Debates of Nov. 8th, 2001

Grants and Contributions

[Joe Clark, Progressive Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Deputy Prime Minister. Yesterday a long time crony of the Prime Minister, Paul Lemire, pleaded guilty to defrauding two federally funded organizations, Groupe Forces and the Canadian Institute of Tourism and E-commerce. Paul Lemire was a director of Groupe Forces in 1997 when a loan of $200,000 was extended to the Auberge Grand-Mère.

Why did the Prime Minister deliberately not mention this loan by Groupe Forces last spring when he carefully specified in his letter to me all the other sources of funding for the Auberge Grand-Mère?

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I will have to check the text of the letter, but I do want to say that this matter is being dealt with by the courts. One should not forget that this matter came to the attention of police authorities because it was brought to their attention by the Office of the Prime Minister.

[Deborah Grey, Canadian Alliance, Edmonton North, AB]

Mr. Speaker, that is just one of five investigations going on about the Shawinigan deal. Paul Lemire, who has been involved with using $190,000 of taxpayer funds, just kept thinking he shall win again except he got caught.

When is the Prime Minister finally going to admit that he can no longer keep propping up his pals?

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member's premise is totally wrong and the innuendo is wrong. He has not been propping up his pals. In fact, and I repeat, it was his office that brought the allegations in question to the attention of the police authorities which led to the action reported in the press today.

National Defence

[Leon Benoit, Canadian Alliance, Lakeland, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberal chair of the defence committee complained in the committee's report, when referring to the actions of his government on the military. He said “Canada has shown a certain ambivalence when it comes to our commitments. We can't have it both ways”.

Will the Minister of Finance end his ambivalence today and make a specific commitment to fund the rebuilding of our military?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, that matter has been before the cabinet for some period of time as to what additional resources are needed for the Canadian forces. We have been looking at many of the issues that are in this report, which was issued by the committee yesterday. It was a good piece of work on its part, however the Alliance did not support it.

[Leon Benoit, Canadian Alliance, Lakeland, AB]

Mr. Speaker, this so-called good piece of work did not mention any specific requirements for the government to meet the recommendations. There was no specific funding amount asked for.

Several ministers have paid lip service to the idea that security is the top priority of the government. The military is our largest security force.

Will the Minister of Finance put the money where his mouth is and commit funds in his budget to demonstrate that security is the top priority? Will he commit at least $2 billion per year?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, if the hon. member would care to take a look at the October statement and at the previous budget, he would see that over the last three years there have been substantial increases in the military budget.

At the same time, if the hon. member would care to take a look at the role that the Canadians have played in Kosovo and the role that they are playing now in Afghanistan, he would see a military effort that makes Canada proud.

The Minister of National Defence has fought very hard for the military and that is the main reason that there have been those substantial increases in funding, and we will stand behind our armed forces.

Terrorism

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

Mr. Speaker, in September, I accompanied the Prime Minister to New York and had the opportunity to hear him speak with conviction during his conversation with Kofi Annan.

Unfortunately, this head of state attitude has not remained with him. The Prime Minister still has the opportunity to have his say, but is not exercising it, fearing that he will not succeed in convincing the Americans to stop the use of cluster bombs.

What is the explanation of this complete about-face by the Prime Minister, who has moved from conviction to absolute passivity within the space of a month?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, the United Nations, both in general assembly and in the security council, has made it quite clear that the United States and its allies have every right to self-defence under article 51 of the UN charter.

That is exactly what is being done with respect to this campaign in Afghanistan. Every legal operation is being followed and followed correctly. Cluster bombs are only being used against the military because we need to stamp out the al-Qaeda and their Taliban supporters. That is what it is all about.

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

Mr. Speaker, there are several other types of bomb that could be used. The same argument was used to justify anti-personnel mines. This is shameful.

In the aftermath of the September 11 events, the Prime Minister has declared loud and clear that Canada's attitude would be one of patience and wisdom.

Is not the attitude we are being shown now a completely different one: silence and weakness, rather than patience and wisdom?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

No, we are not, Mr. Speaker. The government is very concerned about the people of Afghanistan. It is very concerned about getting humanitarian assistance to them. It is very concerned about how in fact they will recover from all of this.

We want to see the Afghan people recover from the kind of terror that is being inflicted on them by the al-Qaeda and by the Taliban. That is what this operation is all about.

The Economy

[Jason Kenney, Canadian Alliance, Calgary Southeast, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the finance minister likes to blame everyone but himself for the recession that he sleepwalked the country into. Yesterday he even blamed the opposition for having the temerity to ask him to tell the truth about his recession.

