House of Commons Hansard #44 of the 36th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was money.
Jane Stewart LiberalMinister of Human Resources Development
Mr. Speaker, again, we are taking action. If the hon. member has indications that there was wrongdoing, let him bring them forward and the appropriate authorities will be involved.
Presence In GalleryOral Question Period
The Speaker
I draw the attention of hon. members to the presence in the gallery of my brother Speaker from the Legislative Assembly of Ontario, the honourable Gary Carr.
Pat Martin NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. During question period the Prime Minister used a document to contradict the allegations that I made. Clearly there is complete disagreement here, a 180 degree opposite.
In the sense that the Prime Minister used that prop or that document as part of his answer, I would like him to table it so we can get to the bottom of who is right and who is wrong.
Bill Blaikie NDP Winnipeg—Transcona, MB
Mr. Speaker, I rise on the same point of order as the hon. member for Winnipeg Centre. I think it is important in the House, if we are to have genuine debate and questions and answers, if we are seeking information and asking questions of the government, that there be some modicum of respect for truth in the Chamber.
When a question is asked about a particular fund, in this case the transitional jobs fund, then the government, if it is going to make claims about what goes to certain ridings and what does not go to other ridings, needs to stick to what the question asked is about. In this case it is the transitional jobs fund.
If the government has evidence as it claims that there were transitional jobs fund money, not other money but transitional jobs fund money which is what the question was about, going into the riding of Winnipeg Centre, then I invite the government to table it now because it cannot.
Chuck Strahl Reform Fraser Valley, BC
Mr. Speaker, I am rising in support of the member for Winnipeg Centre on a couple of points. As we know Beauchesne's citation 495 requires that documents quoted from in the House should be tabled in the House. That is one with which we are familiar.
I also turn to Erskine May at page 63 which talk specifically about ministerial accountability in the House. This is a relatively recent ruling adopted by members of the House in 1996. To read briefly from it, it says:
That, in the opinion of this House, the following principles should govern the conduct of ministers of the Crown in relation to Parliament: ministers have a duty to Parliament to account, and be held to account, for the policies, decisions and actions of their departments and Next Steps Agencies; it is of paramount importance that ministers give accurate and truthful information to Parliament, correcting any inadvertent errors at the earliest opportunity. Ministers who knowingly mislead Parliament will be expected to offer their resignation to the Prime Minister; ministers should be as open as possible with Parliament, refusing to provide information only when disclosure would not be in the public interest—
Over the last couple of days we have seen a spectacle of the House leader and others on the government side providing information on a regular basis to the Prime Minister and other ministers and then refusing to table that same binder, that same information which they have collected from across the country. It is in the public interest. It is not in the public interest to withhold that information. It is in the interest of all Canadians to see that information.
The reason it is important, not just the few quotes from today but the entire binder of information it has on each and every member of parliament in this place, is that there is a gag order. A gag order has gone out from the government to HRD offices, refusing to even discuss the very documents that members on the opposition and other sides of the House may have communicated with the government. They have been told to refuse to discuss the very documents the government has in the famous binders across the way.
We have a spectacle where the government is using information garnered from the department, using departmental resources and using ministerial gag orders saying that the information is not to be shared with anyone else. A video has been sent out to all HRD offices explaining how to answer requests for information and how to stymie the process to make sure that information does not get out.
What do we have? We have a government using departmental resources to keep information away from members of parliament and from the Canadian public.
The member's request to table the document, which is a reasonable one, should be extended to the entire packet of information the government has on each and every member of parliament in this place which it is using selectively and to provide information that is not truthful, and which Erskine May says is a contempt of this place.
It should table not only the documents that were quoted from today and this week in the House of Commons, but I would ask you, Mr. Speaker, to ask the government House leader to do the honourable thing and look after ministerial accountability and responsibility. He should do what Erskine May and the House of Commons collectively decided in 1996, and that is not withhold information that is in the public interest. This information is in the public interest and should be tabled in the House of Commons.
Peter MacKay Progressive Conservative Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough, NS
Mr. Speaker, I know hon. members are very upset by this matter, but I would attach myself very much to the remarks of the previous speakers.
The government House leader is not only an officer of his government. He is also an officer of the House. I respectfully request that the House leader is very familiar with House procedure and with the previous precedents quoted by the opposition House leader.
