Debates of April 5th, 2005

Sponsorship Program

[Stephen Harper, Conservative, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, let us be absolutely clear. The RCMP has been called in. If the Liberal Party is involved in criminal activity, it will be charged. Will the Prime Minister say it?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, the statement that was made by Mr. Mitchell is that the Liberal Party has been defrauded and that the RCMP has been called in to determine if the Liberal Party was the target of fraud.

It makes no sense for the Leader of the Opposition to stand up in the House and misquote what Mr. Mitchell or anyone else said.

The fact is that the hon. member ought to know it. No one in this country is above the law. The RCMP or any other police force will make the charges as they see fit. That is the essence of our system.

Passports

[Peter MacKay, Conservative, Central Nova, NS]

Mr. Speaker, we know that the government is not very good at securing people's money. Apparently it cannot secure passports either.

The Auditor General said that the government is not currently meeting security expectations for the issuing of passports. There is inadequate checking of passport guarantors, no electronic links to databases including bureaus of vital statistics for crime watch lists, and critical areas of passport offices are wide open. No wonder some are calling Canada's passports a terrorist dream document.

The Auditor General previously criticized the government for its handling of passports, for failing to track more than 25,000 that were lost last year.

Given the security concerns in a post 9/11 world, when is the government going to start treating--

[The Speaker]

The hon. Minister of Foreign Affairs.

[Pierre Pettigrew, Liberal, Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, I am very happy that the opposition has asked this question. What the member did not say is that the Auditor General has also said that they have not found one single example of a passport that had been given to someone who should not have had it, not one single example.

The Auditor General has brought to our attention a number of difficulties and challenges that other countries meet as well. She has acknowledged that she has worked with Passport Canada. Passport Canada has started to work on some of these issues and all other issues are being resolved right now.

[Peter MacKay, Conservative, Central Nova, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I am glad to hear they are wrapping their arms around the Auditor General who accuses them of breaking every rule in the book.

The Auditor General today revealed that the watch lists used by the passport office are so deficient they are of limited use. Just a fraction of the people on the CPIC wanted or probation violations list are on those lists so officials cannot automatically check this or cross-reference the information. In essence it means that the Canadian passport office has been issuing passports to criminals or parolees.

Why is the security of the Canadian passport system and Canada's international reputation being so sullied by the government? Why does it refuse to--

[The Speaker]

The hon. Minister of Foreign Affairs.

[Pierre Pettigrew, Liberal, Minister of Foreign Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, in March, Passport Canada signed a memorandum of understanding with Correctional Service Canada which directly addresses the concern that was raised in the Auditor General's report.

While examiners have already checked watch lists, the MOU means they have instant electronic access to the names of individuals who are either incarcerated or on parole who may not be eligible for a passport. This has been the case for the past month and that has been acknowledged by the Auditor General as well.

Sponsorship Program

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, when he established the Gomery inquiry, the Prime Minister himself stated that there was political involvement in the sponsorship scandal.

Today, in an attempt to distance himself from the past, he speaks of a parallel group, which supposedly directed the sponsorships. This is my question for the Prime Minister. Does he mean that the political direction behind the sponsorships came from a parallel group within the Liberal Party itself?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I would remind the hon. member that this government, this Prime Minister, called for the inquiry that is now being carried out by Justice Gomery. We did so because we want answers, and because Canadians deserve answers.

Now the member is asking questions. His own leader has said that we want to have complete answers, which is why we need to wait for Justice Gomery's findings.

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the fact is that the Prime Minister is doing everything he can to dissociate the Liberal Party from the sponsorship scandal. To accomplish this, he is trying to tell us that the Liberal Party has nothing to do with it, and is a victim. Yet the Liberal Party is at the very heart of the sponsorship gimmick, and we all know that.

How can the Prime Minister justify the fact that, the day after Jean Chrétien testified before the Gomery inquiry, he welcomed him to caucus where he was given a hero's ovation? If he wants to distance himself from all this, why did he find Jean Chrétien so admirable the day after his testimony?

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

Mr. Speaker, the Bloc wants to blacken the reputation of all Quebec federalists. We all know its agenda: federalism must not succeed.

The Conservatives ought not to support the Bloc's goal of destroying Canada. The Prime Minister supports Justice Gomery, and we need to wait for his report.

