Debates of Oct. 6th, 1998

Apec Summit

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, the minister has denied, and it was confirmed by the lawyer who was travelling with him, that they discussed anything that interfered with the work of the commission. I am satisfied with the word of the minister and the word of the lawyer—

[The Speaker]

Colleagues, surely we should let the person answer the question. Like many of you, I am having difficulty hearing the questions and the answers.

The Right Hon. Prime Minister had the floor. I am sorry I intervened.

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Saint-Maurice, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I will just say that we want this commission to do its work as quickly as possible so that we will know all the facts. That is what this House should wish and it is what the commission should do. The country will be happy if we let them do their work.

[John Reynolds, Reform, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast, BC]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday at 3.30 the Solicitor General was out in the lobby denying he ever said what he said. By 5.30 last night there is a letter in Ottawa saying he did—

[The Speaker]

No props.

[John Reynolds, Reform, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast, BC]

Mr. Speaker, there is a letter that was discussed this morning by the minister. On September 21 the minister rose in this House saying that it would be completely inappropriate to discuss any details around this investigation. The minister obviously discussed this with a friend on the airplane, which he did not remember last night but did a couple of hours later.

My question is to the Prime Minister. The minister did discuss it. He said in this House he should not. Should he not resign until this commission is over?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, the answer is no.

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, clearly the Solicitor General would not have remained in his position had a friend of the Liberal Party not qualified his remarks in the plane.

My question is for the Prime Minister. Is a lawyer like Mr. Toole, whose firm contributed $10,000 to the victory of the Liberal Party in the last election, capable of qualifying the remarks he heard to save the skin of the Solicitor General?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, the lawyer in question, a prominent citizen of New Brunswick, sent a letter, which is now a public document. If the hon. member is saying that the lawyer is lying, let him say so outside the House of Commons, and the lawyer can take the appropriate action.

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the fact is that this is where the event is occurring and it is here we want to know whether the Solicitor General should remain in his position.

My question is as follows: As the Solicitor General, the minister for public security in a way, is supposed to be above all suspicion, can he say that he remains so in order to keep his position? We do not think so.

[Andy Scott, Liberal, Solicitor General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, I am very aware of my role as Solicitor General. I would not compromise it and I did not compromise it. That is what I said yesterday. That is what I said today. That is what has been substantiated by the person who sat with me on the plane.

[Monte Solberg, Reform, Medicine Hat, AB]

Mr. Speaker, this is incredible. First the minister cannot remember who he spoke to, what their gender was, what the person said, and then, like in a soap opera, the 24-hour amnesia passes and all of a sudden he discovers that the mystery passenger was his good friend.

That does not even pass the laugh test. Why does the minister not quit the charade and just resign?

[Andy Scott, Liberal, Solicitor General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, because the story as recounted is absolutely accurate. I never remembered on Monday who was on the plane the Thursday night before. I have taken this plane 300 times in the last five years with many of the same people. It is a small community.

I found out last night who it was. I had the conversation necessary to remind myself of all the details and they were very consistent with what I said in the House yesterday and what I said again today.

[Monte Solberg, Reform, Medicine Hat, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister mentions Linda Tripp. In the U.S. they have DNA tests. Here we will have to start administering IQ tests. Mr. Speaker, in case—

[The Speaker]

I would ask the hon. member to withdraw those last remarks about IQ tests.

[Monte Solberg, Reform, Medicine Hat, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I withdraw them.

In case the minister does not remember, he is the Solicitor General. In case he does not remember, he is in the House of Commons. In case he does not remember, he does have some responsibilities, like telling Canadians exactly what happened on that plane. Why does he not quit fooling around, quit with the fairy tales and just resign?

[Andy Scott, Liberal, Solicitor General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, I have told the hon. member what happened in great detail and I stand by it.

Employment Insurance

[Paul Crête, Bloc, Kamouraska—Rivière-Du-Loup—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Mr. Speaker, this morning the four opposition parties joined with the main central labour bodies in Quebec and Canada in calling for the government to establish an independent employment insurance commission so as to block the government's attempts to divert the employment insurance fund surplus.>

Does the Minister of Human Resources Development plan to heed this common front for the creation of an independent employment insurance commission?

[Pierre Pettigrew, Liberal, Minister of Human Resources Development]

Mr. Speaker, I must say that I find it most interesting that there are so many people offering to administer employment insurance now it is in a surplus situation. There were precious few of them when there was a $6 billion deficit.

Moreover, there already is a commission made up of worker and employer representatives, and we have worked together extremely well over the years.

[Paul Crête, Bloc, Kamouraska—Rivière-Du-Loup—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Mr. Speaker, lined up on the one side we have a certain number of big businessmen, friends of the government, who share its opinions. On the other, we have all the labour unions, all the workers, all the unemployed, all the opposition parties and a large number of employers as well.

Why would the minister heed the minority, who are in favour of diverting the employment insurance fund, rather than the majority, who are calling for an independent commission to ensure the integrity of EI?

[Pierre Pettigrew, Liberal, Minister of Human Resources Development]

Mr. Speaker, we already have an employment insurance commission, which works very well. Our responsibility is to the workers.

We have always respected the law, and I object to the insinuations in the very wording of the hon. member's question that we have not respected the law.

This government is committed to working on behalf of Canadians, those who are working and those who are not, and we will continue to work to help get people back into the work force, before anything else.

Apec Summit

[Randy White, Reform, Langley—Abbotsford, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I have listened with great regret and concern about what has happened in this House and what we have heard in here today. I have heard denials in the face of the facts.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[Randy White, Reform, Langley—Abbotsford, BC]

Mr. Speaker, we have heard denials in the face of the facts. We have heard contradictions by the solicitor general. We have heard excuses and not apologies. The solicitor general of our country is simply not believable.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.