Debates of Nov. 6th, 2002

Kyoto Protocol

[David Anderson, Liberal, Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, the University of Alberta is free to choose other members to sit with me on the panel if it so wishes. However I would point out to the hon. member, who seems quite uninformed as to the true facts of the situation, that we want to have some interaction with the public who are there as well. We do not simply want to have a debate on the stage and no answering of questions from the floor.

I am quite happy to go there provided the University of Alberta chooses some of those expert people that it has and who the Province of Alberta did not want to hear before it made up its mind on its own plan.

Government Contracts

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

Mr. Speaker, five days before Public Works—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[The Speaker]

Order, please. It is impossible to hear the hon. member. I know that members like to help one another when it comes to questions and answers. The Minister of Canadian Heritage would like to hear the question from the hon. member for Laurier—Sainte-Marie. The hon. member for Laurier—Sainte-Marie.

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

Mr. Speaker, five days before Public Works officially awarded the contract to organize the former Secretary of State for Amateur Sport's tour, bureaucrats at Canadian Heritage were exchanging e-mails asking that a clause be added to the Everest contract.

Therefore, the negotiations for the contract took place at Canadian Heritage. Given this fact, how can the Minister of Public Works and Government Services say the contract was awarded by his department, when the e-mail paper trail proves that in reality, the contract signed with Everest was negotiated directly by Canadian Heritage?

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Minister of Public Works and Government Services]

Mr. Speaker, again I would indicate to the hon. gentleman that in the timeframe to which he is referring, there was in fact no contract. The requisition to provide a contract was received on May 29, and the contract was issued on May 30.

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

Mr. Speaker, in simple terms, what the minister is saying is that the negotiations took place at Canadian Heritage and then on May 29, the contract was rubberstamped by his department.

Another e-mail reveals that the firm the secretary of state wanted to hire was Everest. The secretary of state's only defence is to say that he did not award the contract, that it was the responsibility of the Department of Public Works. Yet, the second e-mail shows the exact opposite to be true. The real negotiations took place at Canadian Heritage.

Will the Minister of Public Works and Government Services acknowledge that the only defence of the former Secretary of State for Amateur Sport has just fallen apart?

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Minister of Public Works and Government Services]

Mr. Speaker, whatever a department may do in preparation for submitting a requisition is up to that department. The fact remains that when the requisition comes to the Department of Public Works, the Department of Public Works makes the decision, and it may or may not accept the recommendation of the department.

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, Canadian Heritage officials were aware of the intentions of the former Secretary of State for Amateur Sport, who wanted Everest to be hired. This they confirmed in an e-mail. We also know that these same officials were negotiating certain clauses of the contract before it was signed.

How can the former Secretary of State for Amateur Sport claim not to have had anything to do with the hiring of Everest, when five days before the contract was awarded these officials at Canadian Heritage were involved in negotiations and very well aware that the minister wanted Everest to be selected?

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Minister of Public Works and Government Services]

Mr. Speaker, I cannot in any way comment on what would have gone into the decision making process or recommendation making process of some other department.

When the requisition arrived in public works, it asked for a certain contract to be done. It made a suggestion. It was then up to the officials of public works to decide whether it would accept the suggestion from the department that made the request.

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, how can the Minister of Public Works rise and tell us that everything was done according to the rules of his department, when in fact he ought to instead accept that his predecessor, Alfonso Gagliano, was very much aware of the preferences of the secretary of state, that the negotiations were carried out at Heritage Canada, and that the work had already started?

All he did was rubber-stamp it. He closed his eyes and rubber-stamped what had been done. That is what enables the minister to say today “Everything was done correctly at Public Works”. The problem is at Canadian Heritage, and the minister knows it.

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Minister of Public Works and Government Services]

Mr. Speaker, I have before me the file with respect to this matter. It indicates that the officials in the Department of Public Works conducted themselves appropriately in all of the circumstances. A requisition arrived and they acted upon the basis of that requisition, using their own good judgment to make the appropriate conclusion.

I would point out that there have been examples in the very recent past where requests or suggestions have in fact been denied and I would refer hon. members to the moratorium that I imposed this summer.

Citizenship and Immigration

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Prime Minister was asked about landed immigrants and the harassment that some of them are facing at the U.S. border. He said: “If they do not have a Canadian passport, it's no longer my problem. It's their problem”.

Immigrants, together with our aboriginal people, built this country. How could the Prime Minister make such an insulting, ignorant statement? How could the Prime Minister dismiss Canada's landed immigrants as footloose itinerants or birds in flight?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I said that in these situations every country has its own regulations about the people who enter a nation. We have ours, the Americans have theirs. The French, the Germans and everybody else have their own internal techniques to receive people entering their country.

