Debates of June 7th, 2005

The Economy

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, if the hon. gentleman would like to find the reconciliation, I would recommend that he look at page 258 of the budget plan. He will see the fiscal flexibility that is there, built in.

I would also point out to the hon. gentleman that the advice that comes from the chief executives and those on Bay Street is very valuable and important to the government, but so also are the voices from main street that talk about post-secondary education, that talk about more affordable housing and that talk about foreign aid and the environment. Those voices are also important.

Employment Insurance

[Yves Lessard, Bloc, Chambly—Borduas, QC]

Mr. Speaker, after voting in favour of creating an independent employment insurance fund just a few weeks ago when she was a Conservative, the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development is saying that an independent fund is no longer necessary, now that she has been told how it operates.

Are we to understand from the minister's statements that she is not really convinced of this, but rather has been told this is how she should think?

[Belinda Stronach, Liberal, Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development and Minister responsible for Democratic Renewal]

Mr. Speaker, we are following the advice of the Auditor General, who said those funds should remain with the public accounts.

[Yves Lessard, Bloc, Chambly—Borduas, QC]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the minister discovered that the fund was working well. It is not the fund that is the problem, but how it is being used.

When an offence is committed and a car is seized, it is not seized because it is not working properly, it is seized because it was used in a crime. It is the same thing with the EI fund.

Will the minister admit that nothing explains her 180 degree turnaround on the EI fund issue other than she was prepared to do anything to get—

[The Speaker]

The Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development.

[Belinda Stronach, Liberal, Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development and Minister responsible for Democratic Renewal]

Mr. Speaker, the human resources committee brought forward a number of recommendations to strengthen the independence of the EI commission. They were taken into consideration and were brought forward in the budget bill, Bill C-43, to strengthen the independence of the commission as it strengthens the way that the rate is set, and that it is brought about in a more transparent and accountable way.

Infrastructure

[Mario Laframboise, Bloc, Argenteuil—Mirabel, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister regularly refers to his desire to respect provincial jurisdictions, but acts quite differently.

How can the Prime Minister claim to respect the governments of Quebec and the provinces, when he is insisting that the municipalities agree on the criteria for distributing gasoline tax revenues before paying the money out, whatever the amount may be?

[John Godfrey, Liberal, Minister of State (Infrastructure and Communities)]

Mr. Speaker, I have often said that the matter of the distribution of funds remains in the hands of the Government of Quebec, in cooperation with the municipalities and the Government of Canada. We have already established close cooperation in the case of infrastructures, and will continue this way.

[Mario Laframboise, Bloc, Argenteuil—Mirabel, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the federal government is shamelessly blackmailing Quebec and the provinces by making them subject to the approval of their municipalities before they can touch funds from the transfer of part of the gasoline tax.

How can the Prime Minister use money from the fiscal imbalance to make the governments of Quebec and the provinces dependent on the approval of their own constitutional creatures, the cities? Is this not totally unacceptable meddling?

[John Godfrey, Liberal, Minister of State (Infrastructure and Communities)]

That is not the case at all. We are working closely with the Government of Quebec. We are consulting the cities, but are waiting for the Government of Quebec to find a distribution formula for its cities. Then we will be able to proceed, as partners.

Government Contracts

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, rent scam goes right to the top. Top sources revealed to my office documented proof today that taxpayers started paying rent on the empty Gatineau building two months before a contract was even signed. That is right. The first payday was December 1, 2003, and the deal was inked on January 28, 2004.

Why did the current finance minister, the then public works minister, pay half a million dollars in rent to a Liberal--

[The Speaker]

The hon. Minister of Public Works and Government Services.

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

Mr. Speaker, it is important to recognize that, first of all, this lease was awarded and the contract was awarded after a fair, open and transparent process, and in fact, a process that was overseen by a fairness monitor, that fairness monitor being KPMG.

It is also important to recognize that yesterday in this House the hon. member attacked the new conflict of interest code for senators. It is important to recognize that this code of conduct is in fact supported by Conservative senators. He is offside with his own party membership in the Senate and I suggest that they get on the same page and talk at caucus tomorrow about this important issue.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the finance minister, who was the public works minister at the time that his government started paying rent for an empty building without even signing a contract. Why is it that this minister paid a half a million dollars to the company of a Liberal senator, without a contract?

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

Mr. Speaker, further, the contract was signed before the individual was in fact a member of the Senate.

