Debates of Feb. 17th, 2004

Supply

[Pierre Pettigrew, Liberal, Papineau—Saint-Denis, QC]

I am the one who called the police.

[Grant McNally, Canadian Alliance, Dewdney—Alouette, BC]

The minister is saying he is the one who called the police. That is good. Certainly there should have been a heads-up for cabinet and for the government that this was something that was going on back as far as 1997. They should have had their radar up that this could possibly spring up again. As we have found, it has sprung up.

I would like the minister to comment on that.

[Stephen Owen, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

Madam Speaker, regrettably, and frankly it is the challenge to all of us in the House and in the legislatures across the country, there are incidents of corruption. It is not restricted to this party or this government, or the federal government. We have problems across the country.

Certainly there were cases of corruption as well during the previous Conservative government which are well known and which led to convictions. We have had problems in the province of the hon. member and in my province of British Columbia. We have had difficulties with inappropriate behaviour by a former Social Credit, allegations against the NDP, and allegations against current Liberal governments. Sadly this is not restricted to this place and this party, but it is our responsibility, all of us working together, to get to the bottom of this and to learn from it.

In the specific case that the member mentioned, it is extremely important that it did lead to a criminal investigation, reported by the current Minister of Health, it led to a police investigation, charges and conviction. This is what we must ensure happens in this case. The Prime Minister has invited anyone on both sides of the House to come forward to our inquiries, to our public accounts committee, to give evidence to the RCMP. Let us get to the bottom of it and make sure that no party and no government in any jurisdiction in our country can get away with this type of misappropriation and breach of public trust in the future.

[Howard Hilstrom, Canadian Alliance, Selkirk—Interlake, MB]

Madam Speaker, this is the first time I have had an opportunity to speak while you were in the chair. I congratulate the member from Kamloops on sitting in the chair. You are doing a very good job.

The member from British Columbia is talking about how the Prime Minister is going to take charge and is going to fix this whole thing up. I would like to ask the member, what has he done to take charge of the issue out in British Columbia? The RCMP search warrants were sealed up during an organized crime investigation of the very Liberal Party members who put the Prime Minister into the Prime Minister's chair through their activities of buying memberships and getting him elected. There is a scandal that involves crime and corruption. What is the Prime Minister doing about that?

[Stephen Owen, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

Madam Speaker, first of all I am not aware of any charges having been laid against anybody in British Columbia. What I am aware of is that the federal government has retained counsel to attempt to get those search warrants opened so that we can have a better idea of exactly what is behind them.

Is there any inappropriate action involving anyone involved with the federal Liberal Party of Canada? Let us remember that the raid was on the British Columbia legislature, on offices of aides of senior ministers of the provincial government. I have heard no suggestion whatsoever that there is a connection to the federal government. Let us see where we are going--

[The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Hinton)]

Order. Resuming debate, the hon. Minister of Health and Intergovernmental Affairs.

[Pierre Pettigrew, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Madam Speaker, I too wish to congratulate you on your new position as Chair of our House. This is an important position, which obviously commands great respect.

I want to thank you for allowing me to rise today to speak on this motion, whose wording is certainly excessive, but which gives us an opportunity to take a good look at how a Liberal government handles public funds.

I listened to the presentation of the hon. member for Edmonton—Strathcona earlier. He said our government had no respect for public funds, for the taxpayers' hard-earned money.

My constituents, in Papineau—Saint-Denis, are fully aware of the fact that no other government in the history of this country has done more to look to the future in terms of public spending, instead of allowing the absolutely staggering debt load to continue to grow, which is what used to happen.

I am very happy that the member for Edmonton—Strathcona said that we have disrespect for taxpayers' dollars. It will get the public thinking, and it will remember that our government is the one that eliminated the $42 billion deficit inherited from the Conservative government. Note that the Alliance Party is now the Conservative Party, therefore inheriting the Conservatives' legacy.

This legacy was a $42 billion deficit. In those days, governments kept on borrowing, knowing full well that the day would come when it would have to be paid back using the taxes paid by Canadians.

We have eliminated this $42 billion deficit, out of respect for the taxes paid by Canadians.

The Prime Minister, who was finance minister at the time, did a tremendous job, in respecting public funds. We have carried out very painful program reviews, in which program upon program was reviewed to ensure that we were respecting the taxpayers' money.

