Madam Speaker, the Senate was asked to respond to a message requesting it to send a representative to a House of Commons committee to justify the $40 million it spends of Canadian public money.
The senators disregarded the request so the Reform Party put a motion forward for debate that says: "Since you do not want to come and justify any of your $40 million, then we would like to see the House of Commons vote down or be in opposition to vote 1 which is the $40 million budget of the Senate".
In this day and age in Canada, if you cannot appear before a committee to justify the expenditure of $40 million, do you deserve it? Should you have it? Are you accountable? When are you going to be accountable? Why not?
If we are not going to be accountable for Senate expenditures in this House, then where? If we are not going to be accountable in 1996 or in any other year, then when?
We heard the member for Vancouver Quadra talk about the lack of restraint of an unelected House, which the Senate is. It is a bunch of appointed Liberal and Conservative party hacks. Where is the accountability? Do we just throw the senators $40 million every year and tell them to spend it the way they like and go do their job,
whatever it is? Or, do we tell them to appear before a committee to tell us what is going to happen?
The member for Vancouver Centre spoke this morning and these are some of the things she said about this issue. She said that they are separate Houses, the House of Commons and the Senate, so it is none of our business. She said we are wasting time on this issue. I am going to address each one of these in a moment.
The member gave numerous innuendoes of things like bigotry and so on. I am going to address that. She then said that the the Reform Party is digging up another issue and let us get on to more important issues. I sure as heck am going to address that.
The Senate spends over $40 million a year but hey that is okay, it is only our tax money, folks, so do not worry about it. We can see the interest over there in the $40 million. The people in the gallery can see from the attendance just what the interest is.
Let us talk about the separate Houses. If the House of Commons is responsible for approving $40 million of taxpayers' money of another House down the hall, then it cannot be all that separate. Is it mutually exclusive? If it is so mutually exclusive then why does the Senate not approve its own $40 million? This is taxpayers' money we are talking about. I really do not care who it is spent on, it is taxpayers' money and we are responsible in this House for it. Senators should appear before a committee and justify it just like anybody else in this country.
The Houses are separate. Okay. If they are separate Houses there should be no linkage between political parties. If they are separate Houses then they must somehow get into the Senate by some separate elected process, right? No. They are not separate Houses at all. The people who are put into the Senate are appointed by the Prime Minister of each government. They are very objective appointments, right? All good Canadians have a shot at getting a Senate position, right? Yeah, right.
Let us look at a couple of appointments from the list. One was a former Manitoba MLA, a former provincial Liberal leader in Manitoba. I guess that is not too objective. Another one was a former provincial cabinet minister. That is not too objective. He was from the right party, though.
Another person recently appointed was the former MP for Ottawa-Vanier. He was pulled out of a job he had actually campaigned for. He left the people who had elected him. These people were never given a choice as to whether he stayed in the House of Commons or went to the Senate. He was plucked right out of the riding and someone else ran in his place. That is really objective.
Another appointment is of a former New Brunswick Liberal campaign manager for a leadership bid. And the member over there has the gall to try and tell the rest of Canada that these are separate Houses? These are not separate Houses. Yes, you can look for the rest of your members. They are not around, are they? These are not separate houses at all. The people in one House have been put there as a result of personal selection of the head of government, the Prime Minister.
Is that wrong? The opposition the last time around, which was the Liberal Party, said this:
"The issue is not whether he has had some good appointments", Deputy Liberal Leader Sheila Copps said, "this issue is that once again Brian Mulroney is manipulating the system for his own ends, all the while publicly claiming to be holier than thou".
That was when the Conservatives made Senate appointments, but hey, it is okay now that the Liberals are in government. That makes a difference. Here is another quote:
"He is building a huge millstone which is going to be hanging on the neck of Jean Charest or Kim Campbell", said Boudria. "They have to go into the next election with that around their necks".
That comment on an appointment to the Senate was made while the individual was in opposition. He happens to be in government now. "This one just boggles the mind", said a Liberal in opposition. She has been almost everybody's favourite cabinet minister but that was over here. That is not now.
The member for Vancouver Centre is wrong when she says these are separate Houses. Unfortunately they are not separate Houses. If they were, the Senate would be elected, it would be equal and it would be effective.
"We are wasting our time on this issue", says the member for Vancouver Quadra. "It is only $40 million. Heck, it is only taxpayers' money". That is a sad commentary for $40 million, $1 million, $40,000 or $400. A lot of people have to work and pay taxes for that. For a Liberal to stand up and say we are wasting time on this issue is irresponsible.
Some of the innuendo that was put-hi, George, it is nice to see you.