Madam Speaker, this government has introduced Bill C-22 as an example of renewed political transparency. Or so it claims. In fact, in some respects, the proposed legislation casts a cozy mantle of discretion over the actions it was intended to censure.
First of all, the bill itself raises a number of questions, and I hope this debate will help clarify the grey areas about which we have a quite a few queries. In fact, Bill C-22 is unsatisfactory, not because of what it says but because of what it does not say.
Of course, the government wants to get rid of a hot potato that has been passed back and forth for months, from the anterooms of politicians to law offices, from lobbyists' offices to the halls of government. However, if the powers that be expect this bill will put an end to this disgraceful manoeuvring, they are wrong. On the contrary, there is some fancy legal wording that says a great deal about the hidden agenda of the government, one instance being section 9 of the bill which provides very clearly, as the minister just said with some satisfaction, that no com-
pensation will be paid. Section 9 provides very clearly, and I quote:
- No one is entitled to any compensation from Her Majesty in connection with the coming into force of this Act.
Now that sounds squeaky clean, does it not? The problem is, that the bill immediately goes on to say in section 10(1) that:
- (1) If the Minister considers it appropriate to do so, the Minister may, with the approval of the Governor in Council-
In other words, the cabinet. It continues:
-if the Minister considers it appropriate to do so.
With his ministerial discretion and considering what he thinks is sensible and the interests of his government and those of his friends, he may:
enter into agreements on behalf of Her Majesty to provide for the payment of such amounts as the Minister considers appropriate in connection with the coming into force of this Act, subject to the terms and conditions that the Minister considers appropriate.
Of course the government is not at all trying to protect the interests of the parties involved with these agreements that will be made at the minister's discretion, in the privacy of cabinet, with the Liberal Party's lobbyists in attendance. That is the situation. That is what bill C-22 is all about. Although section 10(2) provides:
(2) No amount is payable under an agreement entered into under this section in relation to (a) any loss of profits, or (b) any fee paid for the purpose of lobbying a public office holder-
We still have no indication of the nature of the amounts the minister may pay at his discretion or of the identity of the individuals who may benefit from such ministerial discretion.
This is disturbing. It is disturbing because this particular case is overrun by lobbyists. It is full of people wheeling and dealing in the corridors of power with the two big parties, the Liberal Party and the Conservative Party.
And it makes the hon. minister laugh. It amuses him. He is laughing at the thought that, by this evening, his concerns will be put to rest by a vote, while those who were mixed up in this sordid affair are loosing sleep over it.
Furthermore, even if lobbying fees are not compensated under the legislation, the fact remains that the taxpayers will be paying part of the companies' lobbying expenses indirectly, in the form of corporate tax deductions.
How can you justify making the taxpayers in Quebec and Canada contribute to the funding of such crass patronage? Even the current Minister of Transport has suggested that lobbying fees not be made tax deductible. Even he, the minister who is laughing here in this House today!
His government did not listen to him. Did he protest? No, he smiled. He was voted down by Cabinet on this issue. He finds it amusing and defers to Cabinet solidarity and the party line.
This is to say that we are not alone to rebel against this policy. What is the government asking for here?
It is asking us to back this shameless political sham. They would want us to give the minister a blank cheque to compensate their friends and others spoilsmen that they would not go about it any differently.
Never will the Bloc Quebecois accept to support in any way a government plan to take with the right hand what it is apparently forbidding itself to take with the left hand.
They would have us be taken in by Bill C-22, colloquially speaking. Just to set things in perspective, allow me, to look back briefly on the recent past.
I would like to reemphasize some basic facts of this complex issue. I see that the minister has little interest for the issue, since he is leaving! He has more important things to do than to listen to the truth on this issue.