Debates of Oct. 9th, 2003

Cinar

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

Mr. Speaker, if I am not mistaken, the hon. member and his colleagues have asked me this several times over the course of three or four days. I am always glad to answer the same question.

The first day, a member of the opposition asked if there was an investigation. I said I would look into it. Once I looked at Hansard a little more carefully, I realized the question alleged that there was an RCMP investigation. The next day in the House I said that, this being related to an investigation or lack of investigation by the RCMP, we would not comment. That is still the case.

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

Mr. Speaker, what the government House leader is saying is quite simply not true. What he said was the opposite.

When we asked about Modes Conili, we were told the RCMP was investigating. In connection with the HRDC scandal, we were referred to the RCMP. Groupaction: the RCMP. Lafleur Communications: the RCMP. Everest: the RCMP. When they do not want to talk to us, they refer us to the RCMP. Even with CINAR they told us, “It is under RCMP investigation”. Really now.

What we are asking them today is this: why refuse to show the report? What does the government have to hide? Who is behind CINAR?

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

Mr. Speaker, I have never met anyone who works for that company. I do not know what the hon. member is referring to. This is ridiculous.

I would simply say this to the hon. member: yes, there may have been times when cases have been referred to agencies. That is not the same thing as whether or not there is an investigation. I will not comment as to whether there has been a report or whether there has not, just as I will not comment on the contents of the report. I have already said so.

Of course, sometimes mention is made here in this House of cases that have been referred, but not to whether an investigation has been carried out. This is not the same thing.

[Richard Marceau, Bloc, Charlesbourg—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, there is something very peculiar about the CINAR affair. The government is acting out of character. It went so far as to refuse to confirm whether or not it had received an investigation report.

Is is not behaving this way because someone in this government has something to hide in connection with the CINAR affair? Is that not the real reason?

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

Mr. Speaker, to the same question, I give the same answer. Perhaps a week ago, the hon. member or a colleague of his inquired about this report. As I have said, I will not comment on whether or not there is a report, nor will I comment on whether or not there is an investigation that would be the subject of the report on which I am not commenting. We are going in circles.

[Richard Marceau, Bloc, Charlesbourg—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the government should always be transparent on this kind of issue. It gladly shares information when it suits its purposes, as demonstrated by the leader of the Bloc Quebecois, but withholds information when it does not.

Really, is it acceptable behaviour for a government to be controlling information to serve its own interests? Is that acceptable?

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

Mr. Speaker, this is just another way of putting the same question and getting the same answer. We are being asked—

[An hon. member]

Keep on lying, lying, lying.

[Don Boudria, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Accusations are being thrown at us and all sorts of unparliamentary language is being used right now. That is probably an excuse for getting expelled from the House and making a scene. In any case, I will not comment on whether or not there is such a report, whether or not there has been an investigation, because I do not know. And that is how it should be. Police work should be left to the police.

Equalization Payments

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

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are asking storm-struck Nova Scotians to dig deep and repay the federal government $160 million because of a mistake made here in Ottawa. In the past, such payments were forgiven. What does it say to Canadians when a multimillionaire shipping magnate/finance minister can avoid paying his fair share of taxes while simultaneously slashing billions to transfer payments intended for the provinces?

If equalization and fairness are the issue, will the minister crack down on those currently exploiting Canadian taxes and come to the aid of beleaguered provinces in need of assistance at times like this?

[John Manley, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, that was such a convoluted mix, a spaghetti bowl of false statements, one tied to the other. But I guess after being chased by an excited suitor as he was, he may have been inclined to misspeak himself.

There has been no change. There was no mistake. Calculation of equalization payments is based on a formula. Everybody understands that. The numbers are plugged in as soon as the numbers are available. They have been plugged in and the calculations are made. All the provinces understand that and they prefer that kind of system to one that would be--

[The Deputy Speaker]

The hon. member for Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough.

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

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Minister of Finance said that when payments were not paid back the last time, he was in high school. He behaves as if he is still in high school.

Ottawa has not paid Nova Scotia's outstanding disaster claims going back to 1999. After the 1998 ice storm, Ottawa paid over $250 million to Quebec and $55 million to Ontario. Within one year in Manitoba, Ottawa paid out over $136 million in claims. Farmers, fishermen and foresters were particularly hard hit by hurricane Juan.

