House of Commons Hansard #88 of the 39th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was food.

Topics

Access to InformationOral Questions

2:15 p.m.

Saint-Laurent—Cartierville Québec

Liberal

Stéphane Dion LiberalLeader of the Opposition

Mr. Speaker, the government said that it shut down the registry because the federal departments did not value it. Why would they? Obviously they would say that. Instead of them, the government should have consulted the clients of the database who were using it everyday: researchers, MPs, journalists, ordinary Canadians.

Once again, why did the government shut down the registry? What does it have to hide?

Access to InformationOral Questions

2:15 p.m.

Calgary Southwest Alberta

Conservative

Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister

Mr. Speaker, we do wider access to information than ever before.

The previous government created a centralized registry in order to control the flow of information. It was deemed expensive and it was deemed to slow down the access to information. That is why this government got rid of it. I am not surprised the hon. member likes a centralized system.

He is and continues to be a centralizer.

Access to InformationOral Questions

2:15 p.m.

Saint-Laurent—Cartierville Québec

Liberal

Stéphane Dion LiberalLeader of the Opposition

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister's response is pathetic. The registry made it possible to know who asked for what through access to information. It was useful. This is the most secretive government in the history of our country; it keeps secrets and covers things up.

How far will the Prime Minister go to hide the truth from Canadians?

Access to InformationOral Questions

2:15 p.m.

Calgary Southwest Alberta

Conservative

Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister

Mr. Speaker, this government has actually widened access to information. That is the opposite of the former government, which created this costly registry to slow down the access to information system. The registry was, and I quote, “the product of a political system in which centralized control is an obsession”.

That is why this government shut down the registry.

Access to InformationOral Questions

2:20 p.m.

Liberal

Michael Ignatieff Liberal Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has not explained why Canadians cannot see a registry that contains requests for information by citizens of government. There is no answer at all on that side, and its record on information is terrible.

Information complaints are at an all time high, numbers not seen since the last Conservative government. Departments are receiving failing grades from the information commissioner. Now the government wants to do away with a key database that provides information to Canadians.

Why is a government that ran on accountability running away from it?

Access to InformationOral Questions

2:20 p.m.

Provencher Manitoba

Conservative

Vic Toews ConservativePresident of the Treasury Board

Mr. Speaker, we know all about the opposite party, when it was in government, wanting to control the access to information.

Here is what a leading expert on access to information law said about CAIRS in 2003. Alasdair Roberts said:

No other country maintains a government-wide database like CAIRS. CAIRS is the product of a political system in which centralized control is an obsession.

That is what the opposite party wished to do.

Access to InformationOral Questions

2:20 p.m.

Liberal

Michael Ignatieff Liberal Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON

Mr. Speaker, the words just quoted are the best description of that government than I have ever heard.

Over the weekend, the government shut down the electronic database where citizens could examine the government's internal affairs. That goes against the spirit of democracy.

Does the Prime Minister think, like Louis XIV, that “I am the state”?

Access to InformationOral Questions

2:20 p.m.

Provencher Manitoba

Conservative

Vic Toews ConservativePresident of the Treasury Board

Mr. Speaker, for the first time Canadians can see how their taxes are being spent by the CBC, by the Wheat Board and by Canada Post. The Liberals were never willing to be honest about the release of this information. They consistently opposed it for farmers in western Canada as money was being spent. They opposed that. This government is opening up the books so that in fact the farmers of western Canada can see what is being done with their money.

Elections CanadaOral Questions

2:20 p.m.

Bloc

Gilles Duceppe Bloc Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Transport, the Conservative Party's political lieutenant for Quebec, says that he was not told about the strategy his party used during the last election campaign. Yet it was his party's high-ranking officials, including Susan Kehoe, the chief financial officer during the last campaign, and Michael Donison, the party's executive director at the time, who set up this procedure to get around the election spending limits authorized by Elections Canada.

Can the Prime Minister tell us when his party's brass told him about this strategy?

Elections CanadaOral Questions

2:20 p.m.

Calgary Southwest Alberta

Conservative

Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister

Mr. Speaker, the so-called in and out method has been around for a long time. That is what it is called when the party transfers funds to riding associations so that they can buy services from the national party. During the 2006 elections, the Bloc transferred over $700,000 to its candidates, and billed them for that same amount.

Elections CanadaOral Questions

2:20 p.m.

Bloc

Gilles Duceppe Bloc Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC

Mr. Speaker, Elections Canada is not investigating the Bloc; it is investigating the Conservative Party. Elections Canada did not search Bloc headquarters; it searched Conservative Party headquarters. Rather than distort reality, the Prime Minister should either accuse the Bloc outright or quit making false statements.

Until that happens, is the Prime Minister, who likes controlling everything—judges, senior public servants, officers of Parliament—telling us that he was not informed of what was going on in his very own party? Is that what the Prime Minister is telling us?

Elections CanadaOral Questions

2:20 p.m.

Calgary Southwest Alberta

Conservative

Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister

Mr. Speaker, the leader of the Bloc Québécois is the one who went to the courts to force his own candidates to participate in the so-called in and out scheme. The courts supported this practice against the wishes of Elections Canada. We are following the precedents set by the Bloc leader, the father of the in and out method.

Elections CanadaOral Questions

2:20 p.m.