Further, I would draw the member's attention to what Senator David Angus has to say about the new conflict of interest code for senators. This is what a Conservative senator is saying: “This conflict of interest code for senators is a remarkable document”. He says that it is the result “of a long and thoughtful but arduous labour by many of our honourable colleagues”. He goes on to say that “our code is much better than the one that was adopted earlier this year in the other place”.

I hope that tomorrow at caucus the hon. member speaks to his Senate colleagues and urges them to get on the same page.

[Leon Benoit, Conservative, Vegreville—Wainwright, AB]

Mr. Speaker, this minister is avoiding the question. On May 31, the public works minister admitted to the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates that their Liberal landlord had broken the Parliament of Canada Act in a deal to rent his building to this government.

What he did not admit is that taxpayers had been paying rent months before the contract was signed. Is it normal procedure for this government to pay out taxpayers' money before a contract is signed or is this a special deal for his Liberal colleagues?

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

Mr. Speaker, to clarify, as I clarified at committee, what I referred to at committee was the fact that when we as the department became aware of the situation, I instructed our department to write to Alexis Nihon. The letter simply said:

We would like to know...what arrangements...you have taken to ensure that you are in compliance with the Lease...Please inform us...of what corrective measures you have taken to arrange your affairs in such a way that you are not in breach of section 25.10 of the Lease.

We took action. Section 25.10 in fact refers to section 14 of the Parliament code. That code no longer exists. There is a new code of ethics and we are confident that in fact all--

[The Speaker]

The hon. member for Vegreville—Wainwright.

[Leon Benoit, Conservative, Vegreville—Wainwright, AB]

Mr. Speaker, this government only acts when it is caught red-handed. It took the opposition to blow the whistle and catch the government's breach of the Parliament of Canada Act. The penalty for breaking this law is $200 a day, which now is $110,000 in total. When will the government collect this fine from its Liberal colleague?

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

Mr. Speaker, once again, the hon. member is simply not up on his facts. In terms of the $200 a day fine he is referring to, that fine no longer exists, in fact. It is part of section 14. Section 14 was replaced by the code of conduct, which I believe this Parliament approved in 2003, and beyond that, a conflict of interest code for the Senate that is supported by the Conservative senators.

If those members have a complaint to launch about a senator's conduct, they should talk to their Conservative senators about making that complaint to the Senate ethics commissioner.

The Budget

[Michael John Savage, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

Mr. Speaker, post-secondary education and skills training is increasingly important in our global economy. To be competitive in today's economy, we must invest in Canada's future to ensure a strong, knowledge based workforce. I believe that Bill C-48 is a step in that direction and I think most Canadians agree.

In light of that, could the Minister of Finance please tell Canadians what will be lost in this area if the House does not pass Bill C-48?

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, first I would like to congratulate the member for Dartmouth—Cole Harbour. He has played a very strong role as the chair of the government caucus on post-secondary education and research and in fact helped to secure the $1 billion in further federal support for science and research that is in the budget of February 23. That builds on about $5 billion per year that our government already invests in education and higher learning. Bill C-48 adds another $1.5 billion over the next two years especially for student assistance.

Natural Resources

[Bill Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the right hon. Prime Minister. It has to do with the very serious need for a full-court press on Washington with respect to the Devils Lake diversion. We only have a few weeks left. The Prime Minister has said that he has been in touch with the President. I wonder if the Prime Minister could tell us when he expects to hear back from the President or Condoleezza Rice. We need to know because if they are not going to say yes to the IJC reference, we need to be able to develop an alternate plan.

Could the Prime Minister tell us what is happening on that file?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I share the views of the hon. member in terms of the seriousness of this measure. I share his views in terms of the need for a full-court press.

It was a major topic that I raised with the President when I spoke to him last week. I asked the President to support his environmental commissioner who is in fact very much aware as a result of the discussions that the government has been having with him.

The President of the Treasury Board has been in constant contact, as have I, with the Premier of Manitoba. I can tell the House that we take this issue very seriously and are pushing it as hard as we possibly can.

[Bill Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Mr. Speaker, we want to know not what the government has done but what the government is going to do and when it expects to hear back from the President.

This does not just have to do with Manitoba. This impacts on everything that would have been formerly treated by the IJC. If this is allowed to go ahead without the IJC being involved, then things could happen to the Great Lakes down the road on both sides of the border without any IJC reference.

This will be a terrible precedent not just for Manitoba's ecosystem but for boundary waters disputes in general.