House of Commons Hansard #30 of the 38th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was chair.
Denise Poirier-Rivard Bloc Châteauguay—Saint-Constant, QC
Mr. Speaker, Quebec producers who raise cull cows are dependent on a single slaughterhouse serving all of eastern Canada, which sets prices and might start looking elsewhere if a floor price is set only by the Government of Quebec.
Does the minister recognize this is a possibility? Does this not prove to him that his intervention is necessary, since this is a matter under his jurisdiction and he cannot remain indifferent?
Andy Mitchell LiberalMinister of Agriculture and Agri-Food
Mr. Speaker, I am quite glad that the agriculture critic for the Bloc has informed the House leader of exactly what the issue is, and it is slaughter capacity. As she pointed out, the difficulty is that there is only one source or one place that the cull cows can go to, so an initiative that will allow for the creation of additional capacity and allow for a competitive environment for that capacity is the long term solution to that issue.
Denise Poirier-Rivard Bloc Châteauguay—Saint-Constant, QC
Mr. Speaker, other provinces were prepared to give Quebec's agriculture minister their consent to cooperate in setting a floor price for cull cows.
Since Quebec is clearly prepared to act and other provinces are prepared to cooperate, what is the minister waiting for to show not only an interest in this issue but also a firm desire to act and, in so doing, to help the producers?
Andy Mitchell LiberalMinister of Agriculture and Agri-Food
Mr. Speaker, it is exactly that strong will that has resulted in the investments that have been made in Quebec. Exactly that strong will is why we are fully engaged with the province of Quebec and the minister of agriculture for the province of Quebec. It is why we have been meeting with producers in Quebec, including meetings today that have been happening with the UPA, to discuss the range of options that are available in order to do even more than what we have already done.
Jack Layton NDP Toronto—Danforth, ON
Mr. Speaker, there are very serious questions raised by the Auditor General's report here today on the Prime Minister's family company.
The House asked for the whole truth and it did not get the whole truth. Companies were excluded, whole departments were excluded, and port authorities were excluded, the very place where one would expect a shipping magnate to deal with the government. Why did the government not tell the whole truth about the Prime Minister's company?
Tony Valeri LiberalLeader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, in February 2004 the government introduced measures to improve the process by which order paper questions were answered. The government then asked the Auditor General to review the effectiveness of these changes and provide any recommendations that she thought necessary. She did so. She provided eight of those recommendations. In fact, I would just quote; this morning and later this afternoon, I believe, the Auditor General in reference to this response said that the response was “as good as it can be”.
Jack Layton NDP Toronto—Danforth, ON
Mr. Speaker, that was selective quoting from a document. The Auditor General said that the PCO directed public works to exclude certain contracts specifically involving the Prime Minister's company. Why did the minister not quote that in his answer?
A government concerned about the whole truth would not do that kind of thing. A prime minister concerned about ethics would have provided the information.
Why did the Prime Minister not review the information about his own company before it was revealed to the public?
Reg Alcock LiberalPresident of the Treasury Board and Minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board
Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the government, I would like to thank the Auditor General for her work. She and her staff do invaluable work in helping us consistently work toward improving the Government of Canada.
Diane Ablonczy Conservative Calgary Nose Hill, AB
Mr. Speaker, today there are new concerns about the immigration minister's ethical judgment. The member for Winnipeg Centre has revealed further private details relating to Alina Balaican's fast-track permit from the minister.
I can advise the House that the minister's director of parliamentary affairs called my office on November 17 and asked whether we needed more information about this case.
Why did the minister authorize her staff to play fast and loose with Canada's privacy laws?
Judy Sgro LiberalMinister of Citizenship and Immigration
Mr. Speaker, I can assure the House that I do not play fast and loose with anything, never mind the law, especially when we get into the Privacy Act.
I have told the hon. member to let the Ethics Commissioner do his job. He has a job to do. I very much look forward to his getting back with a response as soon as possible.
Diane Ablonczy Conservative Calgary Nose Hill, AB
Mr. Speaker, the minister's staff called my office and offered to give us private information about this case. I do not think we need the Ethics Commissioner to tell us any more than that.
The minister has repeatedly told this House that she is not able to comment on particular cases and yet behind the scenes her respect for Canada's privacy laws evaporates. Does the government condone the minister's violations of the Privacy Act or will she be asked to resign?
Anne McLellan LiberalDeputy Prime Minister and Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness
Mr. Speaker, let me make this very clear. If in fact the hon. member has a concern or an assertion that she wishes to make in relation to a matter of privacy, I suggest that she take that matter up with the appropriate officer of Parliament, and that is the Privacy Commissioner.
Helena Guergis Conservative Simcoe—Grey, ON
Mr. Speaker, it is clear that the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration is breaking Canada's privacy laws. The minister's office leaked personal and confidential information about an individual without the written consent of the individual.