Is this program still relevant to the Canadian economy or society? Would that one better meet our needs? Very painful program reviews were conducted out of respect for taxpayers' money.

Therefore, we are the only country in the world, the only country in the G-7, one of the rare countries in the OECD now, that has a budget surplus, and is no longer in a deficit situation. We are the only country in the G-7 to have a surplus and not a deficit because of our government's prudent management of public funds.

It was our Liberal government that modernized employment insurance benefits. We were the ones who got the employment insurance fund out of its deficit position, where it had been year after year, with the government putting in the taxpayers' money. We were the ones who turned this deficit into a surplus, and now we are taken to task for having an EI fund surplus because they say it is excessive.

In any case, at least, the taxpayers' money is no longer going to prop up the employment insurance fund that was running at a deficit. It is precisely because we respect the taxpayers' contributions that the EI fund has finally done this.

In all the world, our country has become a model for its respect for the taxpayers' money. It is clear now that there were some mistakes made in the sponsorship file. Some very disturbing facts have been brought to our attention by the Auditor General.

Furthermore, I would like to point out one thing. The word “corruption” does not appear in the Auditor General's report. She pointed out some worrisome facts to us—serious facts we have been considering for several years. We are being asked, “Where was the Prime Minister all those years?”

We are the ones who called for an internal audit in the Department of Public Works and Government Services when the allegations were first heard. The Deputy Minister, Mr. Quail, came and told us, in mid-2002, that, despite the fact that the three Groupaction reports were not included in the internal audit, there was no evidence of corruption or dishonesty at that time. That is what the internal audit report said.

Unfortunately, later on, some facts came to light that were sufficiently serious to be brought to the attention of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. The RCMP is now carrying out criminal investigations based on the facts that the Auditor General's activities had uncovered over a two-year period. It cannot be said that we have done nothing.

The new government led by the current Prime Minister shut down the program the day after the new government was formed, that is, December 13, 2003.

As a government, we have made some extremely radical decisions. We have created a commission to carry out an independent, public judicial inquiry. Now the opposition is asking us to tell that inquiry to produce its report quickly, and to impose upon it a deadline and other restrictions on this and that. We will not set a time limit. We trust it will work expeditiously, but also that it will go into the matter thoroughly, so that we will have recommendations to prevent this kind of thing from ever happening again.

We set up the Standing Committee on Public Accounts very quickly. It is the only House committee already in place. Its chair is an opposition member. We made sure it would be the first parliamentary committee prepared to start work, and we have already assured it of this government's full cooperation.

We have given a special mandate to a legal counsel specialized in the recovery of funds, in order to trace any funds that may have been misdirected. This specialist, who is not involved in criminal cases, will also be able to recover these funds in civil proceedings.

We have undertaken management reforms. Legislation protecting whistleblowers will ensure that public servants who get wind of certain crooked dealings are protected by a statute under which they can report these facts to the appropriate authority. We are enforcing the Financial Administration Act.

This government has acted, will act and intends to do everything in its power to prevent any future repetition of troubling events such as those now being brought to light.

I want to take the few minutes I have remaining to defend Quebec's reputation, which has taken quite a beating throughout the country. It is unfortunate that people want to associate all of Quebec with certain crooked dealings by a limited number of individuals who will have to answer for their actions.

However, I must say one thing. There have been difficult political situations in provinces other than Quebec, such as British Columbia, Saskatchewan, Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island. They have happened everywhere and under other governments too.

Quebec is even the first society to get its fiscal house and political party financing in order. The Lesage government, a Liberal government in the early 1960s, initiated this initiative to clean up political campaign funds to free political parties from the sometimes, but not always, unhealthy influence of money.

This reform, begun under the Lesage government, was continued by René Lévesque and the Parti Quebecois, in Quebec City, to the extent that this society influenced the Liberal government to adopt Bill C-24, last year, to improve political party financing.

This was an indepth reform, which the Alliance and the Progressive Conservatives opposed. They were against reforming contributions to campaign funds, preferring to leave things in the dark.

Now, I want to come back to what we said about Quebec.

Now I would like to say it in English, if no one minds, so that my English speaking friends around the country know that there have been political difficulties and political corruption in all Canadian provinces and societies. I find it extremely sad when I hear anything close to the Quebec bashing that I have been hearing in the last few days.

