Debates of Nov. 16th, 2005

Sponsorship Program

[Peter MacKay, Conservative, Central Nova, NS]

Mr. Speaker, in reference to ad scam the Prime Minister said, “The problem did not lay with the concept of the sponsorship program”. That concept, according to cabinet material examined by Justice Gomery included, “strengthening of the organization of the Liberal Party of Canada in Quebec”.

The Prime Minister, as finance minister, sat in the cabinet that discussed the creation of the program. He sat as vice-president of the Treasury Board that reviewed the audits of the program. In his leadership lust, he took over the machinery of the Liberal Party.

Does the Prime Minister now realize that Canadians do not believe his ongoing claim that he knew nothing of the wrongdoings in the Liberal Party's sponsorship program?

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

Mr. Speaker, this is what Justice Gomery said in his report:

[The Prime Minister], whose role as Finance Minister did not involve him in the supervision of spending by the PMO or PWGSC, is entitled, like other Ministers in the Quebec caucus, to be exonerated from any blame for carelessness or misconduct.

That is exactly what Justice Gomery said. After hearing from 172 witnesses and after his commission reviewed 28 million pages of documents, Justice Gomery exonerated the Prime Minister completely.

[Peter MacKay, Conservative, Central Nova, NS]

Mr. Speaker, that is another non-answer from one of the turncoat, twin towers of virtue on the Prime Minister's ad scam defence team.

Mr. Chrétien said he was told by the Treasury Board members that there were no problems with the program. The current Prime Minister, as Treasury Board vice-president, would have to sign off on that response. In reference to the Prime Minister's knowledge, Mr. Chrétien said, “He was aware like I was aware”.

Was Mr. Chrétien correct in his assertion that the current Prime Minister was “aware like I was aware”, or does he need more proof of the truth to be proven?

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

Mr. Speaker, for most reasonable Canadians Justice Gomery represents the truth.

Beyond that, the hon. member and I were once both members of a moderate, progressive and centrist party that believed in bilingualism, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and multiculturalism. I still am and he is not.

[Gilles Duceppe, Bloc, Laurier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, Michel Béliveau, the former director of the Liberal Party banned for distributing envelopes of dirty money from the sponsorship scandal told the Gomery commission that he had paid off the $8,000 debt accumulated by the candidate in the riding of Louis-Hébert in the 1997 election. The Liberal candidate in Louis-Hébert in the 2004 election received $5,000 from the president of Norbourg, who swindled thousands of small investors.

How can the Prime Minister claim that the sponsorship scandal file is closed and that things have been cleaned up when a number of allegations regarding the Liberal Party remain unanswered?

[Jean Lapierre, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, I wonder whether the leader of the Bloc Québécois is trying to develop new muckraking activities. He is making allegations not corroborated in Justice Gomery's report. I know that the Bloc Québécois leader is not satisfied with the judge's conclusions, but his remarks are nothing but muckraking and untruths. He should be more responsible.

[Gilles Duceppe, Bloc, Laurier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Gomery commission revealed that Mr. Béliveau had paid the $8,000 and that Marc-Yvan Côté had been banned for unlawful action. I imagine that if he gave the money to someone, it is quite likely someone received it. That is basic logic.

If someone is to be banished for doling out dirty money, do the members of the government not have a duty to say who got the money? By doing so, they would shed light on this scandal. This activity is not entirely above board, but it took place.

[Jean Lapierre, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, the Bloc Québécois leader has a habit of trying to tarnish people's reputation and making insinuations without providing any proof or naming names. He has tried to cast doubt on a lot of people. This is the old Bloc Québécois style, their old sullying tricks. People have, however, seen through it, because the Gomery report contradicted the Bloc on all points. They should have learned.

[Michel Guimond, Bloc, Charlevoix—Montmorency, QC]

Mr. Speaker, we will submit a concrete case to the Minister of Transport. According to the Liberal candidate in Lévis, the Liberal Party of Canada was not as generous to her in 1997 because she refused, in her own words, “to play dirty politics”. She added “I have always been told I was too honest to be a politician”.

Marc-Yvan Côté was expelled from the Liberal Party of Canada for having given tainted money to 18 ridings in eastern Quebec, and in these 10 or so candidates received money personally.

Since the Prime Minister refuses to name the candidates who received the tainted money, he might find it easier to—

[The Speaker]

The hon. Minister of Transport.

