House of Commons Hansard #79 of the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was tax.

Topics

Government Contracts
Oral Questions

2:35 p.m.

Liberal

Denis Coderre Bourassa, QC

Mr. Speaker, I do not hand out $140,000 contracts. My question is clear. Since yesterday the Prime Minister has been saying that no members of the government are part of the RCMP inquiry. Since when does a Prime Minister get involved in RCMP matters?

Since the minister responsible for Quebec attended, as a political minister, a cocktail fundraiser hosted by Paul Sauvé, who is under investigation by the RCMP, there are two possibilities. Did the Prime Minister mislead the House or is he getting involved in RCMP matters?

Government Contracts
Oral Questions

2:35 p.m.

Ottawa West—Nepean
Ontario

Conservative

John Baird Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, the member for Bourassa says that he does not give out large contracts, but there was a time when he held a very powerful position in the Government of Canada, not only being a senior minister in the Chrétien government, but in the Martin government he was the president of the Privy Council. Of course the Privy Council is the central operating agency of the government. I wonder when that cheque was dated. Was it when this government was in power or was it when he was sitting around the cabinet table?

Public Safety
Oral Questions

2:35 p.m.

Bloc

Meili Faille Vaudreuil-Soulanges, QC

Mr. Speaker, the government plans on spending $2 billion over the next five years to expand the prison system. The Minister of Public Safety believes that Quebec and the provinces should deal with the additional costs incurred as a result of its repressive approach.

Does the minister not find it irresponsible to inflict the negative consequences of his approach to crime on others?

Public Safety
Oral Questions

2:35 p.m.

Oxford
Ontario

Conservative

Dave MacKenzie Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety

Mr. Speaker, I do apologize but there was so much noise in the House that I could not hear the question.

Public Safety
Oral Questions

2:35 p.m.

Bloc

Meili Faille Vaudreuil-Soulanges, QC

Mr. Speaker, the government plans on spending $2 billion over the next five years to expand the prison system. The Minister of Public Safety believes that Quebec and the provinces should deal with the additional costs incurred as a result of its repressive approach.

Does the minister not find it irresponsible to inflict the negative consequences of his approach to crime on others?

Public Safety
Oral Questions

2:35 p.m.

Oxford
Ontario

Conservative

Dave MacKenzie Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety

Mr. Speaker, the government will invest in the prison system of Canada. As a matter of fact, many of the changes that are occurring were as a result of the provincial ministers asking for those changes, and as we go forward, we expect they will support them.

Securities
Oral Questions

2:35 p.m.

Bloc

Daniel Paillé Hochelaga, QC

Mr. Speaker, the brief filed by Quebec in the Court of Appeal clearly shows that not only would a federal securities commission be a violation of provincial jurisdictions, but it would also give banks and major issuers the upper hand to the detriment of the public investor.

Will the Minister of Finance admit that his plans to establish a single regulator show that he has meekly bowed to the pressure of his Bay Street buddies?

Securities
Oral Questions

2:35 p.m.

Macleod
Alberta

Conservative

Ted Menzies Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance

Mr. Speaker, we sought the court's approval to ensure that it was federal jurisdiction, but we put in place a process that is voluntary, that all provinces can join a common Canadian securities regulator, and most provinces have accepted that. Most provinces are working proactively to protect their investors in their provinces. I would encourage him to go back to his province and encourage them to do that same thing to protect their investors.

Securities
Oral Questions

2:35 p.m.

Bloc

Daniel Paillé Hochelaga, QC

Mr. Speaker, in view of the decisions of the Chambers of Commerce in Quebec and western Canada, such as the Edmonton Chamber of Commerce, the Canadian Chamber of Commerce decided, at its general annual meeting, to withdraw its support for the creation of a single securities regulator.

This is more proof that the minister's predatory project is harmful for investors, the economy as a whole and small and medium-sized businesses.

The Chambers of Commerce are no longer behind them. If they look back they will see that there is no one left supporting them.

Securities
Oral Questions

2:35 p.m.

Macleod
Alberta

Conservative

Ted Menzies Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance

Mr. Speaker, I have a whole list of people who are supportive of this.

As for the main people we are trying to protect, let me quote someone who is very passionate about this. Joey Davis is a victim of the Earl Jones scam and supports the idea of a national regulatory body overseeing financial organizations. He said that they definitely support the Canadian securities regulator initiative and that Ottawa has been far more responsive to their plight.

Apparently, he considers the Bloc to have been less responsive.

Office of the Prime Minister
Oral Questions

October 7th, 2010 / 2:40 p.m.

Liberal

Siobhan Coady St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL

Mr. Speaker, incoming chief of staff Nigel Wright currently sits on the boards of two aerospace companies, and we know that in 18 to 24 months, he will be returning to business.

The conflict of interest code dictates that he would not be able to participate in any aerospace meetings, because of a business involvement.

Here is a conflict. The Prime Minister is meeting with two aerospace companies today. How will the Conservatives work around this glaring conflict of interest? Will they have the chief of staff sit in the hallway?

Office of the Prime Minister
Oral Questions

2:40 p.m.

Ottawa West—Nepean
Ontario

Conservative

John Baird Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, that is quite the question.

We think it is tremendous that someone who has been incredibly successful outside politics and government has agreed to take a leave from his career and come to Ottawa, our nation's capital, to make a contribution to public life.

Thank goodness that in the past successful business people like Paul Martin and Belinda Stronach were prepared to make that same sacrifice in support of our country.

Office of the Prime Minister
Oral Questions

2:40 p.m.

Liberal

Siobhan Coady St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL

Mr. Speaker, this is not about Nigel Wright; this is about the Prime Minister's judgment. We are raising legitimate concerns regarding potential conflicts of interest as a result of Mr. Wright's business relationships.

Even Brian Mulroney's former chief of staff said how common the conflicts of interest would be and expressed skepticism that the rules would be able to deal with such a complex situation.

What is the plan to ensure there are no conflicts of interest, and when will the Conservatives share it with Canadians? Even the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner is asking them to do so.

Office of the Prime Minister
Oral Questions

2:40 p.m.

Ottawa West—Nepean
Ontario

Conservative

John Baird Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Wright has consulted and sought the counsel of the independent Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, and he will follow all of the counsel she gives him.

This individual will be required to establish a blind trust. In respect of that blind trust, he will not be regularly briefed on the success or failures of his financial holdings. That happened under a previous Liberal government, and it was known as a “Venetian blind trust”.

Census
Oral Questions

2:40 p.m.

Liberal

Lise Zarac LaSalle—Émard, QC

Mr. Speaker, with respect to the census, the Commissioner of Official Languages believes that their decision will be detrimental to the vitality of French outside Quebec.

The CSQ says this is an utter waste of the taxpayers' money. The Minister of Education says that it will hurt the education network. Even the National Assembly is unanimously opposed to the Conservative decision.

The only explanation for the Prime Minister's stubbornness is that he wants to hide his mediocre socio-economic record.

Is that not the truth?