I would like to say how much Quebec in the last 40 years has been a society that has contributed to the progress of cleaner electoral and managerial health in our public finances. It is the first society that has brought forward legislation to free up political parties with respect to election funds.

The progress that has been made in Quebec in the last few years is very important. I am very proud that it is the Quebec society that has influenced the Liberal government to free up political parties from any influence from big business by making sure that party funds will now be public. I think it is great progress for democracy.

[Chuck Strahl, Canadian Alliance, Fraser Valley, BC]

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the minister for his comments, but I am not sure where he is hearing the negative comments about Quebec. He is certainly not hearing it from this side of the House, not from us anyway. The question is not whether Quebec society wants to clean up the corruption. The question is, is the Liberal Party prepared to clean up the corruption?

The problem has been and the reason that the Auditor General has been front and centre is because this scandal involves the Liberal Party and their supporters. She did not say anything about Quebec. We are not saying anything about Quebec, but it is saying a lot about the Liberal Party of Canada.

That is why the member today left the Liberal Party. He said that he has been convinced over the last three or four years that it has not improved. In fact, he says it is going downhill within the Liberal Party itself. He says the problem is getting worse over there, not better. It is not a matter of public financing of political parties. It is a culture that is created when wrongdoing is winked at and accepted.

I would like the minister to answer a specific question which we asked in the House before. In this scandal, as the minister says, there have been aspersions cast upon the ministers from Quebec and it is up to them to stand up and clear the air.

The Prime Minister, for example, received a letter from the president of the Liberal Party of Canada weeks before the Auditor General started her investigation. The question we have been asking is, when did this minister and other ministers hear about the problems that the Auditor General's report details?

When did he hear about it? Did he hear about it before the AG started her investigation or was he surprised a week ago when the report came down? What appears evident again is that there is a culture that has made this acceptable in the Liberal Party. The Liberal Party may want to ferret it out now, but it is certainly there. We need to know, when did the minister know and what did he do about it once he found out?

[Pierre Pettigrew, Liberal, Papineau—Saint-Denis, QC]

Madam Speaker, I find it incredible that we are now saying that the Liberal Party is corrupt and so on. The word corruption does not even appear in the report of the Auditor General of Canada. She brings to our attention a certain number of facts that are troubling. The government is determined to get to the bottom of that.

I can tell members that the word corruption does not appear in her report. She says that she does not have the facts that would allow her to know where the money went. This is the sort of thing that we will see.

I understand that the police have been working for two years on a certain number of cases that have been brought to their attention by the first Auditor General's report. I understand that they have 10 or 12 files. It certainly means that there has been work done in this area.

From the Auditor General's report, there was an internal audit at one stage. In May 2002, Ran Quail, the deputy minister said that the first internal audit revealed mismanagement; however, he did not reveal that there had been any fraud. At that stage the three files on Groupaction were not part of his internal audit; however, he said that at that moment there had been mismanagement and that there were difficulties in identifying how things were going. He said there was no evidence of any fraud.

The opposition says we should have known. In June 2002 the deputy minister went on record based on the internal audit. The opposition apparently knows things that even the Auditor General does not know in her own report at this time.

Let the public inquiry do its work and let the police continue their investigation. Let the public accounts committee do its work. That is the way that we will get to the bottom of this.

[Carol Skelton, Canadian Alliance, Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, SK]

Madam Speaker, I wish to congratulate you on your appointment.

Never in my lifetime did I ever think that I would rise in the House of Commons and discuss government corruption. We all knew the Liberals wasted plenty of money, but corruption in the tens of millions of dollars is mind-boggling, even after having a week to think about it.

Today I read that Jack Layton and the NDP want to jump into bed with these Liberals. Jack Layton wants to fly his own flag of convenience and form a minority government with the Liberals. I cannot believe the NDP will try to sell its new party look in Canada, especially in my riding of Saskatoon--Rosetown--Biggar. My constituents do not support the idea of an NDP-Liberal government. They will not support the waste and they will not support the corruption.

Madam Speaker, I will be dividing my time with my colleague from Surrey Central.

The Conservative Party of Canada stands alone in the House of Commons in calling for real reform of government. We stand alone in demanding that answers come before an election call. We stand alone in defending the responsible spending of taxpayers' dollars. We stand alone as the NDP and Liberals crowd around the trough.

