Debates of March 22nd, 2005

Sponsorship Program

[Diane Ablonczy, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Mr. Speaker, day by day the Gomery inquiry reveals a crooked trail of money from the sponsorship program to ad firms to the Liberal Party. Last week a Liberal organizer close to the Prime Minister confessed that he helped funnel thousands from Groupaction to the Liberal Party.

In 2002, Jean Chrétien admitted that a few million “might have been stolen”, yet this government will not admit what is happening. Why are Canadians being treated like sheep to be fleeced for the convenience of the Liberal Party?

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

Mr. Speaker, the Liberal Party has been clear--

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Speaker]

I am sure the minister appreciates the accolades but we have to be able to hear his answer. The Minister of Public Works has the floor.

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I can understand why the opposition feels sheepish about the hon. member's questions today, but the fact is that the Liberal Party has been absolutely clear on this, that any funds that were inappropriately received will be returned to Canadian taxpayers. But the Liberal Party cannot keep that promise until we have all the facts and until Justice Gomery has completed his work.

It is a promise made and it will be a promise kept. I guarantee it.

[Diane Ablonczy, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Nonsense, Mr. Speaker. These shameless Liberals even used the Business Development Bank in what a close Chrétien aide admitted was a money laundering operation.

Liberal ministers talk openly of possible tainted money, dirty money and ill-gotten gains. One top Liberal organizer alone gained $5 million from the sponsorship program. With all the evidence of cronyism and corruption, why would Canadians not believe the whole sponsorship program was mainly a scheme designed to filter tax money into Liberal Party coffers?

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

Mr. Speaker, once again the Liberal Party has been absolutely clear that any funds that were inappropriately received will be returned to Canadian taxpayers once Justice Gomery has completed his report.

What is really shameless, and it is reported today in the Edmonton Journal , is that the member for Calgary—Nose Hill was not so blunt outside of the Commons following question period. She declined under persistent questioning from journalists to repeat the allegations outside of the cloak of immunity provided by the Commons. That is directly from the Edmonton Journal today.

The hon. member should read the Edmonton Journal . She should be ashamed that she used her parliamentary privilege and said things in the House, made allegations she will not make--

[The Speaker]

The hon. member for Laurier—Sainte-Marie.

[Gilles Duceppe, Bloc, Laurier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, with regard to the Liberal Party's dirty money, even the Minister of Transport's latest defence no longer holds. When Jean Lafleur got his first contracts in 1996, Alfonso Gagliano's office and Quebec Liberal Party organizer Benoît Corbeil immediately invited him to “help with the funding”, which he did and forced his employees to do, so there is clearly a causal link.

Given the evidence, what are the Prime Minister and the government waiting for before demanding that the Liberal Party pay back this dirty money?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, the government has been extremely clear since the start. If some money came from inappropriate sources or if some tainted money was received, it will be repaid.

[Gilles Duceppe, Bloc, Laurier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, this Prime Minister has just asked companies to repay $40 million for work that was never done. What else does he need, when we know that these same companies gave money to the Liberal Party? He has to act like a prime minister not a leader of the Liberal Party.

It has been established that donations to Lafleur Communications, cheques to Liberal organizers and payments against Jacques Corriveau's debt came from the public purse.

Given this, I am asking him again—and this is extremely clear—how can he, today, not demand that the Liberal Party pay back this dirty money?

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

Mr. Speaker, civil suits have already been filed to recover these funds, but we are still awaiting the decision of the courts and the report by Justice Gomery. So, it is reasonable to expect that the Liberal Party will take action, but only once we have all the facts.

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

Mr. Speaker, this is a minority government, and a general election could be called at any time.

Will the government admit that it must take immediate action to recover sponsorship funds from the Liberal Party? Otherwise there might be a fourth election campaign during which the Liberal Party would campaign on dirty money, after 1997, 2000, 2004 and perhaps 2005.

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

Mr. Speaker, the party has been clear.

If there were funds received inappropriately, those funds will be returned to the Canadian taxpayers. That is a promise made that will be a promise kept. However, we need to have all the facts to behave appropriately and we need to have all the facts to act. That is why we are waiting for Justice Gomery to complete his work.

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

Mr. Speaker, on March 3, 2004, the Minister of Transport stated, just before the last election campaign, and I quote, “We have no intention of campaigning with tainted money”.

Will the government admit that if it does not immediately seek to recover the sponsorship funds paid to the Liberal Party, the latter will run a fourth election campaign with dirty money? This is totally unacceptable.

