Debates of May 9th, 2005

Canada Post

[John McCallum, Liberal, Minister of National Revenue]

Mr. Speaker, what the member just said is totally false. In fact, Canada Post is currently working in cooperation with the Canada Revenue Agency, which is auditing the expenses of the office of the president of Canada Post. This is still under way. Once that has been done, Canada Post's board of directors will take action. But we have to wait for the officials to conclude their work first.

[Brian Pallister, Conservative, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

The fact is, Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has been trying to shift the responsibility for wrongdoing on to virtually everyone, rogue bureaucrats and especially his predecessor. However, the wrongdoing at Canada Post came to light on his watch and he has done nothing about it.

It has been more than a year now since André Ouellet was first asked to provide receipts to validate $2 million in lavish expenses. Yet any objective observer would have to say the Prime Minister has done nothing but swept this issue under the carpet.

He claims to be a wire brush. Why does he keep acting like a feather duster?

[John McCallum, Liberal, Minister of National Revenue]

Mr. Speaker, in the other official language, for the benefit of the hon. member, he might recall André Ouellet did leave some time ago. Meanwhile, one has to wait for the results of the audit currently being conducted by Canada Revenue Agency of the expenditures around the president's office and the issue of receipts.

The officials are conducting that audit. When it is complete, the board of Canada Post will take the appropriate action.

Airports

[Marlene Catterall, Liberal, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

Mr. Speaker, for several years airports across Canada have been asking for new, fairer and more affordable rent agreements for their airports. Ottawa is no exception, and local members have been lobbying hard for a new deal.

Could the minister inform the House how his announcement this morning at the Ottawa international airport helps all airports better serve their communities and the travelling public?

[Jean Lapierre, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, I thought no one would ask. This morning we made an announcement by which 60% of the rent will be cut in every airport in Canada, saving $8 billion for the airline industry and the travelling public. I want to thank the Minister of Finance for his contribution to this decision.

This is the best news the aviation sector has had in years.

Sponsorship Program

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, every day Canadians are hearing more and more evidence that their hard-earned tax dollars found their way back to Liberal Party coffers in envelopes stuffed with thousands of their taxpayer dollars. Today former Liberal executive Benoît Corbeil admitted that he too funnelled taxpayer dollars into local Liberal campaigns.

The government has apparently heard enough evidence to bring lawsuits against several of the ad companies, but when will the government respect the will of the House and put that dirty money in a trust?

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Minister of Public Works and Government Services]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has been clear, the government has been clear and the party has been clear that if there were funds received for the party inappropriately, those funds will be returned to the Canadian taxpayer.

We can trust our Prime Minister to act on this and to ensure that the party acts on this because our Prime Minister is the individual who has demonstrated the courage to establish Justice Gomery's work, to support Justice Gomery and to ensure that Canadians have the truth they deserve.

Fisheries

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I have just returned from my riding in the Pacific northwest where I watched an unprecedented coalition forming.

First Nations, commercial fishers and sport fishers have come together to oppose DFO's irresponsible plans to promote fish farms on the north coast, again a Russian roulette with our wild fish.

The science is clear that open net fish farms are a threat. The Auditor General four years ago said that DFO was not fulfilling its mandate to protect wild salmon from the effects of salmon farming.

Will the minister finally step up and defend the people of B.C.'s coast and put a halt to the expansion of fish farms?

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Minister of Fisheries and Oceans]

Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague considered all the evidence. In fact, he reviewed scientific evidence from my department and he ought to consider it. The government supports the emerging aquaculture industry in the country. It plays an important role in the economies of many coastal communities, as my hon. friend ought to know.

We are committed to assisting the industry as it grows, while at the same time ensuring that this growth occurs in a sustainable way with minimal impact on the environment.

Sponsorship Program

[Andrew Scheer, Conservative, Regina—Qu'Appelle, SK]

Mr. Speaker, the member for Honoré-Mercier was vice-president of Gervais-Gagnon from 1993 to 2003. His company paid more than $46,000 to the Liberal Party in exchange for some dubious contracts, some of these with Canada Post. The member was also involved in the Prime Minister's leadership bid.

How can the Prime Minister still claim to have seen nothing and heard nothing, when one of his organizers was involved in the sponsorship scandal?

[The Speaker]

I do not see the connection between this question and the administration of the Government of Canada. The hon. member is not a member of the government. He is a member of Parliament but not a member of the government.

The hon. member for Elgin—Middlesex—London.

[Joe Preston, Conservative, Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the Gomery commission has pointed the finger at the Prime Minister's office. Canadians are piecing together just how closely connected friends of the Prime Minister are to ad scam.

The former vice-president of the firm Gervais, Gagnon had close ties to the Prime Minister's leadership campaign. His firm benefited from lucrative contracts from Canada Post.

How could the Prime Minister not have known that one of his trusted advisers and key Quebec lieutenants was on the ad scam payroll?

