Debates of May 30th, 2005

Member for Newton—North Delta

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

Mr. Speaker, it is my understanding with respect to this particular issue that a complaint has been laid and that the Ethics Commissioner himself is currently considering whether he has jurisdiction to entertain such a complaint, and secondly, that any allegation against a member of the House of Commons is to be considered under the conflict of interest code for members of the House of Commons.

The House code is administered by the Ethics Commissioner. I would suggest that the Ethics Commissioner alone will determine if in fact this particular matter falls under and within the jurisdiction of the House code.

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

Mr. Speaker, the chief of staff of the Canadian heritage minister resigned because he was under investigation in the sponsorship scandal. Employees of the premier of Quebec did likewise.

I put the question again to the Prime Minister. How could his chief of staff stay on, when he is under considerable suspicion following the release of this recording?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, once again, in an effort to be more civil, members should not use their immunity in this House to engage in a witch hunt. I repeat once again that no offer was made. That means no offer was made.

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

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister. Our members have reported back to me that there is a real concern among Canadians, and it is certainly what I witnessed myself over the past week, about this taped conversation that went on.

It has placed the entire House under a real cloud. I am calling upon the Prime Minister to explain why he would not, or better yet, announce that he would, initiate an RCMP investigation into these very, very disturbing tapes, the kinds of conversations which take it to the edge of illegality. Will he announce an RCMP investigation now?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, the leader of the NDP knows full well that it is not up to the government to initiate an investigation by the RCMP. The fact is that those tapes are in the possession of a member of this House. One would hope that the member will make those tapes public.

Access to Information

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

Mr. Speaker, we certainly hope that will happen and that an RCMP investigation might accelerate that process.

My next question has to do with transparency in government. There seems to be a mixed record here and in fact quite a sad record. Whether it is the Maher Arar inquiry or whether it is Canadians trying to get information about what goes on in government, as revealed by an extensive study by journalists over this past weekend, there is an opaqueness, a secrecy, a shroud over the activities of the federal government which is unequalled by any other government in this country at any other level.

Will the Prime Minister bring forward legislation, as he has promised, to correct this?

[Reg Alcock, Liberal, President of the Treasury Board and Minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board]

Mr. Speaker, quite to the contrary of the assertion made by the hon. member, this government has engaged in unprecedented openness, not just in the release of normally confidential information but in our practice of disclosure around contracting and appointments; in the information we provide to the House on the work we are doing to make evergreen; and in the paper that is before the committee looking at a new Access to Information Act. This government is moving very quickly and very aggressively on open access.

Sponsorship Program

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

Mr. Speaker, the forensic auditors trying to follow ad scam cash for Gomery have hit serious roadblocks. They could not access key records necessary to follow the money trail, including personal bank accounts, and of course they could not track envelopes of cash. They were also barred from reviewing any records under criminal investigation.

The Prime Minister promised no stone would be left unturned so why these boulders in the pathway to the full truth?

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

Mr. Speaker, the government is cooperating fully. I would draw the hon. member's attention to what Justice Gomery said relative to the Kroll Lindquist report:

I think that the accountants have simply given us the raw data without expressing an opinion....Whether it was for the benefit of the Liberal Party or paid to the Liberal Party, or at the request for the Liberal Party or whatever, that is going to depend upon the other evidence that they have not tried to evaluate.

Justice Gomery realizes, as do Canadians realize, that we will not have all the facts until we have his report.

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

Mr. Speaker, one of the auditors said that part of the problem in following ad scam money was that in most cases the shredders got to the bank records first.

The auditors also revealed that far more money went into the sponsorship program than the Liberals have ever admitted, almost 50% more money than the Auditor General had been able to identify.

How can Canadians get to the truth when so much of it has been covered up?

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

Mr. Speaker, furthermore, Justice Gomery had this to say. He said, “Let me give you comfort here. I have no basis for concluding that the full $1,763,000 ever found its way into the Liberal Party of Canada”. He went on to say that on quite a lot of evidence he was not able to come to any conclusion whatsoever.

Justice Gomery, a learned jurist, realizes he does not have all the facts and has not conducted all his analyses. I think Justice Gomery is probably demonstrating just a little better judgment on this than the member for Calgary--Nose Hill, who thinks she knows everything.

Canada Post

[Brian Pallister, Conservative, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

Mr. Speaker, the case of André Ouellet's missing receipts keeps getting murkier.

The revenue minister is also in charge of Canada Post. André Ouellet testified under oath that he turned his receipts over to Canada Post last December. Four months later, the revenue minister claimed he still did not have the receipts. This can only mean that Canada Post has not handed over the receipts to Revenue Canada. The minister is claiming that his right hand does not know what his left hand is doing.

Could the minister explain why one department he is responsible for is stonewalling the other department he is responsible for?

