the Red Cross when he was a CDC board member?

Paul Martin Minister of Finance

Mr. Speaker, I stand fully by the position I have stated this week and last week in the House.

Monique Guay Laurentides, QC

Mr. Speaker, we will refresh the minister's memory.

The CDC's 1984 annual report mentions the expiry of a Connaught contract with the Red Cross representing 14% of its sales. An annual report always mentions the year's highlights, as well as being approved by the board of directors.

Does this not shoot the minister's defence all to pieces?

Paul Martin Minister of Finance

Mr. Speaker, no. The member should read the report. The report mentions all the activities of the CDC, including Connaught, which was a subsidiary, but a subsidiary with its own board of directors.

It should also be mentioned that the CDC mainly focussed on mining, chemicals, and the provision of services to companies. The involvement of Life Sciences, Connaught's parent company, was truly minimal in the overall picture. In fact, CDC did not own 100% of its assets.