This is disgraceful and a gross violation of privacy rights. Can the minister tell us when she will do the honourable thing and step down?
Anne McLellan LiberalDeputy Prime Minister and Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness
Mr. Speaker, as I have just said, if in fact there is some assertion or allegation being made by the other side in relation to any member of this government regarding aspects of the Privacy Act or privacy of information, I would suggest that the appropriate place to have that allegation or assertion dealt with would be with the Privacy Commissioner and her office.
Helena Guergis Conservative Simcoe—Grey, ON
Mr. Speaker, the minister is dodging this like the Prime Minister, but unfortunately for her, she has to stay in town.
We have also learned that an unauthorized person in the minister's election office discussed personal and confidential information with ministry staff, which is also a clear violation of privacy laws.
The minister keeps striking out, stiffing taxpayers with campaign expenses, leaking confidential information and allowing unauthorized individuals to handle personal and confidential information. When will the minister do the honourable thing and step down?
Judy Sgro LiberalMinister of Citizenship and Immigration
Mr. Speaker, as the Deputy Prime Minister indicated, if the member has any information on that the member can go to see the Privacy Commissioner. But let me tell you, Mr. Speaker, to have to continue to listen to these allegations all of the time, bandied around, all based on whatever the newspaper stories of the day are, I think is totally unacceptable and it is nothing more than trying to play cheap political tricks.
Christiane Gagnon Bloc Québec, QC
Mr. Speaker, the economy is doing relatively well, yet the number of children living in poverty is increasing. The federal government's policies, particularly in the areas of employment insurance and social housing, contribute directly to the impoverishment of a segment of the population. If there are children living in poverty, it is because there are parents living in poverty.
Can the government not see that its decisions on social issues are taking it far from its solemn commitment to eliminate child poverty by the year 2000, and that these same choices explain why, 11 years later, the plight of children, far from improving, is deteriorating again?
Ken Dryden LiberalMinister of Social Development
Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member knows, the rate of child poverty is certainly an unacceptable one. We have worked on it. The state of the economy in the last number of years has helped. The child tax benefit has helped. The national child benefit has helped. We hope that the national early learning and child care initiative will also help, but we also need to do better.
Christiane Gagnon Bloc Québec, QC
Mr. Speaker, making parents poorer only makes children poorer. The fact that the number of children living in poverty is increasing should not come as a surprise, considering that the government has implemented all kinds of restrictive measures, particularly with respect to employment insurance and social housing.
Will the government agree that, if there are more children living in poverty, it is simply because there are parents who are getting poorer because of its destructive policies?
Ken Dryden LiberalMinister of Social Development
Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned to the hon. member, it is something that is an unacceptable number. It is something we need to do better at and we will continue to look to find ways of doing better.
Benoît Sauvageau Bloc Repentigny, QC
Mr. Speaker, the Auditor General is concerned about the federal government's rather undemocratic practices in many areas, including the fact that it continues to dip into the employment insurance fund against the will of parliamentarians, the fact that its programs do not allow aboriginals to have access to post-secondary education and participate in the democratic process, and the fact that it does not provide proper answers to questions put to it by parliamentarians.
Can the Prime Minister reiterate, without blinking, that he is concerned by the democratic deficit, after such a damning report by the Auditor General?
Reg Alcock LiberalPresident of the Treasury Board and Minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board
Mr. Speaker, as I said earlier, we wish to thank the Auditor General and her staff and, frankly, all of the public servants who are working so hard to address these issues. We use the words “continuous improvement” because there will always be challenges and we will always respond.
Benoît Sauvageau Bloc Repentigny, QC
Mr. Speaker, what is more worrisome is that the human resources and sponsorship scandals did not serve as lessons. Internal audit committees in the various departments do not have the resources and independence necessary to fulfill their responsibilities and, in this context, another sponsorship scandal remains a distinct possibility.
How can the President of the Treasury Board explain his department's carelessness, after the fine promises made by the Prime Minister to solve this problem?
Reg Alcock LiberalPresident of the Treasury Board and Minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board
Mr. Speaker, perhaps the best answer would be to use the words of the Auditor General herself:
Another unintended consequence of audit reports is that while they present findings on specific programs or issues, those findings are sometimes generalized as applying to the government as a whole. This could serve to diminish the trust Canadians have in the government and the public service.
That would be unfortunate.
I ask the member to get his facts straight.
Tom Lukiwski Conservative Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, SK
Mr. Speaker, yesterday in the House the President of the Treasury Board stood and said that ministers during an election campaign were allowed to take one ministerial staff to assist during the campaign. Records indicate now that the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration had not one but three ministerial staff in the minister's riding during the campaign, all charged back to the taxpayer.
Would the President of the Treasury Board not agree that this was a clear violation by the immigration minister with respect to the election laws?