Debates of Oct. 18th, 2004

Petro-Canada

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, the firms that participated in the process were in each and every case properly selected on entirely objective grounds. I am pleased to say that there were firms participating from every part of Canada, including western Canada, Ontario, Quebec and Atlantic Canada.

[Guy Côté, Bloc, Portneuf, QC]

Mr. Speaker, among the 22 firms that were retained, some are small and specialized in bond financing.

Will the Prime Minister, who has yet to reply to the letter of Alban D'Amours, president of the Mouvement Desjardins, asking him for an explanation, provide such explanation to us, here in this House today?

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, I am not aware of the letter to which the hon. gentleman refers, but if there is outstanding correspondence it will indeed be properly replied to, because this has been judged by all of those who watched this transaction, from near or far, as one of the single most successful transactions of its kind in the last decade in the western world.

National Defence

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Oxford, ON]

Mr. Speaker, in May 2003 the Canadian Department of National Defence published a report stating, “Reactivation of the submarines to meet safe diving certification prior to acceptance by DND is the technical and financial responsibility of the U.K.”.

We now know there was an equipment failure on the Chicoutimi , which resulted in flooding of the sub with sea water. Can the Minister of National Defence tell the House if the Chicoutimi had received its safe diving certification from the U.K.?

[Bill Graham, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, as I said earlier in the House, I have been informed by the navy that all steps were taken necessary to make these ships ready to go to sea, that they set to sea after all necessary trials had taken place, and that the navy was satisfied they were in a situation ready to go to sea. If there are any other problems, I suggest we wait until the inquiry has completed its process so that we can determine exactly what situation prevailed at the time.

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Oxford, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the Chicoutimi was only in service for one year in the British navy before it was dry docked because of serious concerns about its reliability at sea. Can the Minister of National Defence explain why the government did not consider the 1991 British auditor general's report of major design faults, which raised serious questions about the safe operation of these submarines?

[Bill Graham, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, the government considered many reports. The procurement people in my department and in Public Works went through all of the specifications and all of the issues around the purchase of these submarines.

Every modern piece of sophisticated equipment always has issues about it. These were examined with great care, in detail. I would refer the hon. member to the report of the British House of Commons, which pointed out that even with the issues around these submarines they were excellent submarines and the British government should even consider building more.

Sponsorship Program

[Peter MacKay, Conservative, Central Nova, NS]

Mr. Speaker, now we know why last February the Prime Minister told us that there had to be political direction in the sponsorship scandal: because his political staff was giving it. His political staff made calls to lobby for sponsorship funds on behalf of Internationaux du Sport de Montréal, a company headed by Serge Savard. After being rejected for funds, a call was made and presto, the group received $250,000.

Can the Prime Minister tell us why he hid the fact that his office was running political interference in the sponsorship program?

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Minister of Public Works and Government Services]

Mr. Speaker, first of all, the Prime Minister has been clear that he was aware, as were all members of Parliament, of the sponsorship program. He was not aware of the alleged malfeasance. When he became aware as a result of the Auditor General's report, he acted swiftly to end the sponsorship program and beyond that, to establish the Gomery commission, which we are cooperating with fully.

I would urge the hon. member to support Justice Gomery in his deliberations, to not prejudge the results of Justice Gomery based on day to day testimony and play by play on that testimony, and to support what Canadians want, and that is for Justice Gomery to report back to Canadians with the truth.

[Peter MacKay, Conservative, Central Nova, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I had hoped for support from this person before.

This is for the Prime Minister, not the wannabe. The firm of Serge Savard received sponsorship money and yet raised $1 million for the Prime Minister--

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Speaker]

Order, please. It sounds like there are a lot of wannabes, but the question is being asked by the member for Central Nova and it is he we are going to want to hear for the moment.

[Peter MacKay, Conservative, Central Nova, NS]

Mr. Speaker, Serge Savard raised $1 million to help the Prime Minister, yet received sponsorship money. Mr. Savard was both a fundraiser for the Prime Minister and the president of a company seeking sponsorship. In addition, his board included the then Canada Post chairman, André “What Receipts?” Ouellet, and Francis Fox, the Prime Minister's principal secretary.

His staff was involved. His confidants and political supporters were aware. How does the Prime Minister expect Canadians to believe that he was not in the loop on the sponsorship scandal?

