Stephen Harper

[Sponsorship Program, October 27th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, Newfoundlanders and Labradorians have heard enough of, “I feel your pain”. They want the Prime Minister to fulfill his commitments.

On March 10 of this year, the Prime Minister told the House and the member for Roberval in response to a question about the national unity fund, “Mr. Speaker, first, the answer to the question is: none. I have not used it”. Now we know he did use it. In fact we know he wrote a letter related to a contract of $50,000 under the fund to Claude Boulay and Groupe Everest.

Could the Prime Minister explain on this why he so flagrantly misled the House on the facts?

[Natural Resources, October 27th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, there should be no hedging. The Prime Minister said that it was the premier's deal he had accepted, and he should accept it today. Even provincial Liberals have supported Premier Williams on this and do not believe the Prime Minister.

Former Liberal Premier Grimes said the following, “Get it in writing because the federal track record is promise and not do it at all or find some way to do it differently.”

Once again, if members of the Prime Minister's own party do not believe him, why should anyone else believe him? Why does he not sign the deal that he promised on June 5, today?

[Natural Resources, October 27th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has flagrantly broken his 100% promise to Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and Labrador. Even his own federal Liberal MPs do not believe that he is sticking to his word.

The Liberal member for Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte said that he heard the resource royalty promise, and now he is concerned that conditions and strings are being attached.

The Liberal MP for Random—Burin—St. George's has said that he is considering his future over the broken promise.

If the Prime Minister's own Liberal members are not sure they can trust him on this, why should Newfoundland and Labrador? Why should Nova Scotia? Why should anyone?

[Natural Resources, October 26th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, the government promised that when it was on the election trail, but now when Danny Williams asks for the cheque he does not get it. This party promised it then and sticks with that promise today.

The promise was 100% of the offshore oil revenues for Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and Labrador, and now the government wants to claw back revenue in other areas.

Will the minister admit that the only clawback here is the Prime Minister and all his Atlantic ministers clawing back on their promises?

[Natural Resources, October 26th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, we know Alberta has the full benefit of its resources. The Deputy Prime Minister should remind the Prime Minister that the Atlantic provinces should be entitled to the same benefits.

Because there are all these strings now, one of the conditions the Prime Minister wants is that Newfoundland and Labrador commit to a cap. In other words, it could only have the money if it promised to remain a have not province.

Why does the government want Atlantic Canadians to share in the poverty but never to share in the prosperity?

[Natural Resources, October 26th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister went to Atlantic Canada earlier this year and had a deathbed conversion on the election trail. He said that he would give Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and Labrador 100% of the revenue from their offshore energy resources. Now he has reneged on that deal.

Will the Prime Minister and his Atlantic ministers admit they have a moral obligation to keep these promises: no caps, no clawbacks, no limitations, no conditions, no big exceptions in the fine print? Will the Prime Minister keep his word? Will his Atlantic ministers make him keep his word?

[Natural Resources, October 22nd, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, that was nothing less than a complete assurance. The government should have let the Minister of Natural Resources, who also made these commitments, answer the question directly.

I will ask again. Yesterday and again today this government suggested it would reach an agreement if possible, but that was not the promise. The promise was that they would get 100% of their offshore resource revenues and there would be a deal by October 26. I ask the Minister of Natural Resources, is that still a commitment of this Prime Minister and this government?

[Natural Resources, October 22nd, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, after opposing the spirit of the Atlantic accord for years, the Prime Minister did one of his famous complete about-faces in the election campaign and promised that he would end the clawback in offshore resources. In fact, he promised Newfoundland and Labrador and Nova Scotia that they would get 100% of the revenue from offshore oil resources.

Given that there are now mixed signals in negotiations, my question is for the Minister of Natural Resources. Is this still a 100% commitment from the Prime Minister that these provinces will get 100% of their offshore resource revenue?

[Sponsorship Program, October 21st, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, this member is doing nothing but stonewalling on the truth and it is totally unacceptable.

The Prime Minister said in February:

Anyone who knows anything that could help shed light in this area--in the government, in the caucus or anywhere in the country, corporations or in the Liberal Party--should come forward and not wait to be compelled to do so...

Apparently the Prime Minister means this applies to anybody but himself. Will the Prime Minister come forward and tell us when he knew the truth about these telephone calls?

[Sponsorship Program, October 21st, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, in the Canadian Constitution it is the Prime Minister who is supposed to be accountable on the floor of the House of Commons. I have witnessed Mr. Trudeau, I have watched Mr. Mulroney, I have stood face to face with Mr. Chrétien when their integrity was on the line and watched them answer questions in tough situations.

When did the Prime Minister know his office was making calls to Gagliano to get sponsorship money for his friends?