Bloc

Michel Guimond Bloc Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, QC

Mr. Speaker, these are more false statements to try to divert attention, but let us return to the case at hand. The Minister of Transport, who was the political lieutenant for Quebec during the most recent election, claims he does not know how advertising money was allocated. Yet the minister received an email from Mike Donison in December 2005.

Does the minister realize that by pleading ignorance, he is in all likelihood providing new evidence of the Conservatives' disregard for the truth?

Elections CanadaOral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Nepean—Carleton Ontario

Conservative

Pierre Poilievre ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the President of the Treasury Board

Mr. Speaker, I have here the election campaign report for the Bloc candidate in Pontiac, the riding the hon. member was referring to. This report indicates that as of January 1, a total of $17,800 had been transferred to the local Bloc candidate. On May 4, the candidate returned $17,720 to the Bloc to pay for advertising, according to Elections Canada. That is why we call the hon. member the son of in and out.

Elections CanadaOral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Bloc

Michel Guimond Bloc Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, QC

Mr. Speaker, why was the Bloc reimbursed in Pontiac? Why was the Bloc not investigated in Pontiac? It is the Conservatives who are under investigation. Using the in and out scheme, the minister transferred only $6,100, while the other Conservatives in the Outaouais transferred $45,000.

Does this not confirm that this entire scheme was orchestrated at the national level, here in Ottawa, to receive funding—

Elections CanadaOral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Liberal

Elections CanadaOral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Nepean—Carleton Ontario

Conservative

Pierre Poilievre ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the President of the Treasury Board

Mr. Speaker, the member would like to know why Elections Canada has chosen to investigate a method that is the same as the other method. We would like to know the same thing. “During an election campaign, the candidates pay collectively for national expenses.” That quote from the Bloc whip comes from the December 22, 2001 edition of Le Soleil. That is why we call the Bloc leader “the father of in and out”.

Elections CanadaOral Questions

2:25 p.m.

NDP

Jack Layton NDP Toronto—Danforth, ON

Mr. Speaker, the saga of the in and out scandal continues. We are learning the facts little by little. For instance, Le Devoir explains how the Conservatives used that money to cheat. Conservative decision makers used that money to break the law and exceed the limits, to cheat. The Winnipeg Free Press has reported other allegations concerning questionable transfers for polling.

Does the Prime Minister realize that the more he denies the evidence, the more Canadians are losing faith in their government? Does he not understand this?

Elections CanadaOral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Calgary Southwest Alberta

Conservative

Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister

Mr. Speaker, clearly, all the parties have been engaging in the same practices, as permitted by the law, for some time now. The former national campaign manager for the NDP said the same thing. He said that the NDP did the same thing. L. Ian MacDonald asked Robin Sears:

“You've done it yourself with the NDP, right?”

And he answered, “Absolutely”.

Elections CanadaOral Questions

2:25 p.m.

NDP

Jack Layton NDP Toronto—Danforth, ON

Mr. Speaker, that man is Mr. Mulroney's spokesperson. Okay.

The Canadian people are losing trust in the Conservatives. When we boil it down, it is because the Conservatives do not trust Canadians.

Let us just consider what has been happening. The Conservatives committed to expand access to information. Instead, they shut down the registry.

They promised more openness in government, yet what do we see? They are burying the scientific evidence of their own government on everything from climate change to HIV.

They said they would have accountability and now we have the Prime Minister authorizing in and out.

Why do the Conservatives keep burying their promises here--

Elections CanadaOral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Peter Milliken

The right hon. Prime Minister.

Elections CanadaOral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Calgary Southwest Alberta

Conservative

Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member once again talks about access to information. There was a centralized registry that was criticized as a centralized tool of control over access to information. That is what this government got rid of.

What this government brought in was access to information for the Canadian Wheat Board, for the CBC and for dozens of other agencies and crown corporations. We did that in spite of the fact the opposition parties did not want us to.

Elections CanadaOral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Liberal

Marlene Jennings Liberal Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities was the prime minister's Quebec lieutenant during the last election. Last week, he feigned ignorance when asked how the ridings were chosen and how the money from the in and out scandal was allocated. The search warrant document has made public certain emails addressed to the minister regarding this scheme.

Does the Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities still maintain his ignorance, now that those emails are public?

Elections CanadaOral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Nepean—Carleton Ontario

Conservative

Pierre Poilievre ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the President of the Treasury Board

Mr. Speaker, according to Elections Canada, on July 27, 2004, Marlene Catterall, the Liberal candidate in Ottawa West--Nepean, cashed a cheque from the Liberal Party of Canada for $3,300. On August 18, 2004, the Liberal Party of Canada cashed a cheque from Marlene Catterall's local campaign for--let us guess--$3,300. That was $3,300 in and $3,300 out: in, out, legal. If it is legal for them, it is legal for us.

Elections CanadaOral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Liberal

Marlene Jennings Liberal Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC

Mr. Speaker, during the last election, the Conservative head office decided it wanted to spend $800,000 in extra dollars for advertising in Quebec that should have been declared as national expenses, but it decided to hide it as local expenses. A December 19, 2005 email confirms that the Minister of Transport decided which ridings would participate in this in and out scheme.

How can the Minister of Transport now plead ignorance?