House of Commons Hansard #159 of the 36th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was smoking.
Diane Ablonczy Reform Calgary Nose Hill, AB
Mr. Speaker, three months ago today the Canada pension plan's chief actuary was fired. To help quell the controversy the finance minister told this House the Canadian Institute of Actuaries would review the upcoming CPP report. But last week the institute refused to become embroiled in the affair.
How can the minister guarantee now an independent review of the CPP report?
Paul Martin LiberalMinister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, to replace the chief actuary the government has brought in that person who was responsible for the outside review who has extensive experience in this area. He will do a very thorough, very comprehensive review.
Diane Ablonczy Reform Calgary Nose Hill, AB
Mr. Speaker, that is not what the minister told the House earlier. He said there would be an independent review of this report, not just counting on the person who prepared it. The finance minister fired the Canada pension plan's top watchdog. Now the Canadian Institute of Actuaries refuses to review the upcoming report.
How can Canadians ever be sure the CPP numbers are correct?
Paul Martin LiberalMinister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, the finance minister did not fire the chief actuary. He was fired by the Superintendent of Financial Institutions which is an independent agency. The superintendent was acting within his full scope. I was not asked for my opinion. I did not give it and would not have given it if I had been asked.
I met with the provincial finance ministers. The acting chief actuary has met with the provincial finance ministers. The actuary's report will be made available to all of the provinces and they will authenticate it.
Gilles Duceppe Bloc Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC
Mr. Speaker, the work of the RCMP public complaints commission cannot be restricted solely to the ethical aspect of the police officers' conduct during the APEC summit in Vancouver.
Will the Prime Minister admit that what the public wants to know in this entire matter, and what absolutely must be clarified, is the role the Prime Minister played in the brutal repression of a peaceful demonstration? That is the real issue.
Jean Chrétien LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, my answer has already been given, and I will give it again, perhaps with a quote since the opposition never looks at the facts.
Here is the quote:
“On October 5 the panel itself ruled that it had the jurisdiction to investigate, make findings and recommendations on whether the Prime Minister, members of his office, the Privy Council Office or the Government of Canada gave improper orders or directions to the RCMP concerning APEC security”.
Come on. Can I find something clearer than that?
Gilles Duceppe Bloc Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC
Mr. Speaker, it must be kept in mind that, in the Somalia affair, the government tried to put the blame on ordinary soldiers, on those carrying out orders, rather than on the senior officers giving them.
Once again here we have them trying to lay the blame on those who carry out the orders and to protect the ones really responsible.
Does the Prime Minister not think the time has come to appoint an independent commission in order the clarify the role played, regardless of what he says, because the commission's powers of inquiry must be looked at, and the true decision-makers determined? An independent commission must be empowered to investigate and determine the responsibility of the Prime Minister.
Jean Chrétien LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, this is a totally independent commission, a permanent one created by an act of Parliament.
The following is what the terms of reference stated in February:
To “inquire into all matters touching upon these complaints, to hear all relevant evidence, to ensure a full and fair hearing in respect of these complaints and to report such findings and recommendations as are warranted”.
I have just read the terms of reference, what they themselves told the students' lawyers they were going to do. They are fully independent. And I trust that, some day, the opposition will be able—
Richard Marceau Bloc Charlesbourg, QC
Mr. Speaker, less than 12 hours after being sworn in, the new solicitor general already got himself into trouble.
Yesterday, he started off by saying that the report to be submitted by the RCMP complaints commission might not be made public, but he later backpedaled, under pressure from the Prime Minister's office.
Is this not more confirmation that the real decision maker in the whole APEC issue is the Prime Minister, and that the solicitor general is nothing but a puppet for the Prime Minister and his office?
Jean Chrétien LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, the solicitor general clarified the situation yesterday.
He said the commission's report would be made public. This is crystal clear. When he answered the question, he had a doubt. He made inquiries, as any cautious person would do, and in the minutes that followed, after reviewing the matter, he gave the clear reply that the report would be made public.
Richard Marceau Bloc Charlesbourg, QC
Mr. Speaker, the solicitor general surely got the answer from the Prime Minister's office.
Everyone, including the students who filed complaints and the RCMP that is the target of these complaints, feels that the RCMP commission cannot get to the bottom of the whole APEC scandal.
Does the Prime Minister agree that, at this rate, not only will justice not be done, but that it will not even be seen to be done?
Jean Chrétien LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, I mentioned earlier that, after the students' lawyers filed a petition on October 5, the commission stated that it would investigate all aspects of the situation.