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

Mr. Speaker, again, yes, the transport minister has been clear, yes, the Prime Minister has been clear and the party has been clear that if there were funds that were inappropriately received, those funds will be returned to the Canadian taxpayers. However, the party cannot act in that regard until we have all the facts. That is why it is so important that we have those facts and we wait for Justice Gomery to submit his report.

Meeting of North American Leaders

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

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister.

In the last election the Liberals did not tell Canadians they would be seeking more integration with the United States. That was kept from them. Now what we see is the economic agenda of the Liberal Party beginning to emerge, its fortress George Bush bolstered by cheap Mexican labour and lots and lots of Canadian oil turned on and off whenever George Bush wants to turn on or off the tap.

Can the Prime Minister tell us why he will be pursuing an agenda of deeper integration with the U.S. sacrificing Canadian sovereignty? Why is he pursuing this hidden agenda without telling Canadians about it?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I am not quite sure what Alice in Wonderland book the leader of the NDP has been reading, but I will tell members what we will be pursuing. We will be pursuing an agenda that would provide greater security for Canadians and for Americans and indeed for Mexicans. We will be proceeding on an agenda for greater economic prosperity for our three countries. We will be proceeding on an agenda for greater quality of life, for better environmental control.

If the leader of the NDP finds that security, prosperity and a higher quality of life is an agenda that he cannot accept, we have known that for a long time.

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

Mr. Speaker, I can tell the Prime Minister what we have been reading. We have been reading headlines about Canadian jobs leaving this country and going to other countries with the full support of the government. That is no big surprise. When the Prime Minister owned CSL he was shipping Canadian jobs abroad when ships could have been built here in Canada.

I come right back to the question, why is the Prime Minister pursuing the Wal-Mart plan: ship any job anywhere to the lowest economic denominator and tear up any environmental standard?

Why are these items going to be discussed with the President of the United States and the President of Mexico?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, if we take a look at the record that Canada has had, we are the only G-7 country that is currently in a surplus. We have had an incredible increase in the standard of living of Canadians.

The hon. member talks about jobs. The fact is that we have had some of the highest job creation Canada has ever had in any decade, and certainly greater than most other G-7 countries, all as a result of the policies of this government.

What I would suggest the hon. member ought to do is to stop reading just the headlines and he might start reading the articles.

Sponsorship Program

[James Moore, Conservative, Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the Gomery commission has revealed that the real purpose of the sponsorship program was to line the pockets of the Liberal Party and its friends with our tax money.

If the testimony at the Gomery commission is enough to proceed against the advertising agencies, why then is the Liberal government not also proceeding against the Liberal Party in order to get our money back?

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

Mr. Speaker, there is no need to proceed against the Liberal Party, because it has clearly indicated that it would voluntarily return the funds if it is found that they were inappropriately managed.

The fact is that we have commenced action against 19 individuals and firms for $41 million. That action has been commenced, but there is no verdict, nor is there a report from Judge Gomery. Until we have the report from Judge Gomery, we will not have the evidence to move forward to pursue any other action. The Liberal Party has been clear that any funds will be returned to the Canadian public.

[James Moore, Conservative, Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC]

Mr. Speaker, here is what the transport minister said: “If somebody had to pay a certain amount to the Liberal Party to get contracts, I think that money should be reimbursed”.

Lafleur Communications and PR firms Splash and Commando have admitted to making contributions to the Liberal Party to get contracts. Guilt has been admitted. Cash changed hands. Why will the Liberal Party not give back this dirty money and apologize to taxpayers?

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

Mr. Speaker, once again the Liberal Party has been absolutely clear that any funds which were received in a way that would be inappropriate will be returned to the Canadian taxpayer. We have been absolutely clear as a government that we are going to get to the bottom of this issue and that is exactly what we are doing.

The Prime Minister, by establishing Justice Gomery to do his work, by pursuing the action we have to recover funds, by ensuring that we take this issue seriously, we are demonstrating respect for the Canadian taxpayer. We are walking the walk over here. They are merely talking the talk.

[Rahim Jaffer, Conservative, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Mr. Speaker, acting as a front man to redirect campaign contributions is illegal. It is called collusion. When the money goes from Groupaction to Splash to Commando to the Liberal Party, through Brault, Desjeans and Thiboutot on the way, is that clear enough for the Minister of Transport?

Will the government finally apply the remedy it used for the ad agencies, and take legal action against the Liberal Party?