House of Commons Hansard #139 of the 37th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was years.

Topics

Member for LaSalle--Émard
Oral Question Period

2:50 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

Monte Solberg Medicine Hat, AB

Mr. Speaker, it is not only the industry minister who is having ethical problems these days.

Last Friday the ethics counsellor failed to deliver his report on the new Liberal leader's omission of Lansdowne Technologies from his declaration of assets. It sounds like the ethics counsellor is having a little trouble putting lipstick on that pig. Lansdowne received at least $12 million in government contracts.

My question is, why does the government not admit that the new Liberal leader signed a false declaration of assets and put himself potentially in a $12 million conflict of interest?

Member for LaSalle--Émard
Oral Question Period

2:50 p.m.

Ottawa South
Ontario

Liberal

John Manley Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance

Mr. Speaker, we have been through this in the House before. In fact, it does appear that there was an administrative error in connection with a report.

However, it is clear that Lansdowne Technologies was wholly owned by a company that was included in the declaration. It was therefore covered by the declaration.

In fact, it is tiresome to hear the member for Medicine Hat get up day after day and simply throw mud at someone who has more than complied with all the rules since 1988.

Member for LaSalle--Émard
Oral Question Period

2:50 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

Monte Solberg Medicine Hat, AB

Mr. Speaker, apparently the ethics counsellor does not see it that way or he would not be investigating.

The new Liberal leader clearly owned this company. He repeatedly failed to include this company in his declaration of assets.

My question is, when will the government admit that the new Liberal leader personally profited when Lansdowne picked up $12 million in federal contracts? Does he not see that as a problem?

Member for LaSalle--Émard
Oral Question Period

2:50 p.m.

Ottawa South
Ontario

Liberal

John Manley Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance

Mr. Speaker, I see in today's Hill Times that the hon. member describes himself “giddy as a schoolgirl”. I do not know what that says about his question, but I think he should restrain his giddiness and tendency to throw mud at hon. members.

National Defence
Oral Question Period

2:50 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

Jay Hill Prince George—Peace River, BC

Mr. Speaker, on November 1 many families residing in private married quarters provided by the Canadian Forces housing authority will be slapped with yet another rent increase.

Rents will increase by as much as 25% on some bases. Civilians are protected from drastic rent increases by provincial law; however, these laws do not apply to federal property.

Why is the defence minister gouging Canadian Forces families with unreasonable rent increases?

National Defence
Oral Question Period

2:50 p.m.

Markham
Ontario

Liberal

John McCallum Minister of National Defence

Mr. Speaker, I would like to point out that quality of life is a primary objective of the Department of National Defence.

On the question of housing, since 1996 the government has invested $300 million in improvements to the quality of housing for our military people. At the same time, less than 25% of our military personnel live in government provided houses.

It is necessary to provide fairness across the board so there has to be equity in rents paid to the private sector and the government. There are strict limits on the rent increase that is allowable in any given year.

National Defence
Oral Question Period

2:55 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

Jay Hill Prince George—Peace River, BC

Mr. Speaker, we will leave it to our armed forces personnel to decide whether the minister's definition of fairness is adequate and proper.

Tenant protection acts guard against drastic and unfair rent increases; however, provincial laws do not protect military families from massive rent increases at the hands of the minister and the Liberal government. To add insult to injury, the living standards of many of these housing units are quite simply deplorable and do not even meet provincial housing standards.

Why does the Minister of National Defence think that he can get away with things that even slum lords would be held accountable for?

National Defence
Oral Question Period

2:55 p.m.

Markham
Ontario

Liberal

John McCallum Minister of National Defence

Mr. Speaker, over the last five years, the top priority of the Department of National Defence has been to improve the quality of life.

I have mentioned $300 million in housing, substantial salary increases, substantial improvements in the health care system and the treatment of PTSD, and substantial improvements in family resource centres.

We are extremely mindful of the contribution that our members make. This has become all too clear over the last couple of weeks. The well-being, welfare and good quality of life of members of the Canadian Forces remains a top priority for the government.

Canadian Grand Prix
Oral Question Period

2:55 p.m.

Bloc

Réal Ménard Hochelaga—Maisonneuve, QC

Mr. Speaker, while Normand Legault, the promoter of the Grand Prix, is working to save the event, the government is negotiating with Molson behind the scenes and may derail the whole process.

Instead of all these parallel approaches, would it not be better for the government to send a clear message to the private sector by making a public commitment to a financial contribution that would save the Grand Prix in the end?

Canadian Grand Prix
Oral Question Period

2:55 p.m.

Etobicoke Centre
Ontario

Liberal

Allan Rock Minister of Industry

Mr. Speaker, discussions involving the Government of Canada, the Government of Quebec and the City of Montreal are ongoing, in an attempt to find a solution. We hope to find a solution so that Formula 1 racing in Canada can continue.

Ethics
Oral Question Period

2:55 p.m.

Calgary Southwest
Alberta

Canadian Alliance

Stephen Harper Leader of the Opposition

Mr. Speaker, I want to follow-up the questions put to the industry minister.

He claimed to have been un-involved in cabinet decisions related to the Irving shipyards during the blackout period. I note that on July 19, 2002, in the New Brunswick Telegraph Journal and on January 22, 2003, in the The Evening News he gave indications to the public both times that he was intimately briefed and knowledgeable on the procurement process and the decisions being taken in cabinet.

I would like to ask the minister, was he involved in these decisions or was he simply deceiving the public as to his knowledge?

Ethics
Oral Question Period

2:55 p.m.

Etobicoke Centre
Ontario

Liberal

Allan Rock Minister of Industry

Mr. Speaker, from and after the time when I spoke to the ethics counsellor I was out of the decision process. If I was asked publicly, I said only that the government would make a decision when the government had something to announce. I took no part in the decision-making process.

The Prime Minister's Office, the PCO, and other members of my own department, including the deputy minister, were involved. I was not.

The decision was made without my involvement from and after the time the ethics counsellor gave me advice. It was then included in the budget in February of this year, which was news to me, and it was followed through with the usual procedures.

Border Security
Oral Question Period

2:55 p.m.

Bloc

Richard Marceau Charlesbourg—Jacques-Cartier, QC

Mr. Speaker, Ahmad Cheriam, an individual wanted by the Quebec police in connection with a juvenile prostitution ring, crossed the Canadian border without any problem, in spite of two arrest warrants and a national all points bulletin.

How can the government explain that, despite the investments in security that were made, our borders are still sieves?

Border Security
Oral Question Period

2:55 p.m.

Thornhill
Ontario

Liberal

Elinor Caplan Minister of National Revenue

Mr. Speaker, I wish to inform all members that there was no lookout in our system at the time that this individual entered Canada.

I can tell the member that since July 2000 customs officers have apprehended and arrested 2,136 individuals, criminals who were in our system. If they are in our system, we stop them and arrest them.

Agriculture
Oral Question Period

October 20th, 2003 / 3 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

Rick Casson Lethbridge, AB

Mr. Speaker, the cattle industry and Canadians have been kept in the dark by the government on the issue of BSE and the resulting border closure.

It was confirmed today by the U.S., while we were told a week ago by the U.S. consulate, that in the next few days the U.S. government will publish the rule change that will allow the importation of live cattle under 30 months of age.

Why do the Canadian cattle industry and Canadians continually have to get this critical information from the United States instead of its own government?