Debates of May 29th, 2002
House of Commons Hansard #194 of the 37th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was public.
Topics
- Millennium Scholarships
- Ethics
- DES Awareness Week
- Millennium Scholarships
- Rural Expo 2002
- Ethics
- Terrorism
- Société Radio-Canada
- Young People
- Ethics
- Manufacturing
- Liberal Government
- Disability Tax Credit
- Cambridge Memorial Hospital
- Safe Water Act
- Ethics
- Government Contracts
- Government Loans
- Government Contracts
- Ethics
- Government Contracts
- Government Grants
- Government Contracts
- Government Grants
- Francophone Youth
- Whistleblowing
- Foreign Affairs
- Minister of Immigration
- Aboriginal Affairs
- Government Contracts
- Ethics
- Status of Women
- G-8 Summit
- Government Contracts
- International Cooperation
- Foreign Affairs
- Presence in Gallery
- Business of the House
- Government Response to Petitions
- Committees of the House
- Supreme Court Act
- Corrections and Conditional Release Act
- Criminal Code
- Private Members' Business
- Committees of the House
- Petitions
- Questions on the Order Paper
- Question No. 156
- Questions Passed as Orders for Returns
- Question n
- Motions for Papers
- Request for Emergency Debate
- Public Safety Act, 2002
- Criminal Code
Ethics
Oral Question Period
2:30 p.m.
The Speaker
The right hon. Prime Minister.
Ethics
Oral Question Period
2:30 p.m.
Saint-Maurice
Québec
Liberal
Jean Chrétien Prime Minister
Mr. Speaker, rather than reading a prepared question, if he had listened he would have understood what I said. I said that I was inviting the House of Commons to establish an ethics counsellor who would look at the ethics of members of parliament, senators and ministers and would report to the House. I said that a minute ago. He should listen before asking questions.
Government Contracts
Oral Question Period
2:30 p.m.
Bloc
Government Contracts
Oral Question Period
2:30 p.m.
Some hon. members
Oh, oh.
Government Contracts
Oral Question Period
2:30 p.m.
The Speaker
Order, please. It is impossible to hear the hon. member for Chambly, who has the floor.
I warned hon. members about the problem with our air conditioning and this will not help.
Government Contracts
Oral Question Period
2:30 p.m.
Bloc
Ghislain Lebel Chambly, QC
Mr. Speaker, we know that the minister of immigration stayed at the condo owned by his friend Claude Boulay, the president of Everest, when he was a backbencher. The Prime Minister has played down the whole affair by saying that he was not a member of cabinet at the time.
Will the minister of immigration tell us whether he has stayed in accommodation belonging to Claude Boulay, his wife, or Everest, here or outside Canada, since being appointed minister?
Government Contracts
Oral Question Period
2:35 p.m.
Saint-Maurice
Québec
Liberal
Jean Chrétien Prime Minister
Mr. Speaker, this question is completely unacceptable. One could rise and ask the same question of everyone.
When someone asks a member whether he was in a particular bar last night, even if they know he was not, doubt is created.
One could ask a member whether he beat his wife yesterday. If he does not answer or says he did not, doubt will be created in people's minds. This is a deeply destructive and dishonest line of questioning.
Government Contracts
Oral Question Period
2:35 p.m.
Some hon. members
Oh, oh.
Government Contracts
Oral Question Period
2:35 p.m.
An hon. member
Really.
Government Contracts
Oral Question Period
2:35 p.m.
Bloc
Ghislain Lebel Chambly, QC
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister said that the government would answer all questions in the House, and that that is why there would be no public inquiry.
Yet my question is simple and straightforward. Did the minister stay in accommodation belonging to Claude Boulay, his wife, or his company, since being appointed to cabinet, yes or no?
Government Contracts
Oral Question Period
2:35 p.m.
The Speaker
I have reservations about the acceptability of such a question. I know that we have already had an answer, but this question does not concern the minister's duties. There is no reference in the question to his ministerial duties. In my view, the question is unacceptable.
We will therefore proceed with oral question period. The hon. member for Crowfoot.
Government Grants
Oral Question Period
May 29th, 2002 / 2:35 p.m.
Canadian Alliance
Kevin Sorenson Crowfoot, AB
Mr. Speaker, the solicitor general admitted yesterday that he did in fact discuss a $3.5 million grant application with the commissioner of the RCMP. Canadians are offended that he has not admitted and refuses to admit that he blatantly abused his ministerial position.
Will the Prime Minister admit that it was wrong for the solicitor general to lobby the very organization that he controls?
Government Grants
Oral Question Period
2:35 p.m.
Saint-Maurice
Québec
Liberal
Jean Chrétien Prime Minister
Mr. Speaker, the solicitor general is the minister responsible in the House for the province of P.E.I. Institutions in that province made an application. They sent a copy of the application to the minister who passed it on to his department. It was the commissioner who discussed it after he had received the document.
It was his duty as a member of parliament to represent his constituency and do something that could be useful for the RCMP and the people of Prince Edward Island.
Government Grants
Oral Question Period
2:35 p.m.
Canadian Alliance
Kevin Sorenson Crowfoot, AB
Mr. Speaker, clearly it is not the responsibility of the solicitor general. It is not his duty to lobby the organization that he controls, and certainly not on behalf of a family member.
Canadians do not need an eight point ethics package to tell them that the solicitor general crossed the line. I therefore ask my question again. When will the solicitor general do the right thing and resign?
Government Grants
Oral Question Period
2:35 p.m.
Saint-Maurice
Québec
Liberal
Jean Chrétien Prime Minister
Mr. Speaker, again, how low can they go?
I know the minister's brother and he has been an extremely competent public servant for a long time in P.E.I., working for a public administration.
The member of parliament says that he was lobbying for his brother. He was lobbying for a public institution in the province of P.E.I. I think it is shameful to act like that in the House of Commons.