Debates of April 7th, 2003

Canadian Forces

[Susan Whelan, Liberal, Minister for International Cooperation]

Mr. Speaker, we have been very clear. We have said very clearly that the United States is one of our allies and partners and that we expect to be part of the reconstruction process. We intend to participate and we fully believe that the United Nations will play a role in this.

Iraq

[Joe Clark, Progressive Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the foreign minister.

On March 27, Canada's ambassador to the UN finally told the Security Council that the UN should be given the mandate to lead reconstruction in Iraq.

The House assumes that in the 10 days since, the Prime Minister has had time to prepare a detailed Canadian proposal for reconstruction. The difference between a UN led reconstruction effort and one led by the Pentagon could be the difference between success and failure.

The Prime Minister has not come to Parliament on the war. Will the government come to Parliament on reconstruction and describe in a ministerial statement tomorrow exactly what Canada is proposing?

[Susan Whelan, Liberal, Minister for International Cooperation]

Mr. Speaker, Canada has clearly indicated its willingness to participate in reconstruction efforts with the UN playing a central role alongside the coalition, the expected Iraqi transitional authority and other international partners.

I have had productive conversations with a number of my counterparts, including those in the United States, to discuss the ways in which the international community can best respond to the needs of the Iraqi people. We will work toward reconstruction.

Member for LaSalle--Émard

[Joe Clark, Progressive Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Mr. Speaker, this is not about aid.

My question now is for the Deputy Prime Minister.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[The Speaker]

Order, please. We have to be able to hear the right hon. member's question. How could the Deputy Prime Minister possibly answer when we cannot hear?

[Joe Clark, Progressive Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the acting Prime Minister.

The Parker inquiry defined conflict of interest as “a situation in which a minister of the Crown has knowledge of a private economic interest that is sufficient to influence the exercise of his or her public duties and responsibilities”.

The ethics counsellor told CBC Disclosure :

We were never trying to pretend that [the member for LaSalle—Émard] did not know the nature of his interest. He of course knew.

That means that the then minister of finance clearly broke the guidelines established by the Parker commission and applied to Sinclair Stevens.

Mr. Stevens resigned. The Liberal minister did not. How can the government possibly justify--

[The Speaker]

The hon. Minister of Transport.

[David Collenette, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, we have made it clear a number of times that the former minister of finance followed all of the rules, all of the conflict of interest guidelines. I should say that those were guidelines that were based on guidelines established by the previous Conservative government, of which the right hon. member was a member. He should know that before he asks such spurious questions in the House of Commons.

The fact of the matter is that he should not be coming in here every day maligning the reputation of the former minister of finance.

Canada-U.S. Relations

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

Mr. Speaker, three-quarters of Canadian business leaders are worried about anti-American comments made by government members. Yet we learned on the weekend that the Prime Minister took the time in the last caucus to joke about the Canada--U.S. relationship saying that it was not at its worst level in history.

I wonder if the Prime Minister could tell us how bad our relationship with the United States has to get before he starts understanding the consequences of his own actions?

[Bill Graham, Liberal, Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, if one looked at the recent speeches of the Ambassador of the United States to Canada,one would see how good the relationship is between Canada and the United States. Read the speeches. He talks about the agreements we have signed together, the things we do together, the things that join us.

Why does the opposition not join with the Americans, ourselves and others in the world who want to find out what joins us in working together rather than searching always for what divides us and sets us apart?

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

Mr. Speaker, this is the party on this side of the House that has expressed the majority of Canadian support for our American and British allies.

The tourism industry, the auto sector, the aerospace sector and others have all warned about the hard dollar cost of the Liberal mismanagement of the Canada-U.S. relationship.

Does the Prime Minister not fear that a good deal of his own legacy will now be rewritten in the history books as a complete mismanagement of Canada-U.S. relations?

[Bill Graham, Liberal, Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Of one thing we can be certain, Mr. Speaker, and I hope the Canadian public notes that if the voice of the party opposite is the voice that is heard, we are guaranteed to have trouble with our American partners. We are working on making them better, not worse.

Taxation

[Pierre Paquette, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Mr. Speaker, there is a broad consensus in Quebec on the existence of a fiscal imbalance between the federal government and Quebec.

Why will the federal government not admit that there is a fiscal imbalance and that it absolutely must be corrected?

[Maurizio Bevilacqua, Liberal, Secretary of State (International Financial Institutions)]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for his question. He would know that one of the hallmarks of the federal government has been its excellent relationship with the provinces of the nation.

Of course we would sit down with any province that feels we have some issues to deal with, whether they would be fiscal, social, economic or indeed cultural.

[Pierre Paquette, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Mr. Speaker, following the release of the Séguin report, the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs said that the fiscal imbalance was a myth, that there was no such thing. But his statement is not borne out in fact and is contradicted by most experts in the matter.

Would the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs not be wiser to open his mind to the reality of a fiscal imbalance and recognize that major changes need to be made to the existing system?

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, President of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, whether or not we say that there is a fiscal imbalance, the fact remains that the governments in this federation have a duty to help one another out. We will do so even better if we all believe in developing the same country.

[Grant Hill, Canadian Alliance, Macleod, AB]

Mr. Speaker, back in 1994 the former finance minister announced he was closing loopholes in our tax system. The reason was that “certain Canadian corporations are not paying an appropriate level of tax”. Right. The trouble is his corporation was one of the culprits.

Why should Canadians trust somebody who wants to be the prime minister of Canada when he does not pay his fair share of Canadian taxes?

[The Speaker]

The preamble of the question sounded as though it was going to be all right, but the second part of the question was not. It is improper to ask and it is not a matter of the administration of the government to ask about various taxpayers. The hon. member for Macleod may want to rephrase his question in his supplementary.

[Grant Hill, Canadian Alliance, Macleod, AB]

I will be happy to rephrase that, Mr. Speaker.

The Barbados flag of convenience tax scheme benefited CSL and the former member for LaSalle—Émard. He was the finance minister of the government. I think Canadians would want to know why should they trust this man to be the prime minister of Canada when he did not pay the proper Canadian taxes. Why?

[The Speaker]

The administration of the Government of Canada has nothing to do with the choice of the next prime minister. I am afraid the hon. member's question is out of order. We will have to move on.

[Pauline Picard, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Mr. Speaker, whether the federal government likes it or not, the fiscal imbalance accounts for a $50 million a week shortfall for Quebec.

Are we to understand from its denying the existence of a fiscal imbalance that the federal government intends to maintain the status quo and take no action to change a situation that is depriving Quebec of $50 million a week?

[Maurizio Bevilacqua, Liberal, Secretary of State (International Financial Institutions)]

Mr. Speaker, I thought the question had been asked already by another Bloc member. Perhaps I could take this opportunity to once again restate the original answer, or perhaps the hon. member could listen to my original answer so I would not have to repeat it again.

It is clear to the federal government that cooperation with the province is important, but there are some very basic fundamental issues. If one looks at provincial revenues versus federal revenues over the past 20 years, they speak to a certain reality, a reality that the hon. member simply does not want to accept.

[Pauline Picard, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Mr. Speaker, during the 1998 election campaign in Quebec, the Prime Minister, who lent his support to the Quebec Liberals, stated that, as far as the constitution is concerned, the general store was closed.

Are we to understand that, in 2003, the President of the Treasury Board is telling Jean Charest that when it comes to the fiscal imbalance, the till is empty?

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, President of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, the member twisted the Prime Minister's words. He did not say that the general store was closed. Let her check it out.