Was the Governor of the Bank of Canada fearmongering yesterday when he said he was “very concerned about the lame Liberal loonie?” Are private sector economists spreading fear when they talk about his recession?

When will he fess up to the fact that Canada is in its second quarter of negative growth, that he has led the country into a recession? When will he tell the truth?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, the other day I had occasion to sit down and do a calculation of the spending proposals put forward by the Alliance since the election campaign.

The House might be interested in knowing that the Alliance Party has put forth some $36 billion in new spending since the election campaign. The only thing I can say is that the tax and spend Alliance even makes the NDP look responsible.

[Jason Kenney, Canadian Alliance, Calgary Southeast, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I guess the auditors at HRD did that accounting for him. That is complete and utter hogwash. There are published reports that the finance minister will give six billion scarce tax dollars to those great custodians of the public purse, his friends in industry and human resources.

Instead of giving them $6 billion for pork and special Liberal projects, will he take that money and invest it in tax relief to create jobs in a time of recession and put it into national securities? Will he get his priorities straight or will he spend more tax dollars on old fashioned Liberal pork?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, what the Alliance calls pork is CAPC, a program to help young mothers and young families. What the Alliance calls pork is the child benefit, the most important new innovation.

By 2004 there will be $9 billion going out to young Canadian families, helping them raise their children. That is what Alliance members call pork. If they want to see pork they ought to look in the mirror.

Charitable Organizations

[Pauline Picard, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Mr. Speaker, we have asked the Minister of National Revenue to review the unfair treatment of L'Action nationale , which is losing its right to issue tax receipts, a right it has had until now, and one which the Council for Canadian Unity enjoys.

Does the Minister of National Revenue intend to review this Canada Customs and Revenue Agency decision, and at the same time clarify why such an apparently incomprehensible decision was taken?

[Martin Cauchon, Liberal, Minister of National Revenue and Secretary of State (Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec)]

Mr. Speaker, first of all, I have already confirmed in the House that the organization to which the member is referring had its charitable organization status withdrawn this past June.

Second, the rules on what constitutes a charitable organization are contained in the Income Tax Act. Any specific information concerning this organization is therefore confidential in nature, and I may not comment.

[Pauline Picard, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Mr. Speaker, how very interesting. L'Action nationale has sent me a letter in which it requests the minister to allow me access to its tax file and authorizes the information to be made public.

Does the minister now intend to make public the explanations provided by the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency so that we may understand the reasoning behind such a decision?

[Martin Cauchon, Liberal, Minister of National Revenue and Secretary of State (Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec)]

Mr. Speaker, first, giving a member such permission does not release me from my duty of confidentiality under the Income Tax Act.

Second, the act also provides for procedures, including a judicial review procedure. In this case, one may apply to the federal court for a judicial review within 30 days. This is not a hard and fast number. In addition, the organization may re-apply for charitable organization status.

Grants and Contributions

[Kevin Sorenson, Canadian Alliance, Crowfoot, AB]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday Mr. Paul Lemire was convicted of defrauding almost $200,000 in HRDC grants in good old Shawinigan. This man travelled with the Prime Minister on a team Canada mission in 1996. This man donated money to the Liberal campaign in 1997. This individual received millions in grants in 1998 while under yet another investigation for fraud against Revenue Canada, for which he was finally convicted in 1999.

Why did the Prime Minister fail to put into place protection that would have prevented millions in grants to flow to Paul Lemire?

[Herb Gray, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I would direct the hon. member to the answers that I gave to the same kinds of questions. This matter is being dealt with in the courts.

One should not forget that this matter was brought to the attention of the police authorities by the people in the Prime Minister's Office itself. I think that speaks for something.

[Kevin Sorenson, Canadian Alliance, Crowfoot, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the question was asked again because it was not answered the first time. The Prime Minister claimed that a BDC document showing that the Auberge Grand-Mère owed $23,000 to him personally was a forgery. It was sent to the RCMP over six months ago for criminal investigation but we have not heard a word since.

If it is not a forgery, the Prime Minister would be in direct financial conflict of interest in lobbying for money for the auberge. Will the solicitor general tell us when the RCMP investigation will be completed, and will he promise to report to the House when it is?

[Lawrence MacAulay, Liberal, Solicitor General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, I think my hon. colleague is well aware that I do not conduct or direct RCMP investigations. He is well aware the only group that can respond to his question is the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.

Health

[Tony Tirabassi, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Health. Yesterday the minister hosted a meeting of his counterparts from the G-7 and the OECD countries on health security and bioterrorism.

The minister has agreed to co-operate and forge a new partnership to address the critical issue of protecting public health and security. Will the minister tell the House what role Canada will play in this new global action?