House of Commons Hansard #25 of the 37th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was international.

Topics

Government Contracts
Oral Question Period

11:20 a.m.

Bloc

Michel Guimond Beauport—Montmorency—Côte-De- Beaupré—Île-D'Orléans, QC

Mr. Speaker, it was the Prime Minister himself who put ethics on the agenda, and to clearly show his determination, he pointed out that he would deal with it personally. The government is feigning a desire to deal with the ethics challenge, because it claims to be aware of the public criticism. The former Secretary of State for Amateur Sport's behaviour is one more test for this government.

How many e-mails and how many comments will it take to make the Prime Minister see reason and demand the resignation of the former secretary of state?

Government Contracts
Oral Question Period

11:20 a.m.

Wascana
Saskatchewan

Liberal

Ralph Goodale Minister of Public Works and Government Services

Mr. Speaker, again I would explain to the House and to the hon. gentleman that, in respect of the legal matter of a contract existing and coming into force, the requisition was dated May 29. The contract was dated May 30. If there were any activities undertaken by anyone in the private sector prior to those dates that was entirely the responsibility of those individuals and without risk to the government.

Government Contracts
Oral Question Period

11:25 a.m.

Bloc

Réal Ménard Hochelaga—Maisonneuve, QC

Mr. Speaker, an e-mail dated March 17 confirms that the former Secretary of State for Amateur Sport intervened to impose Everest. A workshop, on April 10, 2000, identified Everest as a key player in developing the plan for the former secretary of state's tour. Two weeks before being awarded the contract, Everest had completed the Internet site and, three days after having been awarded the contract, on June 2, Everest launched, in Fredericton, the former secretary of state's tour.

What more does the Prime Minister need as grounds for the dismissal of the former Secretary of State for Amateur Sport?

Government Contracts
Oral Question Period

11:25 a.m.

Hamilton East
Ontario

Liberal

Sheila Copps Minister of Canadian Heritage

Mr. Speaker, we are the ones who released the e-mail.

Government Contracts
Oral Question Period

11:25 a.m.

Bloc

Réal Ménard Hochelaga—Maisonneuve, QC

Mr. Speaker, the facts are there for everyone to see. The former Secretary of State for Amateur Sport intervened to secure the contract for Everest, the firm run by his friend Claude Boulay. The misguided actions of a single minister reflect on the government as a whole.

What is the Prime Minister waiting for to ask this minister to resign now?

Government Contracts
Oral Question Period

11:25 a.m.

Wascana
Saskatchewan

Liberal

Ralph Goodale Minister of Public Works and Government Services

Mr. Speaker, whatever a company may have done in anticipation that it might receive a contract is entirely at its own risk. As experience has demonstrated, sometimes that risk indeed comes to bear upon the company. I would point out to members of the House the recent example of this summer when a moratorium was imposed upon certain activities. Some people had anticipated work and did not get it because of a government decision that said they should not.

Health
Oral Question Period

11:25 a.m.

NDP

Judy Wasylycia-Leis Winnipeg North Centre, MB

Mr. Speaker, it is becoming increasingly clear that the profiteers and privatizers of health care are rushing to try to put the nails in the coffin of medicare before Roy Romanow has a chance to report. Today we learn about Ontario trying to pull ahead of B.C., which is trying to catch up to Alberta, by opening the cash register for for profit private hospitals. This even though we have all kinds of evidence, including the research from the Romanow commission, that says private hospitals do not deliver better and more effective care.

Is the federal government going to stand silently by and award the trophy of medicare?

Health
Oral Question Period

11:25 a.m.

Madawaska—Restigouche
New Brunswick

Liberal

Jeannot Castonguay Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for her question. It is certainly a topic of current interest these days.

It is obvious that the Government of Canada has always made it clear: the Canada Health Act will be respected. Necessary health care will be made available to anyone who needs it. This is why, on this review, the government commissioned the Romanow study, and we should have the official report in hand by the end of the month. We will examine this report, and that of the Kirby commission. On that basis, we will make the necessary decisions to ensure that all Canadians have access—

Health
Oral Question Period

11:25 a.m.

The Speaker

The hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre.

Health
Oral Question Period

11:25 a.m.

NDP

Judy Wasylycia-Leis Winnipeg North Centre, MB

Mr. Speaker, I am tempted to ask the government the question Romanow put yesterday: Where is the beef? Is there no clear statement of concern in the face of this fundamental erosion of our health care system? Just yesterday we learned from the College of Family Physicians that 4.5 million Canadians are waiting to get access to a family doctor, the very first entry point to our health care system, a bedrock, fundamental part of our health care system.

Is there a plan of action to ensure Canadians have access to non-profit, quality health care services?

Health
Oral Question Period

11:25 a.m.

Madawaska—Restigouche
New Brunswick

Liberal

Jeannot Castonguay Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health

Mr. Speaker, we are well aware of what is going on in the medical community. We know full well that, in recent years, there have been changes in the way physicians practice medicine. I was there; I saw the changes.

This has definitely created some turbulence in the system. That is why, in 2000, the first ministers agreed to inject $800 million to ensure better access to primary care. We will continue in that direction, and I can assure my hon. colleague that we will be there, keeping a close watch on things.

Citizenship and Immigration
Oral Question Period

November 8th, 2002 / 11:25 a.m.

Canadian Alliance

Inky Mark Dauphin—Swan River, MB

Mr. Speaker, yesterday we debated the government's new citizenship act, Bill C-18. The problem with the last two bills the government tried to introduce, Bill C-63 and Bill C-16, was that both created two classes of Canadian citizens: those who are born here and those who are naturalized.

Why does the new citizenship act, Bill C-18, continue to support two classes of Canadian citizenship?

Citizenship and Immigration
Oral Question Period

11:30 a.m.

Gatineau
Québec

Liberal

Mark Assad Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration

Mr. Speaker, what the member has raised is totally inexact. This is not a two measure system. It is very simple. The new law states that those who are adopted from abroad will obtain immediate citizenship. That is good news for prospective people who want to adopt.

Citizenship and Immigration
Oral Question Period

11:30 a.m.

Canadian Alliance

Inky Mark Dauphin—Swan River, MB

Mr. Speaker, the problem is about due process of law. Under section 17 of the new bill, the minister still has a right to take away the citizenship of naturalized Canadians during the first five years. There is no equality of citizenship between those who are born here and those who are naturalized.

Why does the minister continue to support two classes of citizenship in this country?

Citizenship and Immigration
Oral Question Period

11:30 a.m.

Gatineau
Québec

Liberal

Mark Assad Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration

Mr. Speaker, once again I believe that the member is erring. It is very clear that there is judicial process in this. It will be debated and I am sure that the member will get all the answers concerning this issue.