House of Commons Hansard #193 of the 37th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was industry.
Stephen Harper Canadian AllianceLeader of the Opposition
Mr. Speaker, according to press reports, he did a little more than that. He discussed these directly with the commissioner of the RCMP.
Since the Prime Minister has expressed concern about the ethical conduct of his ministers and has promised higher standards of behaviour, could the solicitor general tell us whether he informed the Prime Minister that he was lobbying his own department on behalf of his brother and, if so, did he tell the Prime Minister before or after he lobbied the RCMP?
Lawrence MacAulay LiberalSolicitor General of Canada
Mr. Speaker, I indicated quite clearly what took place in this case. I told my hon. colleague that a proposal was received. It was from a number of institutions. It came to my office and was forwarded to the RCMP for approval. The fact is that in this situation the RCMP did not approve the proposal.
Stephen Harper Canadian AllianceLeader of the Opposition
Mr. Speaker, it is great to know that his defence is that he may be a lobbyist but that he is a really bad lobbyist. However he did not answer the question on whether he advised the Prime Minister.
I will ask my last supplementary. Did the solicitor general seek advice on ethics and did he examine the Prime Minister's visible or invisible code of ethical conduct before or after lobbying for his brother's college?
Lawrence MacAulay LiberalSolicitor General of Canada
Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition indicated that I was not successful. The fact is that when a proposal is received it is up to the RCMP to decide what to do with that proposal. I do not direct the RCMP.
Kevin Sorenson Canadian Alliance Crowfoot, AB
Mr. Speaker, on October 16, 2001, the solicitor general said the following in the House:
Mr. Speaker, if there is one thing I do not do it is run the operations of the RCMP.
If in fact that is true, then why did the solicitor general feel that it was appropriate to discuss with the commissioner of the RCMP the awarding of a $3.5 million grant to Holland College which is headed by his brother, Alex MacAulay?
Lawrence MacAulay LiberalSolicitor General of Canada
Mr. Speaker, as I indicated, this proposal was submitted by a number of institutions. As my hon. colleague also indicated, and he is absolutely correct, I do not direct the RCMP. I have not and I will not.
Kevin Sorenson Canadian Alliance Crowfoot, AB
Mr. Speaker, the solicitor general's attempt to influence the RCMP commissioner, whether or not the $3.5 million was or ever will be granted, was highly unethical, highly inappropriate and a clear case of political interference.
When will the solicitor general do the right thing and tender his resignation?
John Manley LiberalDeputy Prime Minister and Minister of Infrastructure and Crown Corporations
Mr. Speaker, again today we see excessive blood lust on the other side.
The truth is that no personal or private interest was being pursued in this case. Is there something wrong with his brother being the president of Holland College? Ought he to have resigned because he happened to have a family member in public life? Is that the extreme that we have gone to? Should Sheridan College have thought “My goodness, we had better not ally in this presentation with Holland College because the leader of the opposition will get up and scream scandal?”
The opposition should stay in the schoolyard and measure its language more carefully.
Gilles Duceppe Bloc Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC
Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the Deputy Prime Minister stated that the Minister of Immigration was not required to comply with the code of ethics when he stayed at Claude Boulay's because, in 1997, he was an MP. Fine.
However, in 2000, the minister was then a secretary of state and he had to comply with the code of ethics when he categorically denied having lived at the condominium of the president of Groupe Everest.
Will the Deputy Prime Minister admit that, in 2000, when he denied the truth and hid his connections with Claude Boulay, at whose condo he did stay, the Minister of Immigration violated the code of ethics for ministers and secretaries of state?
John Manley LiberalDeputy Prime Minister and Minister of Infrastructure and Crown Corporations
Mr. Speaker, one cannot retroactively violate a code of ethics. The minister was not a cabinet member then. His actions were not governed by the standards of the code of ethics.
In any case, the contract was accepted by the Department of Canadian Heritage. This is not a contract that was accepted by the secretary of state or his office.
Gilles Duceppe Bloc Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC
Mr. Speaker, this is somewhat worrisome. The Minister of Immigration has problems understanding things and, in addition, his memory is failing him. In 2000, he forgot that he had stayed at Claude Boulay's condo, who, and this is quite the coincidence, also forgot all about it.
Will the Minister of Immigration admit that all these cases of amnesia occurred while he was governed by the code of ethics and when Groupe Everest had just been awarded a $500,000 contract to organize the Canada-wide tour that he himself had announced with great fanfare?