He is duty bound, I would suggest, to table these documents, not only the documents that were handed quickly as back-up to the Prime Minister throughout question period over the last number of days but, as has been previously stated, all documents being used to fortify and deflect attention away from this issue. Those documents should be before the House and accessible to the opposition and therefore accessible to the Canadian public.
Louis Plamondon Bloc Richelieu, QC
Mr. Speaker, I would like to corroborate to some extent what the two previous speakers have said.
I have been in this House 16 years, and it is customary when quoting a document for the Prime Minister or the minister concerned to table the document, in order to be able to use it subsequently in answering questions or to use extracts from it in answers.
When the Prime Minister or minister quotes from documents or reads excerpts from them, however, they are required to table the entire document so that each member of the House may have the same use, view of, and ease of access to the documents in question.
If no document or file had ever been quoted to the members, he could say “Go and get the documents you want under the Access to Information Act”, but this particular document is pertinent to the debate and to the events as they are unfolding. All of the files must therefore be tabled, and parts of the document must not be quoted during question period only.
It is totally legitimate for each member to demand this right.
Libby Davies NDP Vancouver East, BC
Mr. Speaker, I rise on the same point of order. I also asked a question in the House today and was amazed to hear that $37 million had gone into my riding.
There is no way for me to verify that information. It is not clear whether it was the transitional jobs fund or other programs. It is patently unfair for this information to be at the beck and call of government members and not to be disclosed to all members of the House. It is unparliamentary and undemocratic.
We are talking about public expenditures and if that information is being used by the government in debate, in question period, and there is no way for members to be able to verify that information or how to respond to it, it is very unfair.
I would implore the Speaker to consider this point and to request the government to disclose this information as it is in the public realm.
Don Boudria LiberalLeader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to respond to a number of points that were raised today. I do not agree with too many of them and I intend to share with you why I do not.
The member for Vancouver East alleges that because answers were provided to her the government should automatically supply written material to support an answer. We could equally claim that the government should have supporting material for some of these unsubstantiated allegations from some of the members across. That would probably be far more constructive in terms of the good governance of the country with one difference which is that the numbers we have used I maintain are correct to the best of our knowledge. I would say that is hardly the case with some of the questions being asked.
The member for Richelieu raised the point that, when a minister cites a document, he should not only table the document cited, but all of the documentation.
I draw your attention to citation 495(4) of Beauchesne's, which reads as follows:
Only the document cited need be tabled by a Minister. A complete file need not be tabled—
That is citation 495(4).
Don Boudria Liberal Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON
I am glad the House leader for the NDP is interjecting. It permits me to refer to citation 495(3) of Beauchesne's which says:
A public document referred to but not cited or quoted by a Minister need not be tabled. Journals , November 16, 1971, p. 922.
Don Boudria Liberal Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON
Mr. Speaker, in terms of the document that I have before me, I have my ministerial briefing book prepared by my staff. This is my own personal briefing book. Ministers historically have had these to assist them in preparing constructive answers to the questions that are asked of them from time to time.
Points Of OrderOral Question Period
The Speaker
Order, please. Some things I do hear, some things I do not. I would ask the hon. member who is a veteran parliamentarian to please cease and desist from words such as that. I call on hon. members to listen to the explanations that are being made and then I will make up my own mind.
Don Boudria Liberal Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON
Mr. Speaker, I will ignore that for the time being.
The opposition House leader also requested that a minister table his briefing book. He further alleges that my briefing book was prepared by officials of a government department. That is factually incorrect. I would like him to substantiate that accusation if he has any way of providing that.
Referring to the opposition House leader, I offered yesterday to table the letters that were quoted yesterday. I asked him across the floor of the House by way of interjection to ask me to table the letters because I had annotated them and offered to table them. It is interesting to note that he did not seem to think that it was a good idea to have his own quotes tabled with those of his colleagues in the House of Commons.
The member for Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough would like me to table documents which were not referred to in the House. I would love to table the letter that he sent to the department asking for funding for MacPherson's Trailer Services and the one for the brewery in his constituency. I will drink to that. There is the one he sent for the Dunrite Blasting company, the one for Trans-Atlantic Transport, the one that he sent for Scotia Aqua Farms, the one that he sent for the amusement park, the hair studio, Caren's Shear Magic Hair Design, and the one for Fitness Xpress, but Mr. Speaker, I did not quote from those documents. The rules do not permit me to table in the House of Commons these documents that the hon. member sent, so obviously I do not intend to do so.