As far as Canadians are concerned, they have Canadian passports and we are defending them vis-à-vis the Americans and the validity of the Canadian passport. The Minister of Foreign Affairs has received assurances from the Ambassador of the United States that Canadian passports will be completely acceptable.

If people do not have a Canadian passport and the Americans are asking for something else, I think that as a country we can fight for the passport--

[The Speaker]

The hon. member for Halifax.

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I am not asking about Canadian passports. I am asking about the rights of landed immigrants who do not vote. Maybe that is why the Prime Minister does not really care.

Let me remind the Prime Minister that landed immigrants do have rights under the Canadian charter, including the right to equal treatment. When it comes to appointing a governor general, the Prime Minister is praising immigrants from the Peace Tower, but when it is time to defend their rights, the Prime Minister says that it is not his problem.

Will the Prime Minister apologize to Canada's 1.4 million landed immigrants? Will he assure them that the Canadian government will stand up for their rights?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I simply said that somebody who is not a Canadian citizen is not entitled to a Canadian passport. It is the law of Parliament. It is not me. I am not the one who decides who should have a passport. A passport belongs to a Canadian citizen.

For those who do not have a passport, it is because they are not Canadian citizens. A passport certifies one's citizenship. When one is a citizen of Canada, then one is entitled to a passport. If one is not a citizen of Canada, there is nothing more that Parliament permits me to do.

[Peter MacKay, Progressive Conservative, Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough, NS]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the Prime Minister told landed immigrants that he did not care about their fate at the Canada—U.S. border.

He said “If they do not have a Canadian passport, it is not my problem. Let them become Canadian citizens and then we will protect them”.

Does the Minister of Immigration agree with his leader? Is this the new policy of the Canadian government?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I will repeat in French what I said in English. If the hon. member had listened, he could have asked a different question, but I congratulate him on his progress in speaking French. I rose to congratulate him.

One thing is clear. The Canadian passport belongs to Canadian citizens. The Parliament of Canada passed a law to the effect that if a person is not a Canadian citizen, then that person is not entitled to a Canadian passport.

If the hon. member wants to propose a change to Canadian legislation to grant a passport to a person who comes to Canada for a few weeks, perhaps we can look at it, but at this point we are simply complying with the law, in English and in French.

[Peter MacKay, Progressive Conservative, Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough, NS]

Mr. Speaker, we accept a truthful answer in either official language.

A spokesman for the immigration department issued 606 ministerial passports to convicted felons on compassionate grounds. The minister stated that whenever a permit is issued, it is done with safety in mind. I doubt that the victims of those crimes or the persons without criminal records denied entry to Canada would be impressed with the minister's compassion.

Can the minister tell us why he has allowed the number of permits issued to convicted felons to rise 62% since 1999, and how many of the 606 were convicted of offences for murder, sexual assault or crimes against children?

[Denis Coderre, Liberal, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration]

Mr. Speaker, I find it somewhat deplorable that someone who aspires to become the leader of his party would engage in petty politics at the expense of the public.

The fact is that members of his own party are continually asking me to issue ministerial permits. I will not mention specific cases, but the hon. member is definitely not in a position to talk.

Government Contracts

[Gerry Ritz, Canadian Alliance, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

Mr. Speaker, here is a new one, a politician playing politics. That is exactly what the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration is accused of doing.

Canadians have grave concerns about how much pressure the minister used to promote his friend's firm for a half a million dollar contract while he was Secretary of State for Amateur Sport. The Minister of Public Works insists that his department signed the contract but he cannot or will not tell us who is responsible for promoting Groupe Everest in the first place.

With evidence mounting daily that the minister did indeed direct the contract to his buddies at Groupe Everest, will the Prime Minister show us some of his new ethics and mount a real investigation into this?

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Minister of Public Works and Government Services]

Mr. Speaker, again to refresh the hon. gentleman's memory, as I have said in the House before, there was a pre-qualified suppliers list. It was available to both the Department of Canadian Heritage and the Department of Public Works. It was established through a competitive process and the particular firm in question here was on that list.

[Gerry Ritz, Canadian Alliance, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

Mr. Speaker, there is more than just Groupe Everest on that pre-qualified list. Why did some of the other names not come forward, other than just his buddy at Groupe Everest?

The conflict of interest code says: “Public office holders shall not step out of their official roles to assist private entities--”. A growing number of public servants have corroborated each other's claims that the secretary of state did just that, and now he will not even defend his actions here in the House.

Is the government prepared to announce a full investigation into this situation or will it once again just stonewall Canadians?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I want to say that he cannot make an accusation that the minister does not want to defend himself in the House. He should know the rules of the House. It is the minister who is responsible for his department and in this case the minister responsible for the contract is the Minister of Public Works. If he wants to be in order he will have to follow the rules of the House of Commons.