Debates of Oct. 19th, 2005

Justice

[Stephen Harper, Conservative, Calgary Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, talk about a bunch of people who just do not get it. Yesterday the Vancouver Board of Trade said that crime is so bad in Vancouver it is doing damage to the economy of the city. Vancouver Police Chief Graham says federal laws allow thieves to reoffend and they get bail again and again and again.

When is the government, after 12 years—

[The Speaker]

The hon. Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada.

[Irwin Cotler, Liberal, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, the opposition does not take note of the fact that we have some of the most stringent penalties in the world right now. We have given notice both with regard to the reform of the conditional sentencing regime and with respect to the inquiry now with regard to bail review reform under the federal-provincial-territorial conference.

Child Care

[Stephen Harper, Conservative, Calgary Southwest, AB]

Mr. Speaker, it is very difficult to take that seriously.

On a different topic, it is clear that the federal government intends to impose its conditions on Quebec with respect to the child care program.

Yesterday, Quebec's Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs stated that “The use of the federal spending power is a threat. The fiscal imbalance is a threat. And now, there is a third threat: the concept of national interest”.

In support of the true national interest, will the Prime Minister respect Quebec's jurisdiction over child care, no strings attached?

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

Mr. Speaker, in the national interest, we will work together with all the provinces for the well-being of our children in this country.

[Stephen Harper, Conservative, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, it was the Prime Minister himself who said that the child care program in Quebec was a success story. Now, it is time the federal government respected Quebec's areas of jurisdiction.

Corruption in this federal government has already sullied the reputation of federalism in Quebec. Still, this government is seeking confrontation with the Government of Quebec in areas of provincial jurisdiction.

Does the Prime Minister realize that this bad habit is a threat to national unity?

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

Mr. Speaker, if the Leader of the Opposition, who is supposed to be a responsible leader in this country, is going to use the word “corruption” in connection with just about anything, even a national child care initiative, then he is not fulfilling his duties properly. That is what I believe.

It is totally irresponsible to make a connection between this initiative and what is being done in terms of child care in Quebec. The Prime Minister said that it was an innovative model, which is an inspiration for the other provinces, and we are going to respect exactly what Quebec does.

Intergovernmental Affairs

[Gilles Duceppe, Bloc, Laurier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, Quebec's intergovernmental affairs minister and the Prime Minister hold completely different views of Ottawa-Quebec relations. The Quebec minister feels that the Liberal government's attitude is a threat to Quebec's jurisdiction. He has, moreover, given four examples of this threat: fiscal imbalance, federal spending power, the new concept of national interest and Quebec's place on the international scene.

How can the Prime Minister explain that the opinion of the minister, Mr. Pelletier, Liberal though he may be, differs completely from his, as far as Ottawa-Quebec relations are concerned?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, let us look at the agreements signed with Quebec, 45 of them this year alone. They show how well federalism is working. Last year, there were 67 agreements signed between Quebec and the Government of Canada. That is further proof of how well we are able to work together.

All I ask of the leader and chief of staff of the Bloc Québécois is that he have a proper look at what we are doing. He ought to then realize that Canada and the Government of Quebec are in—

[The Speaker]

The hon. member for Laurier—Sainte-Marie.

[Gilles Duceppe, Bloc, Laurier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I will quote the words of Quebec's minister of intergovernmental affairs, Mr. Pelletier, a Liberal, on this new federal doctrine. He said, “the national interest must not be confused with the federal interest”.

When the Prime Minister uses the national interest as his reason for interfering with child care, does he not realize he is doing exactly what the Quebec minister is faulting him for: confusing national interest with that of the Liberal government?

Those are not my words, but the words of a good Quebec federalist.

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

Mr. Speaker, the very existence of the Bloc Québécois is the worst threat to national unity. First and foremost—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Speaker]

Order please. The hon. Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs.

[Lucienne Robillard, Liberal, Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC]

What is more, Mr. Speaker, as far as I know, the Bloc certainly does not speak for the federalist government in Quebec.

