House of Commons Hansard #40 of the 37th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was banks.
Grant McNally Canadian Alliance Dewdney—Alouette, BC
Mr. Speaker, it is his responsibility to uphold the law. I will ask him the question again. He says the information is coming. We want to know the answer to the question. He should have the information already. Did the Grand-Mère Golf Club break the law?
Prime MinisterOral Question Period
Bonavista—Trinity—Conception Newfoundland & Labrador
Liberal
Brian Tobin LiberalMinister of Industry
Mr. Speaker, if the member understood the act, he would know that I cannot comment on the details under the act. The Prime Minister and other parties had to give consent for the release of documents because they cannot be released under the act. He knows that.
Caroline St-Hilaire Bloc Longueuil, QC
Mr. Speaker, now that the Liberal contingent is out in full force, I hope that we will be getting some real answers on the Grand-Mère golf club and Auberge Grand-Mère situation.
Far from exonerating the Prime Minister, the documents that have been released, the September 1999 sales agreement in particular, prove that the Prime Minister still had an interest in the golf course when the shares were transferred to Mr. Michaud.
In light of the September 1999 agreement, does the government at last acknowledge—
Caroline St-Hilaire Bloc Longueuil, QC
I am beginning to realize, from the way they are fussing, just how unhappy they are.
Will the Prime Minister acknowledge that he placed himself in a conflict of interest situation when he intervened with the bank in favour of the Auberge—
Herb Gray LiberalDeputy Prime Minister
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is showing a complete lack of confidence in her own parliamentary leader, who said in connection with the record of sale:
Let him provide that, and the problem will be over.
It has been provided, yet the hon. member keeps on with her questions. What lack of confidence in her own parliamentary leader.
Caroline St-Hilaire Bloc Longueuil, QC
Mr. Speaker, I am like the general public. We lack confidence in both the Prime Minister and this government.
When reference is made to the sales agreement of September 1999, the Deputy Prime Minister refers to standard clauses. Yet there is nothing standard about these clauses, because it is the Prime Minister and not Jonas Prince, supposed owner of the shares, who renounces all interest in the golf club and provides guarantees to the new purchaser.
Will the Deputy Prime Minister admit that the evidence has been provided that the Prime Minister had a financial interest and placed himself in a conflict of interest position when he used his position—
Herb Gray LiberalDeputy Prime Minister
Mr. Speaker, there is no conflict of interest. The Prime Minister's shares were sold back in November 1993. When the lawyers prepared the documents, they did so prudently. It is a matter of the lawyers' decisions.
Once again, the hon. member's own parliamentary leader is the one she is attacking with her lack of confidence in asking these questions, when her leader has said that tabling the bill of sale would put an end to the situation.
Stéphane Bergeron Bloc Verchères—Les Patriotes, QC
Mr. Speaker, the documents released this week did not solve anything in the Auberge Grand-Mère issue. These documents show that, more than six years after the alleged sale of his shares in 1993, the Prime Minister got involved again in 1999.
When a seller gets involved in the resale of his house six years after its alleged sale, does it not mean that he still has an interest in the property? Is this not the real position in which the Prime Minister found himself in 1999, that of a person who had an interest in the transaction?
Herb Gray LiberalDeputy Prime Minister
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is wrong. The Prime Minister did not get involved. The shares were sold by Mr. Prince to Mr. Michaud. That is the whole story.
Again, another member is showing his lack of trust in the Bloc Quebecois leadership by asking such questions. In spite of the commitment made by his parliamentary leader, when he asked that the bill of sale be tabled, they continue to ask similar questions.
Stéphane Bergeron Bloc Verchères—Les Patriotes, QC
Mr. Speaker, perhaps some members opposite have misplaced their trust, however, by putting it in their current leader.
A number of questions remain unanswered, including this one: How can the Prime Minister justify his involvement more than six years after the alleged sale of his shares in 1993, if it is not because he still owned these shares in 1999?
Herb Gray LiberalDeputy Prime Minister
Mr. Speaker, again, the Prime Minister did not get involved. He no longer owned the shares after November 1, 1993. Once again, the parliamentary leader of the Bloc Quebecois said “Table the bill of sale and we will stop asking questions”.
The bill of sale was tabled, which means that the Bloc Quebecois violated its commitment to the House and to Canadians.
