Debates of April 28th, 1995

Seagram

[John Manley, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, I do not see it as a tainting of the transaction whatsoever.

As I indicated in my earlier answer, as did the Minister of Canadian Heritage, a visit to a group of industry people in Los Angeles is in the normal course. I must say that as industry minister it is common for me to meet with representatives of companies and industrial groups on a daily basis. It is part of our normal activities. It is one of the ways in which we do our jobs. That is normal. The fact that a transaction may come forward is still hypothetical.

I can assure the hon. member, as I did earlier, that our objective as a government, in the event the transaction is reviewable, will be to secure improved undertakings on the part of MCA to make the transaction of greater benefit to Canada.

[René Laurin, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Canadian Heritage.

Two weeks ago, the heritage minister put himself in a conflict of interest by making a secret trip to Los Angeles, to meet Liberal friends conducting a megatransaction which involves Canadian cultural interests and which will require Investment Canada's approval.

Will the Minister of Canadian Heritage tell the House if he used a government aircraft and will he also tell us who accompanied him on that trip out west?

[Michel Dupuy, Liberal, Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for this opportunity to provide him with answers on issues which seem to concern him a great deal. I certainly did not use a government aircraft. In fact, I always avoid doing so, for financial reasons.

When in Los Angeles, I had no contacts with Canadian private interests trying to conclude a transaction to take over MGM. True, I did go to Universal studios with officials from MGM, Disney, Sony and Motion Picture Association of America, including its president, Jack Valenti. The purpose of my visit was strictly to explore possibilities with the heads of these American majors. Neither the agenda of this meeting, nor the discussions which I had with these American studios had anything to do with a transaction which I did not know about.

[René Laurin, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Mr. Speaker, given the answer just provided by the Minister of Canadian Heritage, I will direct my supplementary to the Minister of National Defence.

How does the Minister of National Defence explain the fact that, this morning, his department refused to release information concerning the use of Challenger jets by cabinet members during that period, this at the specific request of the Prime Minister's office? What is the Minister of National Defence also trying to hide?

[David Collenette, Liberal, Minister of National Defence and Minister of Veterans Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member obviously does not know the procedure for reporting the use of government jets. Every month the use of jets is made public.

We have lots of calls on lots of issues. That information will be public within 30 days. There have been no complaints about the procedure.

I find it rather odd the member would raise it in this context. My officials were absolutely correct in saying to the member that they could not give the information to him today, because there is an established procedure and it is working.

[Monte Solberg, Reform, Medicine Hat, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the process in the Seagram deal stinks to high heaven.

The ADM for heritage responsible for the file is linked to the Bronfmans through family ties. Investment Canada has confirmed that Rabinovitch's people have contacted it on the issue. This is a blatant conflict of interest.

Why does the Minister of Canadian Heritage fail to see that his department's continued contacts with industry officials and with the Bronfmans jeopardize the integrity of the process and of the Liberal government?

[Michel Dupuy, Liberal, Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, I should like to make clear in the House that I never met Mr. Bronfman on the occasion of the visit I paid to Los Angeles.

I learned of the transaction as I was walking from the aircraft. My meeting was an hour or two afterward. It is not unusual, bearing in mind that these transactions are highly secretive because of market conditions.

As to the responsibility for Investment Canada and a declaration on whether a certain company is Canadian or American, this is entirely within the responsibility of the Minister of Industry.

[Monte Solberg, Reform, Medicine Hat, AB]

Mr. Speaker, that is an amazing coincidence and probably one without precedent in the country.

The minister has denied that there has been any wrongdoing on the Seagram file. Yet his officials have been in contact with industry officials and are still in contact with and linked to the Bronfmans. Surely the minister has been briefed on the contacts.

Is the minister suggesting that it is appropriate for his officials to continue contacting industry officials who are in constant contact with principals of the Seagram deal?

[John Manley, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, it is difficult to understand an allegation of wrongdoing "on the Seagram file" when so far nothing has been done on the Seagram file.