[John McCallum, Liberal, Minister of National Revenue]

Mr. Speaker, the audit process is continuing normally, and the two departments are working very well together. One issue has not advanced at all however. Ten days ago, the hon. member challenged the right of a witness to address a parliamentary committee in French. I have a question for the member. When is he going to apologize to the millions of French speaking Canadians?

[Brian Pallister, Conservative, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

Mr. Speaker, Canadian taxpayers are not allowed to audit themselves and neither should the minister be allowed to audit himself. The Minister of National Revenue is allowed to audit Canada Post because it is his department, just as André Ouellet was allowed to self-approve over $2 million in expenses without a single exception. The conflict of interest here is staggering and this nine month stonewalling audit is going absolutely nowhere.

The Prime Minister talks about accountability. He has to now step into this incestuous situation and commit today to replace the minister with an independent auditor.

[John McCallum, Liberal, Minister of National Revenue]

Mr. Speaker, I can assure the House that the process is continuing totally normally and without any political interference, either at Canada Post or at the Canada Revenue Agency.

Sponsorship Program

[Benoît Sauvageau, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Mr. Speaker, after creating the dirty money trust fund, the Liberal Party of Canada put $750,000 into it for potential repayment of the money from the federal government's sponsorship program.

Will the government admit that this $750,000 is far from sufficient, since it does not even cover the $800,000 that went directly into the Liberal Party's coffers from the companies identified by the Auditor General? Will the government therefore demand that the Liberal Party of Canada put at least $5.3 million into that trust fund?

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

Mr. Speaker, once again, the government does not have to tell the Liberal Party to cooperate. The Liberal Party on its own volition is cooperating fully with the Gomery commission and has clearly stated and committed to the repayment to the Canadian taxpayer of any funds received inappropriately. The trust fund demonstrates goodwill and we cannot complete that transaction to the Canadian taxpayer until we have all the facts.

Once again, Justice Gomery has expressed that he does not have all the facts and cannot determine which of these various numbers is correct. Let Justice Gomery do his work.

[Benoît Sauvageau, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the $750,000 does not even include the jobs and services paid on behalf of the Liberal Party, nor the envelopes stuffed with cash handed over to bagmen.

Will the government admit that this is also part of the dirty sponsorship money and therefore has to be part of the trust? Will it therefore require the Liberal Party of Canada to put $5.3 million in trust?

[The Speaker]

Order. The hon. member for Repentigny knows that questions must refer to payments on behalf of the people of Canada or the Government of Canada. I therefore have some reservations about that question. If the hon. minister wishes to reply, he may. This question is, however, really about the Liberal Party.

The hon. member for Roberval—Lac-Saint-Jean.

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to give the minister an opportunity to enlighten us. I will therefore ask him this. The House of Commons voted in favour of having a trust for the dirty money. It has been created, but the amounts deposited are far from sufficient.

Will the minister admit that the $750,000 involved here, which belongs to taxpayers, is far from sufficient, in that it ought to include, in addition to the $800,000 in corporate contributions to the Liberal Party, the salaries paid with public moneys—

[The Speaker]

The hon. Minister of Public Works and Government Services.

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

Mr. Speaker, once again, Justice Gomery has stated clearly that:

I think that the accountants have simply given us the raw data without expressing an opinion...Whether it was for the benefit of the Liberal Party or paid to the Liberal Party, or at the request for the Liberal Party or whatever, that is going to depend upon the other evidence that they have not tried to evaluate.

Justice Gomery, a learned jurist, knows he does not have all the facts. If the hon. member opposite believes he has all the facts, perhaps he should resign his seat and volunteer his services to head up a judicial inquiry because he obviously believes that he is a lot smarter than Justice Gomery.

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, begging the minister's pardon, but when we are talking about people being paid from public funds, from kickbacks by friends of the government, on this side of the House we call that dirty money.

Will the minister not admit that, in addition to the $750,000, which does not even include the contributions to the Liberal Party, the government has an obligation to take into account the salaries paid to friends of the regime to work for the Liberal Party?

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

Mr. Speaker, there are also allegations that the Parti Québécois received money inappropriately.

Perhaps the $100,000 the Parti Québécois has established for their trust fund is a little small in comparison to some of the dirty money that has been involved in the separatist activities in that province, and it is not doing anything to clean up its house. It does not take seriously any allegations before Gomery against separatists in Quebec.

I am proud to be part of the Liberal Party and to stand with the Prime Minister who has had the guts and courage to do the right thing to ensure that Canadians are treated fairly. We have changed governance for generations of Canadians.

Infrastructure

[Joy Smith, Conservative, Kildonan—St. Paul, MB]

Mr. Speaker, the government has claimed millions of dollars in gas taxes will be redirected to the infrastructure needs of big cities like Winnipeg. However Winnipeg is not able to spend a single dime of this money on roads or bridges. The government has put massive restrictions on this money.

Why does the government believe it knows better than the cities and municipalities where this money should go?