Bill Blaikie NDP Winnipeg—Transcona, MB
Mr. Speaker, this has not been a good week for the future of planet Earth with American President George Bush simultaneously rejecting the Kyoto accord and saying that he would like oil and gas to flow freely from Canada to the United States.
I would like to ask the government, perhaps the Minister of Natural Resources, whether the government will state today that it does not want Canada to become an unlimited supply of energy for a country that does not realize that the name of the game is to consume less energy rather than more energy. Will the government commit to ratification of the Kyoto accord in 2002 and repudiate George Bush's position on the Kyoto accord?
Ralph Goodale LiberalMinister of Natural Resources and Minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board
Mr. Speaker, the position taken by the Government of Canada with respect to the development of our natural resources is a position that is based entirely upon the principles of sustainable development. That means the effective integration of economic, environmental and social considerations.
We have enormous resources to develop. They can be developed to the great advantage of Canadians in terms of jobs and growth and investment, but we will do so very squarely protecting the interests of our environment, our social concerns and, in northern Canada particularly, the concerns of aboriginal Canadians.
Bill Blaikie NDP Winnipeg—Transcona, MB
Mr. Speaker, I hope the House would notice the silence with respect to the Kyoto accord and the lack of any condemnation coming from the Canadian government with respect to President Bush's position, unlike leaders of the European Union countries who have expressed their outrage at Mr. Bush's position.
I ask the minister to recall a previous time when we had an American president who did not realize the problem of acid rain and the stand that Canada took at that time trying to bring that American president around. Ronald Reagan was his name.
We could do the same with George Bush if we had a government that was willing to stand up and say that George Bush is wrong.
Ralph Goodale LiberalMinister of Natural Resources and Minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board
Mr. Speaker, the Government of Canada still believes very much in the principles that are contained in the Kyoto protocol.
We signed that protocol in 1998. We have been working assiduously to see that its terms are implemented. Just last year, for example, we invested $1.1 billion to pursue all the initiatives, some 400 initiatives, to implement the principles of the Kyoto protocol.
Joe Clark Progressive Conservative Calgary Centre, AB
Mr. Speaker, the side deal on Grand-Mère, signed on the Prime Minister's behalf, refers explicitly to the costs of any inquiry by parliament or any other body. It explicitly obliges the Prime Minister's personal company to pay any costs of such an inquiry incurred by Michaud company that ultimately bought the shares.
The Prime Minister has a financial interest in avoiding any inquiry. If his government can stop an inquiry it saves the Prime Minister's personal money. Does that not in itself constitute a new and serious conflict of interest?
Joe Clark Progressive Conservative Calgary Centre, AB
Well then, Mr. Speaker, if that is the standard, there is no such thing as a conflict of interest. If that is the standard, the government can roll over the rights of any citizen or any institution in the country.
Yesterday I asked the Prime Minister a straightforward question about the handwritten document the Prime Minister claims to be a bill of sale. I did not get an answer. Let me try again with the loquacious Deputy Prime Minister.
Will the Deputy Prime Minister tell us whether both parties signed the document at the same time? In what town or city and province was that note signed? And sir, were there any—
Herb Gray LiberalDeputy Prime Minister
Mr. Speaker, I said yesterday that the agreement speaks for itself. If my hon. friend wants to get further evidence of the accuracy of what the Prime Minister and I have been saying in the House, let him look at the agreement dated September 29 between Park Inns and Placements Louis Michaud.
It says in part:
Whereas—Akimbo Development—on behalf of and as agent of Park Inns Canada Limited—and Park Inns hereinafter—referred to as “Akimbo”, purchased from J. & A. all of the Shares—
The agreement referred to the agreement of November 1, 1993—
Prime MinisterOral Question Period
The Speaker
The hon. member for Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke.
Cheryl Gallant Canadian Alliance Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON
Mr. Speaker, in his 2000 report the auditor general condemned CIDA for a lack of due diligence in awarding a $6.3 million contract to Transelec, a company owned by a close friend of the Prime Minister. A senior CIDA official admitted in public accounts committee that CIDA had made a mistake in awarding the contract to Transelec.
Why, after numerous questions in the House on this issue, did the minister responsible for CIDA never once admit that her department made a $6.3 million mistake?