House of Commons Hansard #220 of the 35th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was ethics.
Maud Debien Bloc Laval East, QC
Mr. Speaker, how can the government expect the public to trust the process, when it is clear that the services of a person close to Mr. Mugesera have been retained to clarify his role in the Rwandan genocide?
I would also like to have assurances that the investigation will be public, and that its findings will be made available as soon as possible.
Alfonso Gagliano LiberalSecretary of State (Parliamentary Affairs) and Deputy Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, I can inform the hon. member that the investigation will start next week, when the person concerned will have a chance to answer all these questions. An independent judge will rule on this case.
Ed Harper Reform Simcoe Centre, ON
Mr. Speaker, in the Prime Minister's speech a year ago he announced that the ethics counsellor would be empowered to investigate conflicts of interest.
The heritage minister has broken these conflict of interest guidelines no less than four times: first when he intervened for a constituent on a CRTC licence; second when he overturned the DTH policy for friends in Power Corp; third when he lunched with the Bronfmans in L.A.; and again when he held a dollars for contracts dinner in Montreal.
In not one of these instances was the ethics counsellor allowed to conduct a proper investigation-
Ethic CounsellorOral Question Period
The Speaker
Maybe it is because it is Friday but it seems to me that the preambles are getting a little long. If members could just shorten the preambles and the questions a little, it would help us in question period.
The question, please, from the member for Simcoe Centre.
Ed Harper Reform Simcoe Centre, ON
Mr. Speaker, why will the Prime Minister not live up to his rhetoric of a year ago, live up to his red book promise and appoint an independent ethics counsellor responsible to Parliament?
Herb Gray LiberalLeader of the Government in the House of Commons and Solicitor General of Canada
Mr. Speaker, first I do not accept the accuracy of the innuendos and allegations in the premise of the hon. member's question.
Second, the Prime Minister has said that in a parliamentary system he has to take the ultimate responsibility for his cabinet and he cannot evade that responsibility. While he has carried out his promise to appoint an ethics counsellor, he still has to carry out the responsibility which is that of a Prime Minister in a parliamentary system.
If my hon. friends agree with our parliamentary system, they would agree with the Prime Minister.
Ed Harper Reform Simcoe Centre, ON
Mr. Speaker, not only do I agree with it but we have respect for it.
A year ago today the Prime Minister stated in this House:
Canadians have a right to know who is trying to influence their elected and public officials.
Canadians have a right to know who was influencing the heritage minister. Every person who attended the fundraising dinner received a contract or an appointment from his heritage department.
Why will the government not release a complete list of who was invited and who contributed to the heritage minister's dinner? Does the Canadian public not have a right to know?
Herb Gray LiberalLeader of the Government in the House of Commons and Solicitor General of Canada
Mr. Speaker, I point out again as I pointed out yesterday that the dinner was not organized by the Government of Canada. The Government of Canada did not send out the invitations.
The material my hon. friend is seeking is not under the control of the Government of Canada. At the same time information has been provided and certainly I will be happy to see what further information is provided.
My hon. friend in his question says he has respect for the parliamentary system. The hon. member's question showed just the opposite. He lacks that fundamental respect. He ought to start showing some if he is serious about what he says.
Gilles Duceppe Bloc Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC
Mr. Speaker, last April, the Bloc Quebecois denounced the flagrant inequity to Quebec in the awarding of professional and special contracts by the Department of Justice. Let me remind you that the value of contracts awarded to Ontario entrepreneurs is 15 times higher than that of contracts awarded to Quebec entrepreneurs. In his written response to Bloc members, the Minister of Justice confirmed our allegations.
Given that only 5 per cent of the value of Department of Justice research contracts is awarded to Quebec entrepreneurs and that only 1 per cent of contracts are in French, does the minister acknowledge that this situation is totally unacceptable and should be rectified as soon as possible?
Allan Rock LiberalMinister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
Mr. Speaker, I have furnished a written response to the hon. member's party answering questions put in the House during the past several months about the statistical breakdown of the awarding of contracts across the country.
The evidence shows that those contracts are distributed to various provinces and the number is disclosed by the letters that I have delivered. The numbers suggested by the hon. member are more or less correct.
As I have also said, there are many factors that determine to whom a contract is awarded. Sometimes these things are for specialized purposes or research to be done by individuals with particular knowledge.
In any event, I have also made it clear in my letter that the awarding of contracts based on language is strictly in accordance with the principles of fairness. I will look again at the whole process to ensure that those principles are being complied with absolutely.
Gilles Duceppe Bloc Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC
Mr. Speaker, I admit that there is a difference in the interpretation of figures. We say 5 per cent, while the minister says 6 per cent. As for the 1 per cent of contracts awarded to Quebec entrepreneurs, let us admit that it could hardly be any less.