My constituents have had enough. They want justice, they want answers, and they want them now. The reckless disregard for hard earned tax dollars by the NDP and Liberals has my constituents tarring us all with the same brush. One voter said “With all the corruption we see in the government hierarchy its hard to believe or trust any politicians”.

Richard P. of Saskatoon wrote:

For the first time in my life, I won't be voting in this spring's federal election. I have given up on the political system in this country. Enough is enough. Have a nice day. This is a waste of taxpayers' dollars.

Lynn B. of Saskatoon wrote:

I don't believe we have an MP from any party who is openly and aggressively looking to the interests of the citizens of this province or any other.

Albert G. of Saskatoon wrote:

It blows my mind how some of these bigwigs can blow so much money and not be responsible.

Finally, Eron M. in her comments wrote:

Sorry, but politicians have difficulty with honesty and morality. They may believe they are honest, but they are only as honest as the other politicians. That is less than half as honest as the average working stiff.

These comments made me angry. The Prime Minister and the Liberals with their unethical and corrupt behaviour are giving us all a bad name. I work hard for my constituents. I work hard for their respect. I just wish the Liberals would too.

The amount of money that has been wasted is disgusting. It could have gone a long way if it had been spent responsibly.

It could have bought 100 MRI machines across Canada and eliminated every waiting list. It could have hired 2,500 nurses to care for our sick and frail citizens as well as nurses to deliver babies and treat our children.

For those people who cannot afford a car, they must be furious when they think of the 12,500 economy cars that could have been bought with this money.

How about buying the weekly groceries for 2.5 million families? They could have eaten for one week on what this corrupt government wasted on this scandal alone. Imagine the cost of all the scandals together.

For those people who were hoping to see gas taxes going to their cities, they would be interested in knowing that almost 8.5 million tanks of gas could have been bought for the money laundered by the Liberals.

The money wasted by the Liberal scandal alone is equivalent to the taxes paid by almost 12,000 hardworking Canadians. That is the most disgusting example. Taxes from 12,000 average working Canadians were taken and squandered.

That is almost half of my riding population. Given that not all of them are employed or are of working age, I feel confident in saying that the government wasted every single tax dollar it collected, or as one constituent said, stole, from the residents of my riding. Some 12,000 hard-working Canadians have been stiffed by this corrupt government. I bet they cannot wait to let the Liberals know what they think of them in the next election. My constituents are demanding overall accountability and an end to government waste. I will do what I can to ensure that.

Henry M. of Milden wrote:

Get rid of government waste.

Andy Z. of Saskatoon wrote:

The National Gun Registry should be scrapped. The money from the registry should go to health care.

Brent K. of Warman wrote:

Get rid of the gun registry. We need a female Prime Minister.

I thought that was a good letter. Carol M. of Perdue wrote:

I do hope you scrap the gun registry. I would also like to see the Governor General replaced, with one that would be more careful with our tax dollars.

Margaret N. of Saskatoon wrote:

This is a waste of taxpayers' money which could be used on social programs. Especially when it comes to health care.

My constituents have had enough. The Prime Minister should bring back his pan-Canadian damage control tour to a quick end, return to his job in Ottawa, and provide us with answers. I bet he will end up spending more on damage control tours than the original waste cost.

Lorne S. of Saskatoon simply wrote that government is wasting too much money and mentioned the Governor General. Maybe the Prime Minister should take the hint. Canadians do not like publicly funded self-important tours.

Along the way, Jack Layton and the NDP will be cheering him on. Like two peas in a pod, they will cross their fingers and hope that Canadians blindly vote for them and their shared flag of convenience.

Canadians do not want the big ship boy and the big city boy to handle their precious tax dollars anymore. They want an accountable, trustworthy government that respects the sweat and tears put into paying their taxes. They want a party that puts them first. They want a government that works for the people, not one that steals from the people. They want a world-class democracy, not a country sliding into the depths of corruption.

I received a call from Donna from Saskatoon last week. She is a taxpayer. She works very hard for the money she makes. She said that she was sick. She wanted to move out of Canada because she was living in a banana republic. She said that we are worse than the banana republics that we hear about everyday on the news. She told me about her son who is in the air force who waited six months to get his boots. It took six months for a young man serving in our military to get proper boots. She was disgusted. She called Canada a banana republic, and that makes me angry. It is the people across the aisle who have labelled us that.

