Debates of Oct. 20th, 2003

Auditor General's Report

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

Mr. Speaker, the respective memberships of the Canadian Alliance and the Progressive Conservative Party will be interested to know that far from waiting to see what they thought of the matter, the union has been consummated on the floor of the House of Commons here in question period before they even get to say anything.

In the end, what is the difference between a marriage of convenience and a flag of convenience? Why does the right not go the whole way, sign up with the member for LaSalle—Émard and get it over with. We will have one big united right in this country with only the NDP standing up for what counts?

I want to ask the minister--

[The Speaker]

The hon. member has run out of time. We are in question period, not S. O. 31s. The hon. member for Winnipeg—Transcona may have a supplementary question.

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

Mr. Speaker, I want to ask the government House leader, does he not think the people of Canada are entitled to hear what the Auditor General has to say in a timely way when she is supposed to report? Will he guarantee that the House will live up to the calendar that it is bound by? Will he tell us that the House will be sitting and if it is not sitting, will he at least be honest and tell us we are not sitting so we can do something about it?

[Don Boudria, Liberal, Minister of State and Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is getting a little agitated. He should know that the Auditor General can report four times a year. We are into that quarter. There is no one that stops the Auditor General from reporting and from tabling her report before the House of Commons.

Insofar as the parliamentary calendar is concerned, that is published on a weekly basis. His seatmate attends regularly and does an excellent job at the House leaders meeting. He should have a little bit more confidence in her than that.

Ethics

[Gerald Keddy, Progressive Conservative, South Shore, NS]

Mr. Speaker, the government pays little attention to ethics. It seems clear that the ethics counsellor makes up rules on the fly and whether a member chooses to obey those rules or not is optional. The ethics counsellor instructed the Minister of Industry to remove himself from dealings with the Irving family and the Minister of Industry blatantly refused.

Will the Deputy Prime Minister explain to the House why his ethics standards are optional?

[Allan Rock, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, I sought the advice of the ethics counsellor. I followed his advice absolutely. I am satisfied that in every respect I complied with the direction of the ethics counsellor by not involving myself in any decisions that directly affected the interests of the Irving companies.

[Gerald Keddy, Progressive Conservative, South Shore, NS]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Industry accepted gifts from the Irving family well over the $200 limit. Not only did the member accept the gift, he delayed in reporting the gift and he ignored instructions from the ethics counsellor to remove himself from decisions affecting the Irving empire.

The Minister of Public Works did exactly the same thing and was forced to resign. Maybe the Minister of Industry could explain the double standard. I would like to hear his explanation.

[Allan Rock, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, I made full disclosure to the ethics counsellor with respect to the matter in question. The ethics counsellor provided me with advice. I took that advice and followed it to the letter. I excluded myself from decisions that directly involved the interests of the Irving companies. That was the advice and I followed it.

St. Lawrence Seaway

[Bernard Bigras, Bloc, Rosemont—Petite-Patrie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, last June, the federal government refused to even do a study of dredging and widening the St. Lawrence Seaway in order to allow large vessels to move from the Great Lakes to the Atlantic Ocean. Now, only a few months later, we learn the government is in favour of the project.

What happened in the last four months to prompt this total about-face by the federal government as far as the seaway is concerned?

[David Collenette, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, the U.S. government has decided to examine the possibility of expanding the St. Lawrence Seaway. We find this of interest, but we require studies before undertaking expansion.

[Bernard Bigras, Bloc, Rosemont—Petite-Patrie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, since his colleague, the Minister of Transport, has given support in principle to the project, can the Minister of Environment tell us whether he has given his OK to the St. Lawrence Seaway dredging and widening project, knowing what a negative environmental impact it will have on the St. Lawrence? What new information does he have at his disposal?

[David Collenette, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, this is why we are examining the situation. We need to determine whether there will be any environmental problems.

Ethics

[James Rajotte, Canadian Alliance, Edmonton Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the industry minister has been caught in a clear conflict of interest. In July 2001 he went on a fishing trip in an executive jet paid for by the Irving family. In June 2003 the federal government awarded an Irving owned company $55 million to help redevelop their unused shipyard, something the minister had been lobbying for since May 2002. This is a clear conflict of interest.

Will the minister do the honourable thing today and resign as the industry minister?

[Allan Rock, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, after I became Minister of Industry, because of the nature of the files I was involved in, I went to see the ethics counsellor. I made full disclosure of the visit to the Irving family. I took his advice to withdraw from, in particular the matter referred to by the member. I did withdraw from it. It was handled entirely by the members of government. It was decided by the members of government. It was eventually included in the budget this year without my knowledge in advance. I have complied with the advice of the ethics counsellor to remove myself from that and other matters that directly relate to the Irving businesses.