[Benoît Sauvageau, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the real victims of the sponsorship scandal are not the Liberals but the taxpayers.

On behalf of the taxpayers, victims of the sponsorships, I ask the Liberal government why it does not immediately set up a trust fund for the dirty money the Liberals received as part of the sponsorship scandal?

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

Mr. Speaker, the party has been clear. We are going to defend the taxpayers. We are going to defend the Quebec federalists. Our government is suing agencies and individuals to recover this money. The party has been clear: if it has received inappropriate funds, it will reimburse the taxpayers.

[Benoît Sauvageau, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Mr. Speaker, they must not wait for the end of the Gomery inquiry to put the dirty money in trust; it must be done now.

Since the names of some of the people involved are already known, and some of the money involved has been identified, and we know that the gangrene has spread to the highest levels of the Liberal Party, how can the government pretend to be a victim of sponsorships, when it refuses to take the dirty money out of its coffers?

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

Mr. Speaker, I repeat: if the party has received money from agencies or individuals who are found guilty, the party will voluntarily reimburse the taxpayers.

Canada-U.S. Relations

[Kevin Sorenson, Conservative, Crowfoot, AB]

Mr. Speaker, according to today's Auditor General's report, the passport office is a mess. This observation falls on the heels of today's news that the Bush administration is set to impose increased security screening for Canadians. Because of the government's failure to take security seriously, rules are about to change prohibiting Canadians from entering the U.S. without a passport.

Has there been any attempt on the minister's part to convince the United States that a passport or some form of biometric identifier is unnecessary and extremely detrimental to trade and tourism between the two--

[The Speaker]

The hon. Deputy Prime Minister.

[Anne McLellan, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness]

Mr. Speaker, we have been working on this matter with our counterparts in the United States.

First, the hon. member needs to understand that the actual measure that is being put in place by the Department of Homeland Security is primarily in relation to citizens of the United States of America. In the 9/11 commission deep concern was expressed that Americans re-entered or entered the United States of America with a variety of identity documents. The recommendation was made that for American citizens a passport or some other secure document be--

[The Speaker]

The hon. member for Crowfoot.

[Kevin Sorenson, Conservative, Crowfoot, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Public Safety cannot convince her U.S. counterpart that some form of border crossing card is not necessary because she cannot convince him that the security of this country is adequate, especially given the Auditor General's report today.

If the Minister of Public Safety cannot convince the U.S. that passports or border crossing cards are not necessary, how will the government ensure that by December 2006 all Canadians will have the necessary ID to travel to and from the United States?

[Anne McLellan, Liberal, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness]

Mr. Speaker, let me go back again and explain. The measure that was passed by Congress at the end of December last year is primarily directed at the citizens of the United States of America.

If the hon. member is suggesting that somehow we should be treated better than America's own citizens, then he lives in some bizarre world. In fact we are the only country on earth that is treated like the citizens of the United States because of the special relationship we have with them.

Foreign Affairs

[Stockwell Day, Conservative, Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Leader of the Opposition asked the Prime Minister a very clear question related to the torture and murder of Zahra Kazemi. The Prime Minister shocked everybody by not even addressing the issue about Zahra Kazemi but instead focused on the Liberal financial scandals.

If he can stay focused long enough, will he just tell us when he found out the details about the torture and murder of Zahra Kazemi? Why did he respond so weakly by sending our ambassador back to Iran instead of pulling our ambassador out?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, the question from the hon. member is actually quite disturbing. The fact is that the government was asked to keep this matter as secret as possible. The possibility of a doctor's life being in danger was uppermost in the government's mind. We wanted to make sure that we could get him here to a safe haven.

What is disturbing about this is that the hon. member knows about this and knows the answer to the question. I find it incredulous that the hon. member would stand in the House and ask that question.

[Stockwell Day, Conservative, Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC]

Mr. Speaker, what is incredible is that the Prime Minister could not answer this question yesterday and still cannot answer it today.

Stephen Hachemi, Zahra Kazemi's son, will have to live his entire life with the harsh reality that his mother was brutally tortured and killed by the Iranian regime. And we will have to live with the harsh reality of a vague and unacceptable response by the federal government to this tragedy.

When does this government intend to apologize to Stephen Hachemi and recall our ambassador until such time as our demands are met? When?