House of Commons Hansard #149 of the 38th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was liberal.

Topics

Sponsorship Program
Oral Questions

2:20 p.m.

The Speaker

Order, please. I am sure the hon. member for Central Nova appreciates all the advice and assistance, but I cannot hear the hon. member. Somebody will get a question and may want to hear it so a response can be given. The hon. member for Central Nova has the floor.

Sponsorship Program
Oral Questions

2:20 p.m.

Conservative

Peter MacKay Central Nova, NS

Mr. Speaker, Justice Gomery reports that over $40 million is still unaccounted for. The Prime Minister nor his justice minister cannot credibly say that the agreement between the Liberal Party and the Liberal government to pay back the paltry $1.14 million, to which they have committed, was all the stolen money that came from Canadian taxpayers, stolen by his party.

When will the Prime Minister sue the Liberal Party of Canada to get a judicial determination of the full amount that his party stole, pay back every red--

Sponsorship Program
Oral Questions

2:20 p.m.

The Speaker

The hon. Minister of Public Works and Government Services.

Sponsorship Program
Oral Questions

2:20 p.m.

Kings—Hants
Nova Scotia

Liberal

Scott Brison Minister of Public Works and Government Services

Mr. Speaker, every penny that was received by the Liberal Party inappropriately has been repaid to the Canadian taxpayer. Beyond that, we based that analysis on the facts in Justice Gomery's report. We know the Conservative Party and the Bloc have been pulling numbers out of the air in terms of what the appropriate figure is. We prefer to base our analysis on the facts in Justice Gomery's report.

Sponsorship Program
Oral Questions

2:20 p.m.

Bloc

Gilles Duceppe Laurier, QC

Mr. Speaker, in his report on the sponsorship scandal, Justice Gomery wrote, and I quote, “Treasury Board no longer considers its oversight function to be an important part of its overall responsibilities”.

As for Jean Chrétien, speaking of the sponsorship program, he said he had instructed the Treasury Board to conduct the appropriate audits and it was confirmed to him on several occasions that he had nothing to worry about.

My question is very simple. Is it true that the Prime Minister, who was vice-chair of the Treasury Board at the time, was instructed by Jean Chrétien to report? If so, is it true that his answer to Jean Chrétien was that he had nothing to worry about?

Sponsorship Program
Oral Questions

2:20 p.m.

LaSalle—Émard
Québec

Liberal

Paul Martin Prime Minister

Mr. Speaker, the question is frivolous and unfounded. I can say, as I have said previously, that in my opinion, there were deficiencies at Treasury Board at the time. These are precisely the deficiencies that the President of the Treasury Board addressed through reforms.

Sponsorship Program
Oral Questions

2:20 p.m.

Bloc

Gilles Duceppe Laurier, QC

Mr. Speaker, first, he admits that there were deficiencies. As vice-chair, he could have acted earlier.

Second, my question is simple. Jean Chrétien said that he instructed the minister responsible for the Treasury Board to audit the sponsorship program. On several occasions, he was assured that there were no problems. This is a very simple question. That statement was made after the Gomery report was published.

Is it true that the Prime Minister, who was vice-chair of the Treasury Board at the time, was so instructed? Is it true that his answer was that there were no problems? The question is simple. He should answer it.

Sponsorship Program
Oral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Outremont
Québec

Liberal

Jean Lapierre Minister of Transport

Mr. Speaker, for the benefit of the leader of the Bloc Québécois, what Justice Gomery said above all is this. “[The current Prime Minister]... is entitled, like other ministers in the Quebec caucus, to be exonerated from any blame for carelessness or misconduct”. Such is Justice Gomery's finding.

Sponsorship Program
Oral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Bloc

Michel Gauthier Roberval, QC

Mr. Speaker, Jean Chrétien was quite clear. He said, “I had given the order to Treasury Board to carry out the necessary audits. They confirmed to me on several occasions that I had nothing to worry about”. For the edification of our viewers, the Prime Minister was vice-chair of Treasury Board. So, he took orders from Jean Chrétien.

What we want to know today is whether he did well and truly receive such orders and whether he replied that there was nothing to worry about.

Sponsorship Program
Oral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Outremont
Québec

Liberal

Jean Lapierre Minister of Transport

Mr. Speaker, the members of the Bloc Québécois want to conduct the inquiry for Justice Gomery, because they are not happy with his findings. Each of their questions aims to continue the smear campaign to their discredit. That is why they should be happy with the findings of Justice Gomery himself and stop trying to go beyond his report because they are not happy with its findings. They should blame Justice Gomery, if they dare.

Sponsorship Program
Oral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Bloc

Michel Gauthier Roberval, QC

Mr. Speaker, I do not see how quoting former Prime Minister Jean Chrétien constitutes a smear campaign against the government. Perhaps the Minister of Transport is in disgrace and will be even more so.

My question to the Prime Minister is as follows. Jean Chrétien, his predecessor, said that he had asked for an update and was told that everything was fine. He was a member of Treasury Board. Is it true that Jean Chrétien asked him this? If so, what answer did he give? It is not complicated.

Sponsorship Program
Oral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Outremont
Québec

Liberal

Jean Lapierre Minister of Transport

Mr. Speaker, the Gomery inquiry into the facts has concluded. Justice Gomery heard all the witnesses, including Mr. Chrétien, who told what he knew about this matter. So, the Bloc Québécois does not need to try to do the judge's job. He has done it and he has drawn his own conclusions. They may not like them but they should be ashamed of trying to prolong the matter. I understand they are not happy that the Prime Minister was exonerated from any blame for carelessness or misconduct. They do not like this conclusion, but that is what Justice Gomery found.

Health
Oral Questions

November 14th, 2005 / 2:25 p.m.

NDP

Jack Layton Toronto—Danforth, ON

Mr. Speaker, over this past weekend the Quebec wing of the Liberal Party of Canada passed a motion and adopted the position that there should be a parallel system of private health insurance. We are not talking about Ralph Klein or Gordon Campbell. We are talking about the Liberal Party of Canada, which has been in power for 12 years in Canada and has no rules in place to protect health care.

We know where the Prime Minister stands and now I think we know why. Can he explain why his party is supporting a parallel private system of health care?

Health
Oral Questions

2:25 p.m.

LaSalle—Émard
Québec

Liberal

Paul Martin Prime Minister

Mr. Speaker, first of all, that is not what the party resolution said, but in any event, we are a democratic party. Those who are part of our party have the opportunity to debate issues. We make it very clear, on the other hand, that government follows its policies and is not bound by those that are debated at the party conventions. This is a democratic party. People have opinions and they express them.

Parliament of Canada
Oral Questions

2:25 p.m.

NDP

Jack Layton Toronto—Danforth, ON

Mr. Speaker, first of all, it is not surprising to see the Prime Minister wanting to disassociate himself from the Quebec wing of the Liberal Party, although my guess is he will be happy to have it work to re-elect him the next time around.

When it comes to democracy, the question is whether the Prime Minister will abide by the position of a majority of the House of Commons concerning how the business of the House of Commons should be conducted over the next number of weeks and months. That is a question about real democracy.