I state again very clearly that the threshold issue is whether or not Seagram is a Canadian controlled corporation. That is a matter entirely within the determination of the acting president of Investment Canada, based on criteria set out in the act. That determination will be made based upon information we obtain from Seagram or its counsel. The next stage would be a review under the Investment Canada Act of whether the transaction is of net benefit to Canada.

I suspect the hon. member wants to say that he does not think Heritage Canada, Investment Canada and Industry Canada will act in the best interest of Canada in reviewing the transaction. That is an extreme allegation. I invite him to make such allegations in a public forum where he is subject to all disciplines of civil law. I would ask him, if he is going to say things like that, to provide real evidence rather than just innuendo.

Telecommunications

[Réal Ménard, Bloc, Hochelaga—Maisonneuve, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am feeling sick to my stomach, but I will nevertheless put my question to the Minister of Industry.

In the endless series of intimate relations this government has with the extended Liberal family, the matter of Power DirecTv continues to raise a number of questions about the actual involvement of the Prime Minister and his entourage.

Could the Minister of Industry, the self-styled champion of transparency, tell us clearly when the Prime Minister informed him that he did not want to be involved in any way with Power DirecTv in which his son-in-law has interests? When did the Prime Minister tell him, about that, exactly?

[John Manley, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, first let me thank the hon. member for his question.

It bears repetition that the Prime Minister has restated in the House, as he did among ministers, that he did not wish to be involved in the file or have any knowledge directed to him about it. That being the basis upon which the entire transaction has occurred, I have never had a discussion with the Prime Minister about the file.

I want the hon. member to understand that these are the kinds of indications we are receiving from disinterested people who are concerned about the issue. The Consumers' Association of Canada: "I am writing to you on behalf of the Consumers' Association to urge the government to act upon the recommendations of the policy review panel"; ACTRA: "We are pleased with the recognition of the need for competition among services. We hope the government will move quickly"; the Friends of Canadian Broadcasting; the Canadian Conference of the Arts; and all the others.

The simple point is that the Prime Minister has acted with entire integrity, discretion and care in the matter to avoid any appearance of potential conflict. For the government to have failed to take its responsibility-

[The Acting Speaker (Mr. Kilger)]

Order. I must ask that both the responses and the questions be somewhat briefer.

[Réal Ménard, Bloc, Hochelaga—Maisonneuve, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Industry would surely be held in higher esteem if he answered the question.

And so I ask him: Given that the government decided on September 12, 1994 to overturn the decision of the CRTC, which did not serve the interests of the Prime Minister's son-in-law, -and I want it to be very clear-would the Minister of Industry show us today, from his seat, the memorandum he received from the Prime Minister asking to be completely kept out of the government's decisions in this matter?

Can the sponsor of the Lobbyists Registration Act table the memorandum that will enable us to understand and shed some light on this matter?

[John Manley, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, I never had any discussions with the Prime Minister about the file. There was nothing to visit.

Let me complete the statement I was making. In the face of the urging such as I was indicating to the hon. member, the government would have failed many groups in society, many consumers, all the interests crying out for competition and choice in the area, if it had failed to act.

I am waiting for the opposition parties to give us a clear indication of how they would have responded to these pleadings if they did not think we should move the way we did.

Gasoline Prices

[Eugène Bellemare, Liberal, Carleton—Gloucester, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Industry.

On Wednesday major oil companies raised the price of gas again, this time by 5 cents per litre in the national capital region. This makes for a 20 per cent increase in just one month.

These unacceptable increases in the price of gasoline in the Ottawa region worry and shock local MPs and consumers.

What does the minister intend to do to stop the constant abuse of price hikes by major oil companies in the national capital region?

[John Manley, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, it is my day again.

I am pleased the hon. member raised the issue with respect to the national capital region. However, whether it is in the national capital region, remote communities of northern Ontario or the farmers of Saskatchewan, everywhere across the country, même au Québec, même dans l'Ouest, consumers are concerned that gasoline prices seem to go up without explanation.