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Minister of Public Works and Government Services]

Mr. Speaker, I am surprised that somebody who calls himself a lawyer would not understand the importance of the independence of a judicial inquiry and respect of that independence. I suspect he is having a bit of a lapse of legal judgment today. Perhaps that was the same lapse of judgment that led him to rip up a written agreement he made with David Orchard.

Agriculture

[Rose-Marie Ur, Liberal, Middlesex—Kent—Lambton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food. In May 2004 the former Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food announced a plan to assist tobacco producers. Will the current Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food inform the House of when he plans to implement the commitment made by the government to provide transitional assistance to tobacco producers?

[Andy Mitchell, Liberal, Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food]

Mr. Speaker, the Government of Canada recognizes the difficulties that our tobacco producers and the communities that support them are experiencing. I am pleased to advise that we will be honouring the commitment made last May. We are working with the industry on the particulars of the implementation of the program and we expect to see that implementation take place this fall.

Health

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

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Health. The Minister of Health will recall that as leader the Prime Minister in the recent election campaigned against the Tories because he said he was against credit card medicine. We now have credit card medicine in Montreal.

What is the Minister of Health doing about it and how does he reconcile the fact that he is not doing anything with the things the Liberals said during the election campaign?

[Ujjal Dosanjh, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, I want the member to remember that we just poured $41 billion into health care for the next 10 years. I just want him to remember that.

We are the defenders and protectors of health care. I am looking at the Canada Health Act situation with respect to the Montreal clinic. It is very important that we review the situation. It is also important that we deal with these issues in an amicable way to make sure that the spirit of the act survives and that across the country public health care thrives every day.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am beginning to understand why we did not get anything for him when we traded him to the Liberals.

The Minister of Health said that pharmacare was years away, that they could not afford it, and yet they promised a national pharmacare program during the election. Presumably they did not know they had the kind of surplus they have today. Why can they not afford pharmacare today when they have a surplus that is way larger than it was when they promised it?

[Ujjal Dosanjh, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, after I left, I did not know whether they had anything to give over there. I honestly did not know.

We established a task force headed by the minister of health from B.C. and myself as co-chairs. We are going to look at bulk purchasing. We are going to look at national formulary. We want to make sure that we build the blocks so that eventually we may have a national pharmacare plan across the country.

[Steven Fletcher, Conservative, Charleswood—St. James, MB]

Mr. Speaker, last week provided more evidence that the new health minister has no clue about what he is doing. He told Canadians that the government will review the rules of the hepatitis C fund and give compensation to those outside the 1986-90 window. In fact, we have found out that he had no intention of opening the fund.

What he did was give false hope to these people. While the government compensates its pals with millions of dollars of ad contracts and golf balls, victims sit at home, getting sicker every day.

When will the minister stop giving these people false hope and apologize for his comments?

[Ujjal Dosanjh, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member neither listens to me nor reads the press clippings carefully.

What we did say was that there may be potentially an actuarial surplus in the fund and that actuarial surplus would have to be determined by the court. We will have to work with the provinces and territories to ensure that we can look at that surplus, and we will of course have to talk with the lawyers of the plaintiffs.

It is important that we treat this issue seriously. This is an issue of serious injury to ordinary people across the country.

[Steven Fletcher, Conservative, Charleswood—St. James, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I understand why the NDP traded him away.

The minister refuses to give Canadians an honest answer. Why is the government blatantly discriminating against the pre-1986 and post-1990 victims? Why will the minister not stand up in the House right now and tell Canadians that all victims of hepatitis C from tainted blood deserve compensation?

Canadians know. Give an honest answer and do the right thing.

[Ujjal Dosanjh, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, there is a trust fund established by the courts. Contributors to that trust fund are the federal and provincial governments. We need to speak to those partners. We need to speak to the lawyers of the plaintiffs. We need to then approach the courts to take a look at whether or not there is an actuarial surplus. We are in the process of doing exactly that.

Agriculture

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

Mr. Speaker, last Friday the United States department of commerce announced unfair preliminary anti-dumping duties on Canadian hogs. This decision means that Canadian hog producers now have to post potentially crippling bonds on their pork exports to the United States.

I ask the international trade minister, is it not true that the government's mismanagement of Canada-U.S. relations may result in U.S. protectionism hurting our farmers once again?