I look forward to being a constructive part of reform in a new Conservative Government of Canada.

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

Madam Speaker, I was listening to the member from Saskatchewan. She was talking about the Liberal Party and the NDP, but I think she forgot to speak about the Conservative Party of Saskatchewan under Grant Devine. He was a former premier of Saskatchewan.

Sixteen members of that party were charged with criminal offences with convictions. Now, this same person is running for the federal Conservative Party. Is she mad about that? Will she tell her leader of the Conservative Party that she does not want Grant Devine in her party because he will hurt the Conservative Party, or is it that her party is just perfect today?

[Carol Skelton, Canadian Alliance, Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, SK]

Madam Speaker, I would like my hon. colleague to check his facts.

[Roy H. Bailey, Canadian Alliance, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

Madam Speaker, I would like to inform the House, with regard to the statements made, that those people in that particular government who committed criminal offences went to jail. There was no amnesty. I am not too sure whether that will happen here.

In dealing with the former premier, it is my understanding that he will not be running for the Conservative Party in Saskatchewan.

[Howard Hilstrom, Canadian Alliance, Selkirk—Interlake, MB]

Madam Speaker, I would like to speak for a minute to this corruption and the granting of moneys by the Liberal government.

Speaking of the gun registry, which we know is a big waste of money, we are like everyone else. We are for one gun control. Even the Americans are for gun control. However none of us are for the excessive waste of time of registering rifles and shotguns.

The Liberals often mention that the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police is supportive of their legislation. I would like to point out to the Canadian public and to members that the Association of Chiefs of Police receives money from the Liberal government for its association.

I know that one year $100,000 went to a program that the chiefs of police used. That is very clear. This kind of thing shows that the Liberal government has sympathizers in many organizations throughout the country and it buys that support.

The president of the Canada Beef Export Federation, Ted Haney, is now running for the Liberals.

I would also point out that Bob Friesen, who is the head of the Canadian Federation of Agriculture, just lost the riding of Brandon--Souris to Murray Downing who will be running for the Liberals.

It is amazing how all these organizations have Liberal sympathizers which is also part of this overall level of the insidious nature that Liberals get into with Canadians to buy the next election.

[Sarkis Assadourian, Liberal, Brampton Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, congratulations on your new position.

The hon. member mentioned earlier that we had paid money to the police associations to support us. Is he saying that we bribe the police and that the police receive bribes from us? Could he clarify that point?

[Carol Skelton, Canadian Alliance, Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, SK]

I am assuming, Madam Speaker, that the question was directed to me. I know the member was referring to what the hon. member for Selkirk—Interlake said but I would like to add to what the hon. member for Selkirk--Interlake said.

My son-in-law, who is a class police officer, does not believe in the gun registry. I do not agree with what the member is saying.

[Gurmant Grewal, Canadian Alliance, Surrey Central, BC]

Madam Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to rise on behalf of the constituents of Surrey Central to participate in the supply day motion debate, as well as to congratulate you formally on your appointment as Deputy Speaker of the chamber. I wish you good luck and I am quite confident that with your personality and abilities you will do a wonderful job in the House.

Canadians are disgusted with the ethically bankrupt Liberal government and its miserable record of corruption, frauds and scandals. For years we have been witness to one boondoggle after another. Hundreds of millions of dollars, even billions of dollars, have been misspent in one manner or another, often on questionable grants to Liberal held ridings.

This grates on the nerves of all taxpayers, especially when those accountable dismiss the losses. “So what if a few million dollars were stolen”, said the former prime minister, Mr. Jean Chrétien. A few million may look small when contrasted with a $180 billion federal budget and the huge amount that has been pocketed by the Liberal Party out of that money.

When we start talking about a quarter of a billion dollars in the sponsorship scandal, much of which appears to have ended up in the hands of Liberal cronies and eventually in the pocket of the Liberal Party, it becomes a nightmare for all Canadians.

It appears from the Auditor General's report that the government has been funneling tens of millions of dollars through the public works department and five crown corporations to a number of Quebec advertising agencies, all with ties to the federal Liberal Party of Canada.