Any documents that were quoted from today, other than our own internal documents, I will gladly table. For instance, I am prepared to table the householder of the member for Madawaska—Restigouche which made all sorts of very praising remarks about the human resources department. I will gladly table that particular document because it was actually quoted.
Finally, a member from Winnipeg asked about the amount that human resources development contributed to his constituency. I believe that he asked specifically about the transitional jobs fund. The Prime Minister—
Points Of OrderOral Question Period
The Speaker
Order, please. I will hear this and then I will hear your point of order. The hon. government House leader.
Don Boudria Liberal Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON
The Prime Minister in his response answered that the total human resources development money given to the constituency represented by the hon. member, which I believe to be Winnipeg Centre, that information is correct, was in the amount of $139,469,824. That is the riding in all of Canada that has received the most human resources development money for the combined years of 1997-98, 1998-99 and 1999-2000 at least to date.
Points Of OrderOral Question Period
The Speaker
As a general rule, when we have a public document that was quoted from and cited, yes, we do have it tabled in the House of Commons.
I repeat citation 495 which states:
(3) A public document referred to but not cited or quoted by a minister need not be tabled.
That is from a decision in 1971.
(4) Only the document cited need be tabled by a minister. A complete file need not be tabled because one document in it has been cited.
Therefore, if something was quoted from in the House and it is cited, then that document would be tabled.
What we have here is a question of do ministers have the right to have materials in the House that they refer to to give answers in the House. I would judge that if all of the briefing notes which were prepared for the ministers had to be tabled, then I think that that would perhaps put the minister at somewhat of a disadvantage and that all of the information that he uses would be cited in public.
I will review the blues, and if the blues do state a specific document was cited and where it was cited, then I will come back to the House if it is necessary. But I will not order that notes that are made either in the House or before they come in the House as briefing notes be released to the House.
On the other point brought up about accountability of the ministers, I am sure that if the hon. member looks through all of that and if what the hon. member is claiming is that not that there is a matter of opinion on both sides but that there was—now this is my word, the hon. member did not use it—but that in fact there was a deliberate lie, then we are dealing with something else altogether. The minister of course is appointed by the Prime Minister. If the minister feels for whatever reason that he or she should be resigning for whatever reasons he or she has, then that would be his or her decision. Conversely I think that the Prime Minister would have all of the authority that a leader of a party has to dismiss or change the ministers as they are.
On both counts, one the releasing of the information, I would rule that yes, if it is in a public document cited—and I commit to reviewing the blues to see if indeed there was a document cited in there—and two on the accountability of ministers, I would rule on both cases that the point of order is not granted.
This point of order is over.
Howard Hilstrom Reform Selkirk—Interlake, MB
My member's privilege, Mr. Speaker, has to do with debate this morning. The member for Mississauga West was speaking about myself and the Selkirk—Interlake riding and referring to HRDC moneys that had flowed into my riding.
The member for Mississauga West is referring to material that he has access to out of the HRDC department or from the hon. House leader of the Liberal government which I as a member do not have access to. As a result my ability to debate and to discuss the very moneys that have flowed into Selkirk—Interlake are hampered by not having access to the same information that the government members have.
As a result, my privileges have been abused in the House. I would ask that all the files pertaining to the HRDC money that has flowed into Selkirk—Interlake be turned over to me so that I can defend myself and answer to allegations that are brought forward by the members on the Liberal side.
PrivilegeOral Question Period
The Speaker
I think that the hon. member is now taking part in a debate. The hon. member says one thing which would be his understanding. I do not know that you have to show all of your research files for everything that you say in the House. The hon. member on the other side is claiming another thing.
I would suggest that this is a matter of debate and that the hon. member has recourse to debate. That would be my decision at this point.
Réal Ménard Bloc Hochelaga—Maisonneuve, QC
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order, just for clarification.
You acknowledge that it is the privilege of all parliamentarians to send our fellow citizens householders four times a year. This is a recognized privilege in this House.
I want to point out for your consideration the fact that, when the government leader, with a lack of fair play and something nearing unparliamentary practice, hijacks this mailing in order to change the meaning we have given it as opposition parties, we are put at a disadvantage in relation to all the information the government has.
I will close simply by respectfully submitting that, if the government leader can rise in the House and use our parliamentary mailings for devious purposes, we as opposition parties must have the same information as they do to on the subsidies awarded in our respective ridings.