When will the Prime Minister cancel the clawback and pay the money to Nova Scotia for disaster relief?

[John Manley, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, the member is so jumbled up here that he is combining transfer payments and equalization, and now disaster relief. Let us get a few things straight.

First, transfer payments were increased by $35 billion in the health accord. Second, equalization is a formula. It is based on numbers which are derived by Statistics Canada. There is nothing mysterious about that, although it is complicated, I grant that to him, and I will try to explain it to him at another time. Third, disaster relief is based upon expenses that are actually incurred. Nova Scotia will receive federal disaster--

[The Deputy Speaker]

The hon. member for Winnipeg—Transcona.

Government Contracts

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

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Industry.

We have heard a troubling rumour that Statistics Canada has awarded a multi-million dollar contract to an American corporation to do the dress rehearsal for the census in 2005 and subsequently the census itself. That corporation, we have heard, is Lockheed Martin, one of the biggest munitions companies in the world.

I wonder if the minister could tell us whether or not this is in fact true and, if it is true, why the Liberal government has decided to award such a contract.

[Allan Rock, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, one thing I can assure the House is that Statistics Canada will continue to do its job according to the worldclass standards that it has always achieved. We will make certain of that. It has a well deserved reputation for excellence and it will continue to work to deserve that reputation.

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

Mr. Speaker, let the House take note that the Minister of Industry did not answer my question and did not deny that such a contract has been offered.

Given that this is an American munitions corporation that is actually all wound up with the star wars thing, I wonder if the minister could explain to us the connection between star wars and Statistics Canada and tell us whether or not the government is involved in the letting of a contract of this kind to an American corporation. Would he answer the question? Surely he knows what is going on in his own department.

[Allan Rock, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is working himself into an agitated state when he should focus instead on the real purpose of all this, which is to make sure we get statistics numbers and a census that we can rely upon. Statistics Canada will continue to do what is necessary to achieve just that.

Member for LaSalle—Émard

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

Mr. Speaker, the finance minister's argument with respect to Lansdowne Technologies simply does not make sense. CSE Marine Services, a sister company to Lansdowne, is included in the declaration of the new Liberal leader's assets. Lansdowne, in the same situation, is not. Clearly there is a problem with his public declaration.

My question again to the finance minister is, why was it included in 1994 and 1995 and excluded in 1996 and afterward?

[John Manley, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, I am not making an argument. I am simply quoting what the ethics counsellor said, which was that because the parent company was listed the blind trust rules would still have applied.

What we are getting at here is the essence of this. Is there a conflict? The ethics counsellor says that it is covered by the blind trust rules. The opposition is not interested in whether or not there was a conflict. All it is interested in is trying to hurt somebody's reputation. It is unworthy.

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

Mr. Speaker, the fact is that Lansdowne Technologies is a subsidiary of Canada Steamship Lines and Lansdowne can call on CSL for support in its contracting with the federal government. Lansdowne's clients read as a who's who of the federal government: Transport Canada, National Defence, Foreign Affairs, Health Canada, Consulting and Audit Canada and many more departments.

Is it not true that the new Liberal leader will have to rise from the cabinet table with regard to every matter regarding space, health, the RCMP and national defence because they all have contracts with Lansdowne Technologies?

[John Manley, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, I repeat that this is a matter which is dealt with by the ethics counsellor. It is within his purview.

As I said earlier, since the member for LaSalle—Émard came to the House he has made every effort to ensure, not just that he comply with the applicable rules but went beyond what the rules required.

These matters will be ones that will be dealt with in the appropriate way by Mr. Wilson.

Business Development Bank of Canada

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

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Industry confirmed yesterday that the Business Development Bank of Canada is an independent entity and that he could not intervene. Nevertheless, the regulations governing the bank require a complete audit by the Auditor General every five years; the last one was four years ago.

Would it be possible for the minister to ask the Auditor General to act one year earlier, considering the abuses that have been discovered in the BDC?

[Allan Rock, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, the Auditor General does not need orders from the Government of Canada to do her work. As for the corporation, it is a crown corporation, independent of the government. Its president has appeared several times before the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology, of which my hon. colleague is a member. If he has questions, he can ask them of the president.