The commission said it could have access to the Prime Minister's office, the privy council and every federal department to find out whether orders that should not have been given had in fact been given.
The commission intends to do so. It has the mandate to do so. It has been working on this issue since February. Let the commission do its job. That is all we are asking.
Alexa McDonough NDP Halifax, NS
Mr. Speaker, on October 6 I stated in this House that the former solicitor general's infamous in-flight remarks were inappropriate and prejudicial to the public complaints commission inquiry.
The Prime Minister accused me at the time of raising baseless allegations and asked me to apologize. Well, these allegations have been proven true. It is the Prime Minister who owes the apology.
On the anniversary of Spray-PEC, will the Prime Minister now apologize to Canadians for his arrogant dismissal of concerns raised about the integrity of the public complaints commission?
Jean Chrétien LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, I remember very well the hon. member had an eye witness who had seen me giving orders there. I was talking to my staff. The eye witness did not understand a word. I was giving orders in French to my staff. She never retracted that. She said to this House that we had called the president of the university. It was totally false because it was the president of the university who called Mr. Goldenberg who in turn made sure through Mr. Pelletier that the university was satisfied.
She never apologized—
Alexa McDonough NDP Halifax, NS
Mr. Speaker, apparently there is no apology from the Prime Minister who accused the member for Palliser of being a reporter for the National Enquirer , a reporter accused by the then solicitor general of fabricating his story. The story has been proven true. The former solicitor general did prejudice the inquiry.
If the Prime Minister does not have the humility to apologize to Canadians, will he undo the damage by launching a full, independent judicial inquiry to get at the truth about Spray-PEC?
Apec InquiryOral Question Period
The Speaker
My colleagues, it is getting a little bit difficult to hear the questions. I am sure we want to hear the questions as well as the answers. I call on the right hon. Prime Minister.
Jean Chrétien LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, it is not very complicated. The commission is looking at all the arguments. The commission has not ruled on the affirmation she made. Again, she should wait to have the facts. If there is a ruling by the commission that the commission has been prejudiced, we will recognize that. But there is no decision, so she should wait a bit and check her facts. She is not very good on that.
Bill Matthews Progressive Conservative Burin—St. George's, NL
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the leader of the Progressive Conservative Party and our agriculture critic met with western farmers to discuss the current farm income crisis.
One farmer from Saskatchewan during that meeting said “We have used the children's education fund to keep the farm afloat. I will tell you, every day I am faced with calls from farmers in tears”. They are in desperate shape.
I ask the minister of agriculture, when will the government start showing some compassion and help farmers across this country who are suffering through this financial crisis?
Lyle Vanclief LiberalMinister of Agriculture and Agri-Food
Mr. Speaker, we have made it very clear that we understand fully the very unfortunate circumstances which too many of our Canadian farmers are in right now. I am discussing that issue with my cabinet colleagues as we go forward in this very unfortunate situation.
Bill Matthews Progressive Conservative Burin—St. George's, NL
Mr. Speaker, the national safety net advisory committee said on November 18: “The Canadian farm sector is facing a crisis. This situation has revealed a major gap in the safety net system, a gap that needs to be filled now”.
The minister said in the House that a national program would be in place by the end of November. The standing committee on agriculture says its report will not be ready until December 7.
Can farmers expect action from this government before the end of the month or will the minister just waste more time while more farmers go bankrupt?
Lyle Vanclief LiberalMinister of Agriculture and Agri-Food
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member should get his facts straight. I did not make a statement on what would or would not happen by the end of November.
What I did make a commitment to was that I would make a presentation and discuss this with my cabinet colleagues before the end of November. I will be doing that.
Werner Schmidt Reform Kelowna, BC
Mr. Speaker, the minister of public works hired the Golden West Document Shredding company in Burnaby to shred 22,000 boxes of confidential information. This included very personal information on Canadian families, including tax files and secret RCMP police files. Golden West Document Shredding did not shred the documents. In fact, it sold them to a private company for profit.
Can the minister tell this House how many Canadian families had their private files sold to the highest bidder?
Golden West Document ShreddingOral Question Period
Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel Québec
Liberal
Alfonso Gagliano LiberalMinister of Public Works and Government Services
Mr. Speaker, in the beginning of July my department learned of this incident. We took it very seriously.
Right away we issued a stop work order, suspended the company's security clearance and removed all the remaining security material from the premises. We also have commenced a review of all security clearances and the removal of material.
We just received a report from the RCMP. We are studying the report and will take the necessary steps.