Debates of June 20th, 2002

Government Contracts

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

Mr. Speaker, what was revealed, as a result of the internal audit, was there were practices that did not in fact comply with the requirements of treasury board and that there were other procedures and mechanisms employed that were not appropriate in the circumstances. All those defects were outlined in the internal audit as well as an action plan for how to respond to those things and the action plan was implemented.

[Ghislain Lebel, Bloc, Chambly, QC]

Mr. Speaker, as we listen to the minister day after day, it becomes clear that there was not much that did comply with the Treasury Board requirements.

Will the Minister of Public Works and Government Services admit that, given the mystery surrounding the contracts given to their buddies to save Canadian federalism, as they put it, an inquiry is essential, since millions of taxpayers' dollars disappeared into businesses belonging to friends of the Liberal party, without a trace?

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

Mr. Speaker, we certainly need to ensure that all the recommendations flowing from the internal audit are fully and properly implemented. We need to ensure that the management framework and governance system is a modern 21st century system that is in full compliance with all of the requirements of the treasury board. We need to ensure that all advertising and sponsorship contracts are totally and thoroughly audited on a government-wide basis. We need to ensure that anything that raises any questions of a legal nature are properly and immediately referred to the RCMP, and we are doing all of that.

[Rahim Jaffer, Canadian Alliance, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Mr. Speaker, to listen to the minister of public works we would think he moves swiftly to correct the problems, but that is not really true. The first red flag on Groupaction was raised nearly six years ago. Audits were conducted four years later and only now, once the scam was exposed, have measures been introduced to clean up this mess.

Why did it take so long to cut off the funds to Groupaction?

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

Mr. Speaker, the difficulties were revealed in a comprehensive way by the internal audit that was ordered in the year 2000 by the deputy minister of public works. As a result of that, a great deal of public exposure and disclosure has been achieved.

There was an action plan to implement the recommendations of that audit report. We reviewed that in the spring of this year to determine that the action plan had been implemented.

With respect to Groupaction, my predecessor began the process of terminating that relationship.

[Rahim Jaffer, Canadian Alliance, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the only action clearly was group action over there. The government had a cozy arrangement set up with firms like Groupaction, Groupe Everest, Lafleur, Polygone and Coffin. The evidence is conclusive. Its alibis do not stand up. Now, with the scam exposed, it is scrambling to find some way to make us believe the Liberal government is the victim. It is the perpetrator.

Will the Prime Minister finally admit that he has been the mastermind in this cash for contracts scam?

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

Again, Mr. Speaker, we have a very personal and very scurrilous allegation for which there is no evidence of any kind upon which to base it.

The difficulties with respect to this program on sponsorship were revealed initially through the internal audit. Since that audit in the year 2000, there has been a long series of steps that have been taken by the government and by my predecessors to ensure that the problems are exposed, that they are corrected, if there are overpayments that we recover them and wherever there is any illegal activity that is investigated and prosecuted.

Taxation

[Paul Crête, Bloc, Kamouraska—Rivière-Du-Loup—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Mr. Speaker, 73,000 people who would normally receive their GST rebate cheques in July will not receive them.

The excuse given by the federal government is that these people owe the government money. However, in the past, the government acknowledged that these people had a low income and that they needed the rebate, and it issued the cheques.

How can the government justify being so intransigeant all of sudden with low income citizens, when it is so understanding when it comes to friends' PR firms that have collected hundreds of thousands of dollars for work that was never done.

[Sophia Leung, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Revenue]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member has all the facts twisted. We have never mistreated anyone. The government is very sympathetic and compassionate toward people. Therefore I want the member to review the facts.

[Paul Crête, Bloc, Kamouraska—Rivière-Du-Loup—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the fact remains that 73,000 people with a low income will not receive a cheque in July.

It took two years from the time an incriminating report on the sponsorship program was published for the government to start wondering about possibly recouping the money handed out to its pals' firms.

Why did it only take a few days for the government to decide to recover the GST it was supposed to pay these 73,000 low income earners, who needed this money to make ends meet?

[Sophia Leung, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Revenue]

Mr. Speaker, for those inquiries, our auditor general already pointed out and we already requested that it be looked into.

I am on the public accounts committee, so we know all about this. In the meantime we already have requested the witnesses to come before the committee. We even will come back in July, on July 9, to continue committee work.

Government Contracts

[Monte Solberg, Canadian Alliance, Medicine Hat, AB]

Mr. Speaker, in 1996, perhaps sooner, these Liberals were giving out inflated contracts to ad companies that did nothing in return except recycle the money back to the Liberal Party.