That said, this is not the first time the federal government has been involved with issues relating to children. In 1998, when everyone was offered the child tax benefit—in the days of a PQ government in Quebec—we did not hear any protests from the Bloc. It is quite natural then—

[The Speaker]

The hon. member for Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier.

[Guy Côté, Bloc, Portneuf, QC]

Mr. Speaker, Minister Pelletier added that, “[indeed] we should be concerned about what we are hearing from Ottawa these days. It is as if the Government of Canada was going to define the major Canadian thrusts alone, while the provinces are going to implement them”.

Will the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs continue to maintain that these comments are a figment of the Bloc Québécois' imagination, when in fact they were made by a federalist Liberal minister in Quebec?

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

Mr. Speaker, I will continue the dialogue with my Quebec counterpart, but never with the Bloc Québécois, which does not want things to work in Canada. That is very different.

The Prime Minister of Canada and the Minister of Social Development have always said that this would be done in the respect of provincial jurisdictions. That is what we will do.

[Guy Côté, Bloc, Portneuf, QC]

Mr. Speaker, they do not even know what respecting jurisdictions is about. The minister may give a list of all the agreements concluded in the past, but the opposite is happening on the child care issue, for example. Minister Pelletier said that “the statements made in recent days—by the Prime Minister of Canada, [the Minister of Foreign Affairs], [the Minister of Transport]—suggest to him that they are in the process of shutting the door”.

How can the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs claim that things are just fine as regards the child care issue, when the other party involved in the negotiations says the opposite? The minister should get serious here.

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

Mr. Speaker, the door is wide open to the federalist government in Quebec, but not to the Bloc Québécois. That is very clear. This is why, over the past year, we have signed a number of agreements on health, older workers, the homeless, the New Horizons Program for the elderly, agriculture and the environment. We will continue to do so in the child care sector.

Lobbyists

[Jack Layton, NDP, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister. Today we learned that more well connected Liberals think that the rules just do not apply to them. Let me remind everyone that this is taking place on the Prime Minister's watch, or worse, in the case of Liberal candidate Richard Mahoney, it is taking place in the Prime Minister's official residence.

Mr. Mahoney broke the corporate lobbying laws. It is the latest in a long line of transgressions and questionable lobbying practices.

When is the cozy world of corporate lobbying going to be cleaned up by this Prime Minister?

[David Emerson, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, I think the hon. member knows that the Registrar of Lobbyists does operate independently. If there is a violation of the Lobbyists Registration Act, that will be investigated by the Registrar who is aware of all these situations.

It is about time those members focused on public policy instead of hurling more dirt at people for which they do not have any evidence.

Government Contracts

[Jack Layton, NDP, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

Mr. Speaker, Richard Mahoney is in trouble when the Prime Minister stands up for David Dingwall but on this issue remains silent.

Let me turn to another contract, this contract awarded on a sole source basis to a firm that used to be owned by a Liberal member of Parliament, the member for Pontiac, now owned by his wife and family. This is the latest in a long line of this kind of transgression.

When is the Prime Minister going to get to the bottom of these kinds of issues and clean up cronyism and corporate lobbying in the country?

[Tony Valeri, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Pontiac denies any wrongdoing on his part, but has written to the Ethics Commissioner to ask him to look into this matter. I hope the member opposite waits for a response from the Ethics Commissioner before commenting on this issue in the House again.

Correctional Service Canada

[Peter MacKay, Conservative, Central Nova, NS]

Mr. Speaker, shockingly the Liberal government is allowing prisoners to use the Access to Information Act to obtain information about prison security systems and the personal details of the guards.

Recently, a partial list of Correctional Service employees in Quebec was released to a prisoner and one guard was distraught to learn that a prisoner was attempting to get her name, rank, qualifications and where she previously worked. Guards have a legitimate concern, in particular, that prisoners may gain access to their addresses.

Why is the government making it easier for prisoners to get sensitive information about the guards that could endanger these officers and the Canadian public?