In some cases all the advertising agencies were doing was transferring money from one government department to a government agency and charging a hefty commission. For example, for one transaction, the transferring of a cheque for $900 million to one of the crown corporations, an advertising agency charged $112,000 as a commission for picking up and delivering the cheque.

As the Auditor General pointed out, there was no need for a middleman in those transactions. It certainly was not a service worth thousands or millions of dollars.

It has been suggested in the media that the money was paid for services performed for the Liberal Party during the 1997 and 2000 elections. There seems little other explanation for why the Liberals would be rewarding these firms with millions of dollars.

The Prime Minister claims that he did not know what was going on. This program began in 1997 when the Prime Minister was finance minister, the custodian of the public purse and vice-chair of the Treasury Board committee. How could a finance minister, vice-chair of the Treasury Board committee and senior Quebec minister not know what was going on? Does the Prime Minister want Canadians to believe that he is incompetent? That will be reassuring to Canadian voters come election time.

According to the Prime Minister's latest spin on the scandal, it is no longer the work of a few rogue bureaucrats but rather a political operation. While at first claiming complete ignorance to what was going on, as further information has come to light he now admits to having been aware of rumours surrounding the sponsorship program, but thinking it merely a matter of some administrative failures until the Auditor General's report confirmed how corrupt it really was.

This is the same Prime Minister who for the past 13 years has been busy back-stabbing and manipulating to take over the Liberal Party's leadership.

His hold over the party was so complete that by 2002 that he was able to force Mr. Jean Chrétien into retirement. When he submitted his nomination papers for the contest to become Liberal leader, he had the support of 259 out of 301 riding presidents. Can members imagine that?

However the Prime Minister now wants us to believe that despite all his ground work securing the support of the party, he had no idea what was going on inside the party. Frankly I find that to be unbelievable. I do not care how strained the relationship was between the Prime Minister and his successor, the current leader of the Liberal Party could not have been oblivious to the political corruption that was taking place right under his nose.

He was aware of the scandals surrounding Shawinigan, the HRDC boondoggles, the transitional jobs fund, the $2 billion gun registry and the long history of mismanagement in the regional development agencies. It should have been more surprising to him if the sponsorship program had not been corrupt.

The Prime Minister, in just the last year, has proven that he has a bad memory. He seems to forget important details until reminded by the official opposition or by the media. Let us take, for instance, the Prime Minister's multi-million dollar family business, Canada Steamship Lines.

All the while he was finance minister, CSL was supposedly held in a blind trust. According to the Prime Minister, he was held completely in the dark, but, alas, that was not completely true. The blind trust actually had at least a dozen holes in it.

The Prime Minister has finally admitted that he did have briefings on at least a dozen occasions by company executives on important issues affecting CSL. However the ethics counsellor was always present so that everything was okay, so much so that the ethics councillor charged the government purse for lunch expenses for his meetings with the Prime Minister and his staff.

His family business received contracts worth $161 million from the government instead of the original figure indicated of $137,000.

Last fall it was revealed that five Liberal cabinet ministers had received free flights or vacations from Canada's corporate elite. The former finance minister, however, remained quiet at that time. It was only later, after his objective of being elected Liberal leader was accomplished, did he come clean and admit that he too had benefited from the generosity of corporate Canada.

When asked about the rule that ministers have to publicly declare gifts valued at more than $200, the soon to be Prime Minister replied that everyone else was breaking the rules too. He was hiding behind everyone else. On that day the Prime Minister proved that while he may be a political leader, he certainly was not a moral leader.

While other parties receive significant donations from everyday Canadians, the Liberals have always relied upon the generous support of the corporate elite, usually the same corporations that receive lucrative government contracts.

Let me give one example. Over the course of four years, Geratec Inc., which later became Tecsult Inc., received $136 million worth of contracts from CIDA. However, in return, it gave $137,000 to the Liberal government.

I would like to say to the Prime Minister that whether it is $12 million of funds raised for his campaign from the same business elite who might at one time be looking forward to getting some benefit from the Prime Minister, or whether it is the tax havens where the Prime Minister's family's company has registered the ships, it raises difficult questions.

Since coming to power in 1993, the Liberals have been actively eroding the confidence Canadians have in their government. Noted Canadian historian, the author of Right Honourable Men: The Descent of Canadian Politics from Macdonald to Mulroney , Michael Bliss, refers to the latest sponsorship scandal as the mother of all Canadian political scandals.

