House of Commons Hansard #135 of the 38th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was human.

Topics

Municipalities
Oral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Don Valley West
Ontario

Liberal

John Godfrey Minister of State (Infrastructure and Communities)

Mr. Speaker, our involvement in the infrastructure initiative is based on dividing up priorities into three groups, namely national, provincial and municipal priorities, in an attempt to find a common ground and to work together by uniting our efforts to achieve the same goal and the same objective.

Health
Oral Questions

October 17th, 2005 / 2:25 p.m.

NDP

Jack Layton Toronto—Danforth, ON

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister, who once again last week showed us that he cannot face up to a problem without posturing. How Ralph Klein is responsible for the trade wars that George Bush has launched against our country is completely beyond me.

The Prime Minister has picked a fight with Ralph Klein before; it was on protecting public medicare. In fact, the Prime Minister called it the fight of his life.

Let us see if he meant it. What new conditions are Premier Klein and the other premiers now having to face to stop the privatization of our health care system?

Health
Oral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Vancouver South
B.C.

Liberal

Ujjal Dosanjh Minister of Health

Mr. Speaker, the fact is that the additional $41.3 billion that is going to the provinces over the next 10 years is going through the Canada Health Act.

Our differences are not with the NDP. The enemies of health care are across from us. Every one of their three leaders, including the current leader, has said they would gut the Canada Health Act and they would privatize health care.

Health
Oral Questions

2:25 p.m.

NDP

Jack Layton Toronto—Danforth, ON

Mr. Speaker, that is an odd way to conduct a fight, have somebody else stand up when it is the fight of your life.

The Prime Minister promised. He said he would fix the wait times, that he would stop the privatization of health care, yet both are taking place at this very moment. In fact, he allowed the provinces to leave with $41 billion without a single string attached, without a single condition to stop the privatization of health care.

Will the minister now agree with the NDP that it is time for some new rules?

Health
Oral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Vancouver South
B.C.

Liberal

Ujjal Dosanjh Minister of Health

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is wrong again. All of the conditions of the Canada Health Act apply to the $41.3 billion over the next 10 years.

What I really want to say is our difference is not with them. We share the same objective of actually strengthening the public health care system. The wait times are being reduced in every province across the country. That money is being utilized. We will have benchmarks by December 31, 2005.

David Dingwall
Oral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Conservative

Brian Pallister Portage—Lisgar, MB

Mr. Speaker, we have learned that the Prime Minister's Office spoke with David Dingwall before he submitted his letter of resignation. We also know that the Prime Minister knew that Dingwall's remuneration agreement did not include severance. Therefore, severance pay would be entirely at the discretion of the Prime Minister.

I would like to ask, when the Prime Minister spoke with David Dingwall who raised the issue of severance pay? Was it Mr. Dingwall or him?

David Dingwall
Oral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Markham—Unionville
Ontario

Liberal

John McCallum Minister of National Revenue

Mr. Speaker, the government will pay to Mr. Dingwall only what legal counsel says is required.

Moreover, a review is under way by PriceWaterhouseCoopers in terms of the expenses. The report will be made public on Wednesday of this week. We shall have a full accounting as to whether his expenditures were appropriate. Were they not appropriate, then those that are inappropriate would be deducted from any severance payments that he might receive.

David Dingwall
Oral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Conservative

Brian Pallister Portage—Lisgar, MB

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister began claiming that severance was an obligatory aspect of the government's obligations and that it be paid immediately following David Dingwall's resignation. Yet the Prime Minister could not provide us with a single legitimate reason, no contractual obligation, no legislation, no legal opinion.

The only possible reason for the Prime Minister to pay Mr. Dingwall severance is that he promised to pay Mr. Dingwall severance. Why did the Prime Minister promise David Dingwall severance pay?

David Dingwall
Oral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Markham—Unionville
Ontario

Liberal

John McCallum Minister of National Revenue

Mr. Speaker, sometime ago I said there would be two reviews conducted by the Mint. The first is the audit which I just mentioned a few moments ago. In addition, there is a review to examine the processes of the Mint with the possibility of improvements being recommended.

I am pleased to announce that the Mint has engaged Peter Dey, a well-known expert in corporate governance from the firm Osler Hoskin & Harcourt to undertake this review.

Campaign Financing
Oral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Conservative

Scott Reid Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON

Mr. Speaker, the multiculturalism minister was accompanied on a Team Canada mission to China last January by Michael Lo and Queenie Tin, shareholders in the Kingston Education Group. Mr. Lo and Queenie Tin also appear to be investors in Grand Canadian Academy, the minister's own education company in China.

Is it not therefore the case that the minister has been using official Team Canada trade missions to promote deals which benefit his investment partners?

Campaign Financing
Oral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Ottawa—Vanier
Ontario

Liberal

Mauril Bélanger Minister for Internal Trade

Mr. Speaker, as is the case with all ministers when they are sworn into the cabinet, they submit their situation for the advice of the Ethics Commissioner. In this case the minister did that. The Ethics Commissioner recommended that he divest himself of any shares that he had and the minister did just that in December 2004.

No, the minister is not in any conflict of interest.

Campaign Financing
Oral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Conservative

Scott Reid Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON

Mr. Speaker, according to the Vancouver Sun , the minister failed to disclose to the Ethics Commissioner who owned the other 30% of his school at the time and the question is the interest of his partners.

The minister having failed to file a complete report leaves questions in our minds. The missing information which would either confirm that he has been using the trade missions inappropriately or clear his name could be presented to the House.

Will the minister tell this House whether or not investors in his own company have benefited from his recent trade trip to China?

Campaign Financing
Oral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Ottawa—Vanier
Ontario

Liberal

Mauril Bélanger Minister for Internal Trade

Mr. Speaker, the member might be well advised to consult with the Ethics Commissioner instead of the Vancouver Sun .

The minister did exactly what he was advised to do by the Ethics Commissioner, which was to divest himself of any shares or any interest he might have had in these corporations. He did that in December 2004, way before the trips. No, the minister is not in any way, shape or form in any conflict of interest in this situation.

Budget Surpluses
Oral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Bloc

Yvan Loubier Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC

Mr. Speaker, the government has just introduced a bill on the use of federal budget surpluses in the coming years.

How can the Prime Minister contradict himself so by denying the existence of any fiscal imbalance to the federal government's advantage and then confirming the anticipated existence of huge federal surpluses by introducing legislation on their allocation in the future?

Budget Surpluses
Oral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Scarborough—Guildwood
Ontario

Liberal

John McKay Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance

Mr. Speaker, the government commissioned Dr. O'Neill to write a report with regard to the surpluses that occur from time to time.

Dr. O'Neill's findings were that the bias is always skewered to the positive and as a consequence, there should be some mechanism for dealing with that positive result that happens, and has happened over the last eight years. The tabling of the report, which is an equal division among tax relief, debt reduction and program initiatives, is our response to that report. I believe it is greatly supported by many Canadians.