Debates of Feb. 23rd, 2004

Sponsorship Program

[Grant Hill, Canadian Alliance, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, the government last week refused to suspend the heads of crown corporations. “Wait for the public inquiry,” was the message into this scandal. We now hear the Prime Minister is considering changing his mind and he is actually thinking of this.

What new information has come to light to cause him to change his mind on this important issue in a week?

[Anne McLellan, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister had requested that the President of the Treasury Board do a review of the crown corporations referred to in the Auditor General's report. In fact the President of the Treasury Board is conducting that review and he will report to the Prime Minister upon its completion.

[Grant Hill, Canadian Alliance, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister started by blaming Gagliano. Next, he started to blame those individuals from the former prime minister. Now, he is blaming heads of crown corporations.

Does the Prime Minister really think we will believe that there was no Liberal implication in this scandal?

[Anne McLellan, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness]

Mr. Speaker, let me reassure the hon. member that we are not in the business of blaming anyone.

What we want to do is get to the bottom of this matter on behalf of all Canadians. That is why we have a public inquiry. That is why public accounts committee is at work. That is why the Prime Minister has requested that the President of the Treasury Board review the crown corporations referred to by the Auditor General.

This is not about blame. This is about getting to the bottom of what happened here.

[Grant Hill, Canadian Alliance, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister said today that this is not a Quebec scandal, that it is a national scandal. That is not true. This is a scandal of the Liberal Party of Canada, wasteful mess piled on wasteful mess.

Does the Prime Minister really expect us to believe that he and his party are going to get out of this mess by blaming a few heads of crown corporations?

[Anne McLellan, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness]

Mr. Speaker, let me say again that this is not about blaming anyone. This is about getting to the bottom of this situation. That is why there is a public inquiry. That is why the public accounts committee is at work. That is why the President of the Treasury Board is reviewing the actions of crown corporations referred to by the Auditor General.

We all want to get to the bottom of this matter. This is not about blame.

[Peter MacKay, Progressive Conservative, Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough, NS]

Mr. Speaker, to get to the bottom, one has to go to the top. The Prime Minister has become the artful dodger of accountability. Rogue bureaucrats, a few Quebec ministers, a former prime minister, throw in an ambassador, now it is crown corporations; the Prime Minister has mastered the art of finger pointing.

It has been literally months since he was aware of this brewing scandal within the department. It has been months. Does the Prime Minister really believe that after years of inaction and denial, simply suspending a few Liberal friends is going to absolve him completely of any his own personal responsibility?

[Reg Alcock, Liberal, President of the Treasury Board and Minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board]

Mr. Speaker, this is an exceptionally serious matter.

The Prime Minister asked me after the report was tabled to evaluate the activities of people who serve at pleasure who were there at the time that these incidents took place, to satisfy him that the management of the crown corporations had responded appropriately to the concerns raised, had and put in place systems that would prevent this from happening in the future. That is what I am doing. I will report to the Prime Minister when I am ready.

[Peter MacKay, Progressive Conservative, Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough, NS]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberal Party sharing the outrage of the public completely denies the fact that they are responsible. The chairs of VIA Rail and Canada Post and the BDC president were all implicated by the Auditor General in this scandal. They are still drawing hundreds of thousands of dollars in public money as salaries. There are massive waste, shady transactions and an all too common Liberal arrogance about the whole thing.

How can the Prime Minister, who was able to amass a personal fortune in business with a reputed eye for detail, now plead complete ignorance of the most basic levels of accountability and knowledge of public spending in the government for the last 10 years?

[Reg Alcock, Liberal, President of the Treasury Board and Minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board]

Mr. Speaker, as has become common with the member, he is willing to jump to the verdict well before he sees the evidence. Like the queen of hearts he runs around wanting heads, but government cannot do that. It would be completely improper for us to come to any conclusions until we have examined all of the facts. I am doing that and I am doing it carefully. I will report to the Prime Minister when I have reached a conclusion.

[Gilles Duceppe, Bloc, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the people have the right to know whether the money from the sponsorship scandal ended up in Liberal Party trust funds or in Liberal MPs' funds. As the Chief Electoral Officer has pointed out, it is impossible to know who financed these slush funds.

Will the Prime Minister, who says he wants to get to the bottom of things, open the books of these Liberal slush funds before the election, so that we can find out, at last, whether the sponsorship scandal benefited Liberal members and ministers?