[Jean Lapierre, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, here we go again. Justice Gomery has examined the entire situation and every red cent of the money has been paid back to the government by the Liberal Party of Canada. The Gomery report provides certain conclusions. The Bloc Québécois members are not satisfied with those conclusions, so they want to invent some scandals and continue their character assassination based on facts that are not true.

[Michel Guimond, Bloc, Charlevoix—Montmorency, QC]

Mr. Speaker, if the minister believes that the $120,000 of Marc-Yvan Côté's dirty money has been reimbursed, that means certain people received that money. Who did and who did not receive it?

[Jean Lapierre, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, it is not our role to do the job of the police. I am sure that the member, not being satisfied with Justice Gomery's work, will not be satisfied with the role of the police either. Yet the RCMP has the entire Gomery report in its possession, and can have access to all documents and all witnesses. I have far more faith in the police than in the Bloc Québécois.

Parliament of Canada

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

Mr. Speaker, all week we have been listening to Liberals say that they could not adopt the reasonable compromise that is before Parliament that could get things done and launch the election in January. However, yesterday the Deputy Prime Minister indicated that there was absolutely nothing to stop the Prime Minister from agreeing to this proposal. It is not a question of whether the Liberals cannot agree to the proposal, it is a question of whether they will. They simply will not.

Here is the question. Why is it that this leader is the only leader in the House that will not compromise?

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

Mr. Speaker, once again the opposition is suggesting that it should be able to vote non-confidence in the government today and have the consequences some time in January.

Opposition members have asked this question over and over again. I think the reason they are asking this question over and over again is because the leader of the NDP is fearful of the fact that so many people have said there was absolutely nothing wrong with having an election as indicated by the Prime Minister in his commitment to Canadians. Today he is attempting to backtrack and is afraid to accept the fact that either we have confidence or we do not. If we do not, have the courage to put something forward.

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

Mr. Speaker, that can only be described as childish bullying tactics. It really is.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Speaker]

Order, please. The hon. member for Toronto—Danforth will want to proceed with his next question.

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

Mr. Speaker, what people have just seen is really quite childish. It is a bullying approach.

It does not make sense to Canadians because they do not buy the idea that a party that received 37% of the vote deserves 100% of the control all the time. They want to see a compromise, so that the things they would like to see done can get done.

Why will this party not compromise in the interest of Canada?

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

Mr. Speaker, I know the hon. member has just recently come to this place and he is certainly welcome by all other members, but the hon. member should understand that we are in fact in a parliamentary democracy that operates on a principle that a government must have the confidence of Parliament.

If the hon. member wants to in fact demonstrate that he does not have the confidence in the government, then what is required is a motion of non-confidence on the floor of the House of Commons. Confidence is like an on-off switch. One either has it or one does not. If there is a suggestion we do not, then put the motion forward.

Keeseekoose First Nation

[Jim Prentice, Conservative, Calgary North Centre, AB]

Mr. Speaker, on Monday the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development was questioned about the Keeseekoose education trust account of $600,000, which has now been stolen. At the time, he said that the allegations were ridiculous. By Tuesday, according to the minister, those ridiculous allegations had become serious financial irregularities with the RCMP involved and, in addition, criminal charges being laid. The minister is having some difficulty getting his story straight.

We know that his department has audit documents about the theft. He is refusing to produce them. Is he trying to protect the former chief, the former Liberal candidate?

[Andy Scott, Liberal, Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development and Federal Interlocutor for Métis and Non-Status Indians]

Mr. Speaker, whether the Conservatives like it or not, first nations governments take matters of accountability very seriously. That is exactly what we have seen in this case. Where irregularities were found, the police were informed and charges were laid. What we see from the other side shows once again that these Conservatives will do anything to discredit first nations, their leadership and their members.

[Jim Prentice, Conservative, Calgary North Centre, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the chief at the time of the theft was the Liberal candidate, but in fairness, I am not surprised that the minister is confused. It is difficult for all Canadians to actually keep a clear picture of which Liberals are under RCMP investigation and which are not, which have been convicted and which have not, and which have been banned from the party for life and which have not.

Would the government consider establishing a sort of Liberal offender registry, a criminal registry that the public could consult from time to time and which the minister could use?

[Andy Scott, Liberal, Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development and Federal Interlocutor for Métis and Non-Status Indians]

Mr. Speaker, I said it before and I will say it again--

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!