Debates of June 2nd, 1999

Government Contracts

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, there is no involvement by the Prime Minister.

Why do the Reform Party members not get up and admit that they are making these baseless allegations because they are trying to divert attention from the fact that their party is disintegrating before the eyes of Canadians and Reform members are in open revolt against the united alternative initiative and, in particular, against their Leader of the Opposition? For that matter, they are at half of where they were in the last election. The party is dying and they are trying to hide that fact even from themselves.

Asbestos

[Gilles Duceppe, Bloc, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, in reference to asbestos and the WTO, the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs justified the federal government's refusal to be accompanied by Quebec by saying “winning a round against the WTO means playing by the WTO's rules”.

How can the minister say that it is the WTO's rules that are preventing Quebec from joining the Canadian delegation when, in reality, everyone knows that the rules were set by the federal government?

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, the asbestos issue obviously involves regulations passed by the French government and not regulations passed by the province of Quebec.

It is therefore only right that the national government, which represents all Canadians, including Quebecers, play the principal role.

[Gilles Duceppe, Bloc, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, perhaps the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs will reply, unless the Deputy Prime Minister is going to bat for him.

I would like him to tell me the specific WTO regulation or section that prevents a provincial government from sitting on the Canadian delegation.

Will the Deputy Prime Minister not admit that this was a decision taken by the federal government, and that the truth is that it is the federal government that is preventing the provinces, including Quebec, from sitting on the delegation and not the WTO?

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, as usual, it is all the federal government's fault.

They are still looking for winning conditions, but these conditions will be their undoing. In the case of an international trade dispute, Canadian policy is to invite the provinces to take part in hearings only in the case of provincial measures that are challenged by other countries.

[Benoît Sauvageau, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs had the nerve to claim that Quebec would be less well served if it were present at the table with the federal government. Yet it is Quebec that prepared the entire case. Even the minister acknowledges that.

Is the minister aware that the federal government's position of excluding Quebec from defending its asbestos, when we are the second ranking producer in the world, is not based on any logic, has no connection with any WTO requirement and is purely doctrinaire?

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, President of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, the first thing I would say is that yesterday the deputy Premier of Quebec accused the Government of Canada of being fanatical on this issue.

I would suggest that the Government of Quebec and the Bloc Quebecois drop all of this verbal bombast, which only proves in the end that they are out to get winning conditions.

Second, in the WTO all member states, without exception, jealously protect their ability to speak with a single voice in negotiations in order to be in a winning position.

[Benoît Sauvageau, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the minister told us that Quebec will be briefed every evening on the progress of negotiations.

He ought to realize that by evening it will be too late for us to tell the federal government what other arguments it ought to have used to defend us.

Is this the best way to defend the interests of Quebec, briefing us in the evening after the cases have already been argued?

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I have been informed that, of the 12 delegation members, 10 are from the province of Quebec and are spokespersons for the Quebec asbestos industry. These are the real experts. Their expertise will, I trust, help us toward a good outcome for the people of Quebec and for all the people of Canada.

Kosovo

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, the defence minister is scrambling to convince Canadians that he is on top of his job. Let us listen to the words of the defence minister about a key NATO meeting that took place six days ago. He can try to duck it but these are his words, “I don't know exactly who was at the meeting. I'm still looking into it. I don't know what was discussed or what impact it had. I'm still waiting to find out”.

Canadian Armed Forces personnel are doing their jobs in the Balkans. Canadian aid workers are doing their jobs. Why can the defence minister not do his job?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, the first thing that is false about that preamble is her suggestion that it was a NATO meeting. It was not a NATO meeting at all. It was a regular meeting of defence ministers of the European Union. They have been going on year in and year out and nobody has ever suggested that Canada should be involved in those meetings. They are strictly for the European Union. A group of them decided to have an informal ad hoc meeting on the side with Mr. Cohen. That is all it was. It was not a decision making meeting by any means. Decisions are made at the full NATO council in Brussels and Canada is a full participant.

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, when is a meeting a meeting? When armed forces personnel go AWOL there are definite consequences, but when the defence minister abandons his post there appears to be absolutely no consequences whatsoever.

Are Canadians to conclude that the government has no intention of doing anything about the incompetence of the defence minister?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, I am on the job. The hon. member for Burnaby—Douglas was part of the NDP caucus that went a little AWOL not too long ago in going over to Belgrade.

I just had a meeting today with Secretary Cohen. I have had numerous meetings with Secretary Cohen and other defence ministers within NATO. I do not hear complaints from other NATO defence ministers that I did not include them.

We all know that we have informal discussions, but we also know that the decision making process is at NATO in Brussels and we are all full participants in it.

Government Contracts

[Jim Jones, Progressive Conservative, Markham, ON]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Prime Minister refused to answer three simple questions: First, will he ask his HRDC minister to release the 363 pages withheld from my access to information request on the Duhaime and Thibault deals; second, will he release all the documents regarding the CIDA contract to Claude Gauthier; and third, will he invoke section 11 of the Auditor General Act to investigate this questionable use of taxpayers' dollars?

Will the Prime Minister answer these questions or will he keep hiding behind his cabinet ministers?

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I think it is obvious that if there is one person who is a 100% stand-up guy and does not hide from anything, it is our Prime Minister.

The Prime Minister is meeting with the executive director of the International Monetary Fund at an important function.

I want to say that there is not a shred of evidence of any wrongdoing. The auditor general, of course, has his own autonomy and jurisdiction. Furthermore, the Minister of Human Resources Development and the minister responsible for CIDA can give answers on the release of documents.

The Prime Minister has acted in a perfectly proper way in this—

[The Speaker]

Order, please.

[Jim Jones, Progressive Conservative, Markham, ON]

Mr. Speaker, if there is not a shred of evidence, let us table all of the documents.

We, the Conservative caucus, were the first to urge the Prime Minister to use section 11 of the Auditor General Act to clear the air on this scandal. Only an independent investigation from an apolitical, arm's length office can credibly examine the nearly $9 million in questionable HRDC grants, federal business loans and CIDA grants to the Prime Minister's friends and constituents.

Is the Prime Minister refusing to ask the auditor general to investigate because of what might be uncovered?

[Diane Marleau, Liberal, Minister for International Cooperation and Minister responsible for Francophonie]

Mr. Speaker, there is no CIDA grant. It is a contract for work being done in one of the poorest countries in the world.

There is not a shred of evidence. It is all innuendo and it is rotten politics.

[Jason Kenney, Reform, Calgary Southeast, AB]

Mr. Speaker, it seems that whenever—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[The Speaker]

Order, please.

[Jason Kenney, Reform, Calgary Southeast, AB]

There is a little concern over there.

It seems that whenever the Prime Minister is asked some tough questions about his shady business dealings—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[The Speaker]

Order, please. I would ask the hon. member to go directly to his question.

[Jason Kenney, Reform, Calgary Southeast, AB]

Mr. Speaker, why is it that when the Prime Minister threatens to sue people for talking about conflicts of interests outside this House he ends up ducking, dodging and disappearing? Why is it that the Prime Minister expects Canadians to believe that when he receives $15,000 from a constituent and gets a half million dollars in his company from that constituent that a $190,000 untendered government paving contract is an accident?