[James Rajotte, Canadian Alliance, Edmonton Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the industry minister was specifically directed by the ethics counsellor not to involve himself in any decisions involved with the Irvings.

The $55 million fund was announced during that blackout period. In addition, in November 2002 the vice-chairman of Irving Shipbuilding was appointed by Industry Canada to the shipbuilding and industrial marine advisory committee. This was also done during the blackout period put forward by the ethics counsellor.

Clearly the minister is in a conflict of interest and was involved during the blackout period. Again I ask the minister, will he do the honourable thing and resign today?

[Allan Rock, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, the member is not listening to the response. After I got the advice of the ethics counsellor, I withdrew from the matter. It may have been decided during the blackout period, but not with my involvement. I was out of the matter. It was decided by others.

With respect to the advisory council, 30 volunteers from around the country donate their time and their expenses to come to meetings twice a year to talk about policy for shipbuilding in Canada. A representative of the Irving companies was included in that 30 and he took part.

That is hardly a conflict of interest involving the pecuniary advantage of the Irving company.

Agriculture

[Sébastien Gagnon, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean—Saguenay, QC]

Mr. Speaker, with respect to the cull cattle issue, the Quebec minister of agriculture says that the federal government must make an effort and she is asking for help in convincing the federal government to do its share.

Given that 40% of dairy cows are in Quebec, several farms are literally going bankrupt and the Government of Quebec is asking the federal government to do its share, does the Minister of Agriculture intend to follow up on the requests made by the minister and the farmers?

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

Mr. Speaker, we have been having meetings for a number of weeks of now, including discussions with provincial ministers, the Canadian Cattlemen's Association and the Dairy Farmers of Canada. We have been discussing with them the concerns we all have with the culled cow situation in Canada and the development of markets and ways in which we can work with the provinces and the industry to alleviate the financial pressure that has been caused by BSE.

I can tell the hon. member we will continue those discussions with the provinces and the industry.

[Sébastien Gagnon, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean—Saguenay, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the new agricultural policy framework includes less money for cattle producers than the special program did last summer.

How can the federal government wash its hands of its responsibilities to farmers who are going bankrupt, when it collects 50% of our taxes? If it collects our taxes, it has to assume the responsibilities that come with it.

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

Mr. Speaker, the Canadian Federation of Agriculture asked for a third party study of the new business risk management program.

The first vice-president of the Canadian Federation of Agriculture is also the president of the UPA. We responded to that and the report that came back in June of this year said very clearly that the new business risk management proposal and program for Canadian producers is better than the programs that were there in the past.

I do not know why the hon. member is complaining when we are making improvements to support the farmers rather than making other changes.

Ethics

[Leon Benoit, Canadian Alliance, Lakeland, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the industry minister broke the law by accepting from Irving Shipbuilding a gift which was well over the $200 limit. The minister then pressured the cabinet to give that same company millions of dollars in taxpayers' money.

When the current House leader got caught doing the same thing, he lost his job. Will the current minister, now that he has been caught, hold himself to that same standard and resign?

[Allan Rock, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, I have made clear that I made full disclosure to the ethics counsellor and by that time had not involved myself in the decision affecting the Irving companies. The ethics counsellor advised me to get out of matters involving them, which I did. I followed that advice and respected it.

After that point I did not lobby, I did not argue and I did not work on those files. In relation to all those matters, I took the ethics counsellor's advice that I should be no part of decisions affecting their interest and that is exactly what I did.

[Leon Benoit, Canadian Alliance, Lakeland, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the minister cannot hide behind the ethics counsellor.

Here are the facts: ACOA, which was responsible to the industry minister, paid $55 million to Irving Shipbuilding. The Irvings gave the minister a trip worth well over the $200 limit. In the eyes of the public, the gift bought the Irvings $55 million in taxpayers' money.

This is clearly a serious situation and what the minister did was wrong. Will he do the right thing and resign?

[Allan Rock, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, long before any decision was made with respect to the Irving application, I withdrew. On the advice of the ethics counsellor, I withdrew.

That file was then handled by others. It was analyzed by others. It was decided by others and was announced by others without my involvement.

There was no connection between the two. I sought the advice and took the advice of the ethics counsellor. As a result there was no connection between the trip and the decision because I was not involved.

Auditor General of Canada

[John Herron, Progressive Conservative, Fundy Royal, NB]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister can run but he cannot hide. Sooner or later the Auditor General's report will come out. To that end, he promised Canadians an open government.

Will the government bring in an amendment to the Auditor General Act to allow her to present her report even if the Prime Minister sets down this House early? I can assure the Deputy Prime Minister that members on this side of the House are willing to pass that amendment faster than the Prime Minister can buy himself new jets.