[Jacques Saada, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister responsible for Democratic Reform]

Mr. Speaker, repeating things over and over will not make them come true. The Quebec division of the Liberal Party of Canada has no secret slush funds.

The members' fund at issue is one in which money was accumulated through fundraising activities in ridings, year after year, and set aside by the Liberal Party of Canada-Quebec to provide election funding for these ridings. Sitting member or not, it is the same for everyone.

[Gilles Duceppe, Bloc, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, if there is no problem, then let them make everything public. Moreover, let them make public the funds denounced by the Chief Electoral Officer of Canada, who talked about the personal trust funds of MPs who laundered this money on December 31—it is impossible to tell who made which contributions—before turning it over to the Liberal Party.

So if they say there is no problem with the Liberal funds—and I do believe them—let them also show that there is no problem with the other funds, and make it all public. Is the government prepared to do that?

[Jacques Saada, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister responsible for Democratic Reform]

Mr. Speaker, it is quite fascinating how someone can introduce a premise that makes absolutely no sense. How can the Liberal Party be asked to make public contributions already so public that they are on the Elections Canada website? It makes absolutely no sense.

And as for what goes on outside the party, pardon me, but I have no control over what happens outside the party, just as they have no oversight over what goes on outside their party.

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister announced publicly that he would track down all funds that might have originated from the sponsorship scandal, even within the Liberal Party's coffers. No doubt he will look at public donations, but there are a number of donations beyond our control. These specific funds are the Liberal Party Trust Fund 2 and the Corporation de service—PLCQ.

We must know just one thing. Will these funds which come from somewhere be subject to review to determine whether they include sponsorship funds?

[Jacques Saada, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister responsible for Democratic Reform]

Mr. Speaker, the answer is quite simply yes. There is nothing to hide. The Liberal Party has nothing to hide. This has already been announced. Furthermore, we said from the start that the commission of inquiry can go wherever it wants to seek all the answers it needs.

We have repeated this ten times already, but instead of listening to the answer, the opposition prefers to stick to its question.

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the government House leader does not need to get upset. On the contrary, I am quite pleased to hear that both these funds will be subject to investigation.

Now, I have another quick question. In this same spirit of cleaning house, will the funds of each member, which flowed through these trust funds thanks to Bill C-24, be subject to investigation by those individuals conducting the inquiry to see if they started off as sponsorship funding? That is all we want to know.

[Jacques Saada, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister responsible for Democratic Reform]

Mr. Speaker, all the funds belonging to the Liberal Party of Canada are accessible, and the contents of our books are clear, transparent and open. There is no problem.

As for funds outside the Liberal Party, the answer is simple: the commission of inquiry has all the means to investigate in this regard and to reach its own conclusions.

I cannot provide an answer on things outside the government and the party.

National Defence

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of National Defence, who keeps thumbing his nose at Canadian values. Now he tells us he may approve American controlled missile bases on Canadian soil. This flies in the face of Canadian independence and Canadian values. How dare he make these commitments without permission from Canadians?

Does the Prime Minister support the defence minister's position, or did the minister clear it only with the White House?

[David Pratt, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, inherent in that question are really two levels of speculation.

The first level presumes that we will be part of the U.S. missile defence system. That in effect is not the case. The government has not made a decision on that. The second level of speculation involves whether or not the U.S. may need our territory if we decide to participate. We do not know that at this point.

Again the NDP has run off on a tangent here in terms of its level of speculation.

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, the minister's refusal to deal with the facts leaves Canadians speculating. Canadians want some straight answers.

Fact: the U.S. has budgeted for space based interceptors. Fact: the U.S. has unveiled plans for missiles in orbit. Fact: Russia has successfully tested a hypersonic missile defence busting weapon. The facts are clear for everyone except the hawks in the government.

Given the minister's refusal to deal with the facts, can he not understand why Canadians fear that he is lying?

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[The Speaker]

The hon. member for Halifax knows that the use of that kind of language in the House is quite out of order and I would ask her to withdraw the word that she has used.

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I did not accuse the minister of lying. I said, can he not understand why Canadians think he is lying when he will not deal with the facts. He himself said he leaves people speculating.

[The Speaker]

We will deal with the matter after question period. The hon. Minister of National Defence.