John Manley LiberalDeputy Prime Minister and Minister of Infrastructure and Crown Corporations
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member keeps trying to subject to the code of ethics the actions of an MP who was not a minister. This is neither the proper level, nor the proper standard.
We will develop a code for MPs and senators. I hope that the members of the Bloc will support us when we do so.
Michel Gauthier Bloc Roberval, QC
Mr. Speaker, yesterday, in defending himself against charges that he favoured Everest, the minister of immigration claimed that a secretary of state does not have authority to authorize contracts.
My question is for the minister of immigration. Will he admit that not having authority to authorize contracts in no way prevented him from being able to strongly recommend that Everest be hired, all the more so as it was his pan-Canadian tour and his consultation which was involved? It was his first project as minister.
Will he admit that it in no way prevented him from being able to give his friend a very strong recommendation?
John Manley LiberalDeputy Prime Minister and Minister of Infrastructure and Crown Corporations
Mr. Speaker, this contract was permitted under treasury board rules. It was approved by the department of public works.
As I have repeatedly said, the actions of a member who is not a minister are not covered by the ethics code.
Michel Gauthier Bloc Roberval, QC
Mr. Speaker, the minister of immigration was conducting a pan-Canadian consultation. It was his first project as minister, and they want us to believe that the then minister of public works, Alfonso Gagliano, or the Minister of Canadian Heritage, I do not know which, surprised him with the news that the firm that would be helping him, the firm which had been given the contract, was the firm owned by his friend, the president of Everest.
They actually want us to swallow this. They take us for idiots. They take the public for idiots.
John Manley LiberalDeputy Prime Minister and Minister of Infrastructure and Crown Corporations
Mr. Speaker, it is not a question of the minister of immigration's friends. If there are questions about the contract, the same holds as for the other contracts. This is something that could be looked at by the auditor general.
She is the one who conducted the investigations which were requested by the government. She will continue to do so. She has already said that she will continue to do so, and we will respond directly to the auditor general's recommendations.
Alexa McDonough NDP Halifax, NS
Mr. Speaker, the Canadian Medical Association today published evidence that patients treated in for profit hospitals have a 2% higher risk of dying than those in not for profit hospitals. Based on 38 million patients, the study demolishes the health minister's contention that who owns or operates hospitals does not matter “as long as when you present your health card, your stay and treatment are paid for by a publicly administered health care system”.
Has this dramatic evidence finally persuaded the health minister to change her mind?
Anne McLellan LiberalMinister of Health
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member misunderstands what I said. I do not advocate for profit hospitals. What I do advocate for is evidence based decision making.
The importance of the Canadian Medical Association Journal article is that it provides us with more evidence that provincial and territorial health care ministers can use in making decisions as to how to best deliver health care on behalf of all Canadians.
Alexa McDonough NDP Halifax, NS
Mr. Speaker, I certainly welcome that the minister is now acknowledging it is hard evidence that needs to underlie these decisions.
The minister sent shock waves through the country on January 18 when she talked about how it does not matter who owns and operates the hospitals. This is evidence to be sure based on 26,000 American hospitals. Applied to the Canadian context, this means that 2,200 Canadians each year would die unnecessarily.
I ask the minister again, will she withdraw her contention that it does not matter who owns and operates the hospitals?
Anne McLellan LiberalMinister of Health
Mr. Speaker, what I will say is that which I said earlier, which is what is important is evidence on which provincial and territorial health care ministers can make decisions around how health care is delivered in this country. In relation to that, the Canadian Medical Association Journal article is in fact an important contribution. It is one which I am sure my provincial and territorial colleagues as well as myself will review very carefully and with great interest.
Joe Clark Progressive Conservative Calgary Centre, AB
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the minister of immigration.
When he was a minister of the crown, why did he give two contradictory responses to the Globe and Mail concerning his past relationship with Groupe Everest?
John Manley LiberalDeputy Prime Minister and Minister of Infrastructure and Crown Corporations
Mr. Speaker, the minister has already said that he had not properly understood the questions.
John Manley Liberal Ottawa South, ON
But at any rate, he was not obliged to give any answer to questions relating to his conduct while a backbencher.
Joe Clark Progressive Conservative Calgary Centre, AB
Mr. Speaker, the solicitor general now is following precisely the Shawinigate playbook on dealing with government agencies.
The Prime Minister saw nothing wrong in calling the president of the BDC. Now the solicitor general is discussing directly with the commissioner of the RCMP a $3.5 million grant application filed by the minister's brother. This is a clear violation of section 23 of the conflict of interest code.
Will the Deputy Prime Minister tell us, has the ethics counsellor been asked for a ruling on this conflict?