Now, many years, many millions, many companies and many investigations later, the Liberals claim to be fixing the problem.

Hiding a minister in Denmark and introducing some phony guidelines do not erase the sleaze of the government.

Why does the Prime Minister not admit that the jig is up and throw himself on the mercy of a full, independent, public, judicial inquiry now?

[John Manley, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, it is more of the same. This is what we are getting from this member all the time. There are allegations--

[An hon. member]

Oh, oh.

[John Manley, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

--statements that he would never make outside of the protection of parliamentary privilege.

He knows perfectly well that all of the facts are being investigated by the auditor general, who has extensive powers under the act. He does not think that is sufficient.

The truth is, despite the fact that the government put on the table today a $5.2 billion package for agriculture, those members cannot even think of a question to ask about it.

[Monte Solberg, Canadian Alliance, Medicine Hat, AB]

Mr. Speaker, we know we are getting a lot of manure from the government today.

We note that the RCMP will look at the criminality of this scandal. We also know that the auditor general will look at the numbers, but who is looking at the culture of corruption in the government?

We have our own six point plan over here. We want a full, independent, public, judicial inquiry now. When are we going to get it?

[John Manley, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, the six point plan is all right. Let us have an ethics counsellor for parliamentarians, but the Alliance Party? No, a dilatory motion, let us stop that one in its tracks. Disclosure of contributors to members of parliament for political purposes? No, they do not want to tell who gave money to the Leader of the Opposition. They would rather hide that. They do not want all those names coming out. Let us have a six point plan from the other side. Let us see them implement it for themselves.

Peru

[Bernard Patry, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Secretary of State responsible for Latin American and Africa.

During the violent demonstrations which broke out last week in the streets of Arequipa, Peru, many Canadians found themselves stranded in Arequipa.

What is Canada doing to ensure the safety of these Canadians?

[Denis Paradis, Liberal, Secretary of State (Latin America and Africa) (Francophonie)]

Mr. Speaker, the safety of Canadians abroad is a priority for Canada.

According to our information, there were some 33 Canadians in this troubled region. They were able to make it out of the region with the help of Canada. I myself spoke to students of the Montmagny Cegep and their parents. They are now safe.

In conclusion, I would like to thank and congratulate the staff of our embassy in Lima, as well as our ambassador, Hugues Rousseau.

Agriculture

[Bill Blaikie, NDP, Winnipeg—Transcona, MB]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the minister of agriculture.

I want to ask the minister of agriculture why it is that the government refuses to describe the payment it is making today as a trade injury payment when it clearly follows on a trade action by the United States. Is it not because the minister of agriculture and the government do not want to admit their responsibilities when it comes to this problem?

[Lyle Vanclief, Liberal, Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food]

Mr. Speaker, I think the hon. member would stand up and thank the government for the $5.25 billion announcement this morning to support agriculture and the agrifood industry in this country.

That announcement this morning is a long term approach to agriculture and has bridge funding and bridge programming to get there to address a number of issues. It is a long term approach to prepare our industry for the future, but also to help it get there, to address the effects of a number of things, including drought, including excess water, and including the actions of other countries. We are there to support our agriculture.

[Bill Blaikie, NDP, Winnipeg—Transcona, MB]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance. Is the government not open to the possibility of providing this money on an unconditional basis, of being flexible, as the Canadian Federation of Agriculture has said it should be?

Does he not understand the fiscal position he is putting have not provinces like Saskatchewan and Manitoba in by making this federal help for farmers conditional on provincial participation?

[Lyle Vanclief, Liberal, Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food]

Mr. Speaker, we are in negotiations with the provinces. When the federal government has been asked by provinces and the industry to support them in the past, the provincial governments have been there too because of the importance of agriculture in each particular province.

I am confident that because of the importance of agriculture in the province of the hon. member that surely his province will be there to support its industry in the future, as it has in the past.

Fisheries

[Loyola Hearn, Progressive Conservative, St. John's West, NL]

Mr. Speaker, the minister responsible for ACOA, the member for Humber--St. Barbe--Baie Verte, says that the shrimp markets are too weak to support an increased quota. He said the minister assured him that no increase has been granted, but the member for Bonavista--Trinity--Conception says that the minister confirmed to him last week that there will be a 20% or 22,000 tonne increase.

Let me the ask the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, who is telling the truth? Will there be an increase and, if so, who is getting it?

[Robert Thibault, Liberal, Minister of Fisheries and Oceans]

Mr. Speaker, some members of our caucus might have expressed their concerns and their opinions, but I would like to assure the member that when the plan for northern shrimp is announced it will be announced by the minister. It is currently under consideration.