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Minister of Public Works and Government Services]

Mr. Speaker, the Globe and Mail editorial on Friday said that there was no persuasive testimony that the Prime Minister was involved in any way in any alleged chicanery.

After months of testimony and after over 12 million pages of documents reviewed by the Gomery commission, opposition members have failed to identify any involvement by the Prime Minister of Canada in any of this activity. They are involved in a smear campaign and they ought to respect what Justice Gomery is doing.

Furthermore, the hon. member who just spoke said a few weeks ago, “There's a lot of work still to be done. In a minority Parliament, we can get a lot done. I'm just worried that Canadians may lose confidence in the government and put some in us. They might--

[The Speaker]

The hon. member for Cambridge.

Airports

[Gary Goodyear, Conservative, Cambridge, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I just observed the minister opposite puff up his chest, say absolutely nothing and get a standing ovation.

Pearson International Airport in Toronto will continue to be the second most expensive airport in the world. The government has announced yet another ineffective program to reduce airport rents that will have little to no effect on Toronto. This plan will not fly with the thousands of workers at Pearson and it will not fly with the millions of travellers.

Why does the government continue to ignore the needs of Ontario?

[Jean Lapierre, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, obviously that member has not read the documentation. For the Toronto airport, it means a reduction of $5 billion. If that is not money, what is money?

[Gary Goodyear, Conservative, Cambridge, ON]

Mr. Speaker, air travel is very important to Toronto and to Ontario. International carriers are still threatening to stop flying into Toronto. More than 95% of this so-called savings will not even come into effect until the year 2010, just like the government's budget, too little and way too late to help anyone.

Why was the GTA left out of the latest vote-buying, pre-election announcement?

[Jean Lapierre, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, I am sure that if the hon. member would talk to the bond rating agencies, for example, that will be looking at the finances of the GTA, they will be pretty happy and their credit will be much better.

I also want to talk about the Ottawa airport. Its rent will go down by two-thirds. That is $5 billion for Toronto and two-thirds rent reduction for Ottawa. What more does the member want?

Child Care

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Verchères—Les Patriotes, QC]

Mr. Speaker, when it is a matter of concluding agreements with Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Ontario, it is amazing how fast the federal government can settle things. But when it is a matter of negotiating with Quebec, despite the fact that Quebec is responsible for the model for child care in Canada, everything is dragged out. Yet the Prime Minister has already said that Quebec would be getting the money with no strings attached.

How can the government explain that it has entered into three agreements on child care with three provinces within three weeks, while the arrangement with Quebec, which was meant to be automatic, is still not settled?

[Ken Dryden, Liberal, Minister of Social Development]

Mr. Speaker, as I have said in the House before, we have had ongoing discussions and negotiations with the province of Quebec. I am very hopeful that in the days and weeks ahead we will be able to come to an agreement.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Verchères—Les Patriotes, QC]

Mr. Speaker, far from making things more difficult, the existence of a complete child care system in Quebec ought instead to facilitate prompt settlement, particularly since Quebec's requirements are already known.

What is the government waiting for to comply with Quebec's demands: the right to opt out with full compensation and without conditions?

[Ken Dryden, Liberal, Minister of Social Development]

Mr. Speaker, I can really only repeat the answer I gave a moment ago, plus the fact that it has been made very clear to everyone in the House and also to everyone in the province of Quebec the kind of inspiration that the province of Quebec has represented in the area of child care. All of what it has done in the past will be reflected in any agreement to which we come.

Foreign Affairs

[Stockwell Day, Conservative, Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC]

Mr. Speaker, last year the foreign affairs committee voted to support Taiwan's request for observer status at the World Health Assembly and then all of Parliament voted to support that also. When it came time to vote at the World Health Assembly, the government instructed our delegates to vote no, to be in defiance of Parliament, and to leave an abandoned Taiwan.

Last week the foreign affairs committee again voted to support Taiwan's request just for observer status. This time will the government please tell our delegates to support Taiwan, respect the parliamentary procedure here, or will it abandon Taiwan again?

[Pierre Pettigrew, Liberal, Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, Canada has always supported appropriate representation for Taiwan at the World Health Assembly. We have been working quite actively with others toward making that a reality.

Canada would most certainly support a World Health Assembly consensus regarding Taiwan's participation in and access to the World Health Organization. We are encouraged by the very fact that our efforts have been noticed and appreciated by Taiwan's representative in Geneva, the vice-minister of foreign affairs and most recent, from Taiwan's minister of health.

[Stockwell Day, Conservative, Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC]

Mr. Speaker, Taiwan did not appreciate the vote against it. This is unacceptable. Taiwan's location exposes its population to health risks like SARS. On the other hand, Taiwan has the medical research and technology to help in the international fight against these types of diseases.

We support other jurisdictions to have observer status at the World Health Assembly, for instance, the Palestinian Authority. Why do we not support Taiwan? Will the minister give us a clear answer? Will he instruct his delegates to vote yes to support Taiwan for world health status or will we bow down to communist China's pressure again? Which one will it be?