Debates of Oct. 31st, 1994

Ethics

[François Langlois, Bloc, Bellechasse, QC]

Mr. Speaker, what is going on here is extremely serious. We heard from the Prime Minister himself that there is profound disagreement between him and his ethics counsellor.

Would the Prime Minister tell us what recommendation the ethics counsellor has made to him in relation to the actions of the Canadian heritage minister?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, those are communications between the ethics counsellor and myself. I said in this House that he told me nothing that could influence me to change the decision I had taken previously.

[François Langlois, Bloc, Bellechasse, QC]

Mr. Speaker, are we to understand from the answer, or rather the lack of answer, from the Prime Minister that the ethics counsellor did advise him either to ask for the Canadian heritage minister's resignation or to force him to leave Cabinet?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I just said that nothing he told me would lead me to change my mind. The responsibility belongs to the Prime Minister in any case, and no matter what advice is given to the Prime Minister, he is the one who decides and in this case he did take his responsibilities.

[Monte Solberg, Reform, Medicine Hat, AB]

Mr. Speaker, last week the Prime Minister said that initially he had contacted the ethics councillor. Then he changed his story and said that someone on his staff had contacted the ethics counsellor but only at the last moment.

Can the Prime Minister tell us who exactly contacted the ethics counsellor and will he provide the House with a transcript of those conversations?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, we are not taping conversations. There is no tape of any conversation.

I said last week that the commissioner had been consulted. He has been consulted. That is all and I made the decision. That is what I told you last week. It is what I am telling you today and it is what I will say next week if you ask me a question.

[The Speaker]

My colleagues, I would ask you once again please to direct all your comments through the Chair.

[Monte Solberg, Reform, Medicine Hat, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I guess it is kind of like the ethics guidelines themselves. They are not written down either.

I listened to the Prime Minister's statement this afternoon very carefully but found nothing in it to assure Canadians that this will not happen again. The ethics lapdog is still subject to the whims of the Prime Minister's office.

Will the Prime Minister now do what he should have done in his statement and replace the current ethics counsellor with an independent one responsible to Parliament and not the Prime Minister's office?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, the ethics counsellor will make a report to the House of Commons once a year but there is a reality. The only person responsible to the nation for the ministers cannot be anybody but the Prime Minister of Canada.

I want to tell the hon. member that I will never run away from my responsibilities. I am responsible for the integrity of the cabinet and I will take all the steps necessary to make sure that there is integrity.

All of us have a problem. We have to make sure that ministers can at the same time respect the commitment they have made at the time of their election to represent their constituents well while they are ministers. This is the problem we are debating at this time.

I want to have the views of members of Parliament on this issue. We cannot deny the people living in the riding of a minister adequate representation here in Ottawa as these ministers promised when they sought their support at the time of the election.

Taxation

[Jim Jordan, Liberal, Leeds—Grenville, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of National Revenue.

Canadians who pay their taxes are justifiably concerned when they hear about Canadians who are able to escape taxation either through the underground economy or loopholes of one sort or another.

What is the Minister of National Revenue doing right now about Canadians who it appears do not pay their fair share of taxes?

[David Anderson, Liberal, Minister of National Revenue]

Mr. Speaker, I can assure the hon. member we have responded dramatically with respect to the underground economy and those Canadians who do not pay their fair share of taxes because they evade the existing tax system.

On Friday last I signed an agreement with the province of Ontario, the largest single provincial economy, to combine our efforts against the underground economy. We have done this with seven other provinces. We have new agreements with virtually all the business and professional associations so we can better combat the underground economy.

As a result of these measures we have pulled in many hundreds of millions of dollars in new tax revenue which was not expected by the previous government.

I can assure you also, Mr. Speaker, that because of the success of the 1,200 auditors we have put into this area we will be redoubling our efforts in this regard.

Ethics

[Michel Guimond, Bloc, Beauport—Montmorency—Orléans, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister systematically refuses to tell us the ethics counsellor's opinion, as transmitted to him by his officials.

Is it not true that the ethics counsellor gave a different opinion from that of the Prime Minister?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I have said several times that the counsellor's opinion was transmitted to me and that nothing forced me to change my mind.

In any case, whatever opinion he could have given me, the ultimate responsibility lies with the Prime Minister. I took my responsibilities because the minister had acted as quickly as possible in a situation which, in my opinion, was not fatal, because he had not made any recommendation.

[Michel Guimond, Bloc, Beauport—Montmorency—Orléans, QC]

Mr. Speaker, what exactly did the ethics counsellor say?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, the ethics counsellor always tells the Prime Minister that the latter must take his responsibilities, which he did.

[Hugh Hanrahan, Reform, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister.

On October 27 the Minister of Canadian Heritage stated he was approached by a constituent, and I quote from Hansard , page 7273:

-to write a letter drawing the attention of the CRTC to his application for a radio licence.

The constituent, Mr. Daniilidis, has stated in conversations with Reform Party research staff that he never asked the minister to write a letter on his behalf.

Can the Prime Minister explain this contradiction?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, he certainly went to visit the minister. Perhaps they discussed the weather. Perhaps they discussed the application, and the minister wrote a letter asking for information on this file.

I was not there. I was not privy to the conversation. However I know the minister was visited by his constituent and that lead to the letter that is the object of this discussion.

[Hugh Hanrahan, Reform, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister then is suggesting that the constituent in fact did ask for a letter. That is very difficult to understand.

Will the Prime Minister initiate a private and independent investigation into this whole affair so we can finally get to the bottom of it?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, it is a public document. The hon. member should just go to the CRTC and look at the file. It is public. We do not need an investigation.

It looks like the research group of the Reform Party is not very good.

[Pierre De Savoye, Bloc, Portneuf, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister refuses to inform the House on the exact content of the recommendation of the ethics counsellor. Since this is an issue of integrity and public ethics, will the Prime Minister admit that it is now in the public domain?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Of course, Mr. Speaker. It is in the newspapers and in Hansard .

[Pierre De Savoye, Bloc, Portneuf, QC]

Mr. Speaker, does the Prime Minister not realize that he jeopardizes his own integrity by hiding the content of that conversation and does he not realize that he should reveal the facts as he knows them?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I am sorry but the Leader of the Opposition said earlier that he did not question the integrity of the Prime Minister and I said that the issue was in the public domain. We have discussed that. The letter was written by the minister and has been made public. The second letter that was sent has also been published. I have tabled that letter in the House of Commons and the minister has explained the situation to the House. How could we possibly be more open? The counsellors advise the Prime Minister; the advice they give me is for me alone, they are not for the public; I am the one who must make the decision.

[Jim Hart, Reform, Okanagan—Similkameen—Merritt, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister said today that the minister of heritage's letter did not influence the CRTC but on the other hand the secretary general of the CRTC stated that it may have interfered with their decision.

How does the Prime Minister explain this discrepancy?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, it had a lot of influence. The application was denied. The minister did not recommend but if you claim he did, his letter was not of great weight because the applicant did not receive the green light from the CRTC.

I do not know why you can make an argument like that.