The best solution in this sector as well as in others that we have talked about is competition, real competition. As we complete our review of some of the useful proposals we received on whistleblowing legislation and other measures, I hope we will find tools to ensure oil companies and distributors of gasoline products are respectful of the need for real competition in the sector and the need of consumers to have cheaper gasoline.

Seagram

[Jan Brown, Reform, Calgary Southeast, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the simple point is that this is not an issue about competition. This is an issue about ethics, about Liberal friends helping Liberal friends and family. It is the family compact.

My question is for the Minister of Canadian Heritage. Did he meet with the principals of the Seagram deal and Investment Canada officials prior to the announcement of the acquisition? Yes or no.

[Michel Dupuy, Liberal, Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, I had absolutely no contact or anything to do with whatever the Seagram corporation wants to do in the United States.

This is of no concern to me. They have proceeded with the appropriate secrecy and the risk taking involved. I only heard the rumour that there might be an acquisition a day or so before the acquisition was announced. It was from the press that I learned of such an acquisition.

[Jan Brown, Reform, Calgary Southeast, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I asked the hon. minister for an answer of yes or no. I did not get that answer.

I will ask the question again. Did the heritage minister meet with the principals of the Seagram deal and Investment Canada prior to the acquisition? Yes or no.

[Michel Dupuy, Liberal, Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, no.

Telecommunications

[Gaston Leroux, Bloc, Richmond—Wolfe, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister maintains that he did not put himself in a conflict of interest regarding Power DirecTv and continues to purport that he stayed at arm's length of the deal.

Now, the Minister of Industry said, in reply to my colleague's question, that he did not discuss the issue with the Prime Minister. That is what he claims. But we now know, and the Minister of Industry himself even admits it, that Eddie Goldenberg, the Prime Minister's senior policy advisor, was kept abreast of developments on the matter.

Will the Minister of Industry confirm that the departments of Canadian Heritage and Industry sent copies of all of the correspondence they exchanged regarding the Power DirecTv deal to the Prime Minister's senior policy advisor, Eddie Goldenberg?

[John Manley, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Really, Mr. Speaker, so what? Management of an important file would be expected. In the context of conversation it would be normal, among other things, that what the government is doing with respect to a file would be told to the Prime Minister's office.

What I think is important here and the question the member should be asking is whether on behalf of the Prime Minister the principal secretary endeavoured to influence the decisions ministers were taking.

Mr. Goldenberg communicated two things, that the Prime Minister did not want to be involved in any way in the file, and neither did he.

[Gaston Leroux, Bloc, Richmond—Wolfe, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the way the minister acknowledges the direct link between the Prime Minister and his information sources is just incredible.

Given the admission that the Prime Minister's senior policy advisor, Eddie Goldenberg, was kept up-to-date on the matter affecting the Prime Minister's son-in-law, will the Minister of Industry admit that he and the Minister of Canadian Heritage were players in the Prime Minister's charade, in which he used his senior policy advisor to achieve indirectly what the law prohibits him from doing directly?

[John Manley, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, I had a little trouble hearing the member's question.

If I recall, the hon. member is a former or perhaps a continuing actor. I would like to read to him what the president of ACTRA wrote to us on this: "We are particularly pleased with the recognition of the need for competition among services and for an equitable contribution from revenues to be directed toward production and administered at arm's length from carriers. We hope the Government of Canada will move quickly to enunciate policy which will lead to the implementation of these principles".

In this case we have initiated a process which is open and transparent and subject to discussion in Parliament. Process is the rule of law and it is the way to ensure avoidance of conflict of interest, which is what we are doing.

Seagram

[Val Meredith, Reform, Surrey—White Rock—South Langley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the assistant deputy minister for cultural affairs in the Department of Canadian Heritage is Victor Rabinovitch.

Mr. Rabinovitch is directly responsible for the Seagram's file. His brother Robert, who wrote the DTH satellite directive, works for the Bronfmans.

Why is the Minister of Canadian Heritage allowing this sensitive issue to be handled by someone who is in a direct conflict of interest?