Given that most Department of Justice contracts are awarded directly without tender by department officials and taking into account, I imagine, the minister's obvious authority over the awarding of contracts, can the minister make a commitment to issue and make public clear directives designed to ensure that a fair share of research work is done in French, as must or rather should the case&
Department Of JusticeOral Question Period
Etobicoke Centre Ontario
Liberal
Allan Rock LiberalMinister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
Mr. Speaker, we already have full written guidelines. We have established policies.
We clearly stated in the letters I gave the hon. member that government departments already had guidelines concerning the awarding of contracts to the private sector. I would be very happy to provide a copy of these guidelines to the hon. member if he so wishes, as they already exist.
We in the justice department comply with these guidelines.
Ken Epp Reform Elk Island, AB
Mr. Speaker, it was on this Friday a year ago that the Prime Minister said: "I rise today to talk about trust". With all the moral fortitude that he could muster, he announced that things would be different. His government was going to be ethical.
How does this reconcile with the minister of public works engaging in the most blatant form of pork barrelling by diverting money from highway 104 to his own riding? Why does the Prime Minister not live up to his words of a year ago and reinstate the funding to highway 104 where it belongs?
John Manley LiberalMinister of Industry
Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the Minister of Transport today I think this question demonstrates perhaps as well as any just exactly how ethically challenged the Reform Party is.
The reality is that the issue raised by the hon. member is one in which a decision was made by the responsible level of government in an entirely transparent and open way. To try to suggest that this is an ethical question implies that somebody improperly benefited in a personal or pecuniary way from the awarding of a contract. That is not the case at all.
There was a political issue. It was debated openly in the province of Nova Scotia. The decision was made close to the people affected by it and the political consequences will be faced. That is not an ethical question; that is a political one.
By trying to move political questions into the realm of ethics we can see why the hon. member has a basic misunderstanding of what the process of government is all about. Ethics deal with the propriety, the transparency and the openness of a decision making process. What in fact the member complains about is the decision that was taken at the provincial level close to the people.
John Manley Liberal Ottawa South, ON
We have listened to preambles almost three minutes long. Therefore it is appropriate to have a long response.
The issue being debated in this question is one which lies at the provincial level. To try to turn it into an ethical question in the House shows the lack of understanding on the part of the member.
Ken Epp Reform Elk Island, AB
Mr. Speaker, we certainly would not want to have political questions impinging on the question of ethics, would we?
The Prime Minister said that his government would serve all Canadians and not just the privileged few. Tonight, the mayor of Amherst, Cumberland-Colchester councillors, business people and ordinary citizens are pulling together to send a common message: Give the money back.
Let us be very clear. Is the government telling these people that they are wrong and that there is nothing wrong with what the minister of public works has done?
John Manley LiberalMinister of Industry
Mr. Speaker, the problem the member has is that he has to deal with the framework of law.
There is the strategic highway improvement program agreement between the province of Nova Scotia and the Government of Canada. The determination of issues related to the allocation of resources under that agreement is very clearly provided for.
John Manley Liberal Ottawa South, ON
The mayor needs to address the proper level of government, the province of Nova Scotia, where the decision was made in a way that was very transparent and open. If there is disagreement in the province of Nova Scotia with the people responsible at that level then that is the proper place for the debate to occur.
They are not only ethically challenged, but they seem to have difficulty listening as well. I do not understand why the Reform Party has such difficulty focusing on the division of powers between the federal and provincial governments in this matter.
Michel Daviault Bloc Ahuntsic, QC
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Health.
For several months now, milk consumer representatives have been telling the government that the moratorium on the use of somatotropin must be extended. Only the government and Monsanto seem interested in seeing that hormone back on the Canadian market. Two days ago, the health committee unanimously asked that the moratorium be extended for another two years.
Will the minister follow up on the unanimous request made by the three parties represented on the health committee and extend the moratorium for two years?
Diane Marleau LiberalMinister of Health
Mr. Speaker, I want to say once again that the somatotropin hormone has not been approved for sale or consumption in Canada. Consequently, we have to wait. There is a process, at the Department of Health, to approve drugs such as somatotropin. That process is under way, and no decision has yet been made.
A favourable decision will only be made if health department experts are convinced that the hormone can be safely used in Canada. It is important to keep that in mind.
Michel Daviault Bloc Ahuntsic, QC
Mr. Speaker, the moratorium ends in 17 days and the processes set up by the health minister are as flawed as her will to protect the health of Canadians.
Michel Daviault Bloc Ahuntsic, QC
Will the Minister of Health recognize that she can either make specific recommendations to the government to extend the moratorium, or propose measures to prohibit the use of somatotropin in Canada, since that hormone is not currently prohibited?