Michael Bliss goes on to write that it is without precedent in our country's history and that the previous scandals pale by comparison.

[Rob Merrifield, Canadian Alliance, Yellowhead, AB]

Madam Speaker, I listened intently to my colleague's comments with regard to this scandal. We have to ask ourselves why Canadians are having such a difficult time with this?

It drives right to the character of an individual when we review some of the things that have come to light in the last couple of weeks. There is the $137,000 compared to $160 million. That was not a loan guarantee for the shipping company of the Prime Minister. This was an actual grant.

This was knowledge long before it came to light here two weeks ago. We have to ask ourselves why the character of an individual, who has tried to say he is Mr. Clean to a nation, would not have come forward a year ago? We have to ask ourselves if this drive to the character of an individual. When he took the reins as the Prime Minister of the country and knew about the scandal long before, why did he not come clean with it on December 12 or 13. All he did was cancel the program. He did not go after heads. He did not go after the money that was lost, if he was aware of the scandal.

Driving to the character of the individual, how Canadians can look at him as being believable, when he goes from coast to coast this week and says that he is Mr. Clean and that knew nothing about the scandal?

Canadians have to also question what the Prime Minister said with regard to health care and education. He has said that these are his number one and number two priorities. However, when we look at his history, he is the individual who took $25 billion from health care in the last decade, leaving it wanting and weightless. We now have a shortage of over a million doctors and nurses at a critical time. When he says that health is the number one priority and when we look at the history of the individual, is he believable? Health care is Canada's number one treasure.

Could my colleague comment on whether this gives us a pattern of a character flaw?

[Gurmant Grewal, Canadian Alliance, Surrey Central, BC]

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the question from my hon. colleague. He always asks very intelligent questions.

In this situation, with the former finance minister, now the current Prime Minister, we see a pattern. Look at how Canadians have valued the finance minister. Some people used to say that he balanced the budget and gave him credit for that.

However, let us see how he balanced the budget. He stole $45 million from the EI fund, which did not belong to him or his government, and put it into the government revenues. This money belonged to the employers and employees.

If we look at a different example, the Prime Minister once promised to eliminate all tax havens. When he acted on that promise, he conveniently forgot to include Barbados, which permitted CSL to register its ships there and save, by one estimate, about $103 million in Canadian taxes. Convenient indeed. Meanwhile, the Prime Minister's companies received millions of dollars from the government in contracts.

There are many examples that can be related to the pattern that has developed where the former finance minister, now the Prime Minister, has demonstrated that his character, his personality, his thinking, his actions and his talk do not match the ethical leader to which Canadians were looking forward.

I am sure Canadians will be careful not to vote for a corrupt, weak and arrogant Liberal government and its leader.

[Bob Mills, Canadian Alliance, Red Deer, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I have two things. First, we talk about this balancing of the budget. Actually, we are $32 billion deeper in debt than we were in 1993 when we first came here.

Second, what does the member think about public hearings. Look at the record of Somalia, and a private going to jail. Look at the Krever report, and the Red Cross being condemned. APEC sort of disappeared into the wilderness. What are the chances of this present scandal ever nailing anyone who is responsible? It seems to me that there will be just a bunch of whited out pages, and all ministers simply will not testify.

[Gurmant Grewal, Canadian Alliance, Surrey Central, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I think sometimes it is the government's intent to fool Canadians by diverting their attention into something which will not produce anything, or trying to shove everything under the carpet for the time being, under an excuse, so it can hide and not answer the tough questions that the opposition and media are going to ask it.

I agree with the member that the previous record of the Liberal government on the Krever, Somalia, APEC and many other inquiries indicates that the government is not serious about it.

If the Prime Minister were serious about it, he would have done something right away and would have taken some serious action.

Business of the House

[Roger Gallaway, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I rise to report that there have been consultations among the parties and I think you would find unanimous consent for the following motion. I move:

That the Standing Orders and any relevant items on the Order Paper be amended by changing all references to the “Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights” to “Standing Committee on Justice, Human Rights, Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness” and references to the “Standing Committee on Human Resources Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities” to “Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills Development, Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities”.

[The Deputy Speaker]

Does the hon. parliamentary secretary have the consent of the House to propose the motion?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Deputy Speaker]

The House has heard the terms of the motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?