Debates of Feb. 29th, 2008

Ethics

[James Moore, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Works and Government Services and for the Pacific Gateway and the Vancouver-Whistler Olympics]

Mr. Speaker, there were three people at that meeting, and my Bloc Québécois colleague was not among them. All three people who were there said that no offer was made. So quite simply, that is what Mr. Cadman said, and those are the facts of the matter.

[Pauline Picard, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Prime Minister said that Mr. Cadman had been guaranteed a Conservative nomination in the next election. Yet, in 2005, the Prime Minister revealed that Mr. Cadman had been offered financial compensation for losses related to the calling of an election. The Prime Minister has given us two versions of the same story.

Will the Prime Minister admit that, no matter the offer made to Mr. Cadman, if there was an offer, it was attempted bribery?

[James Moore, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Works and Government Services and for the Pacific Gateway and the Vancouver-Whistler Olympics]

Mr. Speaker, the Bloc are trying to blur two very different things. There was in fact a conversation about Chuck Cadman rejoining the Conservative Party.

Chuck was a long time friend of mine. He was a member of Parliament, first elected in 1997 from a neighbouring riding. We wanted him to be a member of the Conservative caucus. The Prime Minister made a recommendation to him that he rejoin the Conservative Party, as he was previously a member, so he could be a candidate for us in the coming campaign.

What she is talking about, in terms of impropriety, is in fact not true. She was not at that meeting. There was no offer that was tabled. Chuck Cadman himself said so. She ought to accept the word of Chuck Cadman.

[Pauline Picard, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Mr. Speaker, just because the financial offer made to Mr. Cadman—and confirmed by the Prime Minister—did not yield the desired results does not mean that there was no bribery.

Does the Prime Minister realize that the offer made by official representatives of the Conservative Party to an MP in an attempt to buy his vote is illegal?

[James Moore, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Works and Government Services and for the Pacific Gateway and the Vancouver-Whistler Olympics]

Mr. Speaker, the problem with the questions is that there was no offer. Mr. Cadman said so himself. He said it on two occasions on national television. He said so himself: there was no offer.

Arts and Culture

[Libby Davies, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, New Democrats are deeply concerned by reports that the Conservatives are planning to censor film and video production in Canada to suit their friends from the religious right.

Will the Minister of Canadian Heritage, Status of Women and Official Languages confirm that her office is working on “updated eligibility requirements” and the “standardized and updated list of illegal and other ineligible content”?

Could the minister assure the House and Canada's cultural community that her department will not place any new barriers to accessing film tax credits in Canada? Will she give that assurance today?

[Jim Abbott, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary for Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, filmmakers are free to make movies as they see fit as long as they are within the law. However, the Canadian taxpayer should not be forced to pay for material that is gratuitously violent or denigrating to identifiable groups.

The government simply reintroduced the same tax measure in an omnibus bill. By the way, that party, along with all parties, voted in favour of the law.

[Libby Davies, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the parliamentary secretary knows full well that the bill in question does not reveal the Conservatives' plan to censor Canadian films. Rather it is the guidelines that the department is drafting that would create a Canadian film censorship board, a board that would decide what film and video content would be worthy and what would not.

Therefore, does the minister agree that there can be no role for government censorship in the Canadian film industry? Will she assure Canadians that any plans to curtail artistic freedom will be stopped immediately? No censorship.

[Jim Abbott, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary for Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, it is regrettable that the NDP member is trying to make something out of nothing. The fact is the tax measure is nothing new. The fact is that party, along with every party in the House, passed the bill. She should have known what was in the bill in the first place.

I should note that it originally came to the House in 2003, under the Liberals at that point. There is nothing new. What is the story here? I do not understand.

Ethics

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Prime Minister and members of his government deliberately tried to confuse Canadians.

According to the book, the distasteful offer to bribe Mr. Cadman was made with the Prime Minister's approval on May 17. There was another meeting on May 19, but the bribe was offered on May 17.

Who represented the Prime Minister at the May 17 meeting and what was offered to Mr. Cadman?

[James Moore, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Works and Government Services and for the Pacific Gateway and the Vancouver-Whistler Olympics]

Mr. Speaker, one meeting took place with Mr. Cadman because we wanted him to rejoin the Conservative Party.

Chuck Cadman was a long-standing friend of many of our colleagues here. In fact, he supported the Prime Minister when he ran for the Conservative Party leadership. He was a long-standing friend of the current Prime Minister. Therefore, there was a meeting to encourage him to rejoin the Conservative Party.

With regard to the budget vote and what has been alleged here, it is not true. Chuck Cadman himself said so in two nationally televised interviews. He said that no offer was made.

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the first reaction of the government is to say anything but the truth.

Yesterday government members said that Mr. Cadman's wife and daughter were not telling the truth. They pretended that the only meeting with Mr. Cadman took place on May 19. However, there was a meeting on May 17 where a $1 million bribe was offered. It was organized by the Minister of Natural Resources, and the Prime Minister knew about it.

I repeat the question. Who represented the Prime Minister at the meeting with Mr. Cadman on May 17?

[James Moore, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Works and Government Services and for the Pacific Gateway and the Vancouver-Whistler Olympics]

Mr. Speaker, I did not know my colleague from Vancouver Centre had the ability to transform herself into a fly, fly through a door on to a wall and be at a meeting she had no part in whatsoever. She claims that there was definitely a meeting and this was discussed. She is wrong.

A meeting took place. All three people at the meeting said that no offer was made. The only discussion that took place was our desire to have Chuck Cadman rejoin the Conservative Party and continue his support of the then leader of the opposition, now the Prime Minister of Canada.

Chuck Cadman said that no offer was made. I hope my friend from Vancouver Centre will accept Chuck Cadman's word, if she does not accept mine.

[Keith Martin, Liberal, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

Mr. Speaker, an offer was made. The Prime Minister's words were caught on tape when specifically asked about the—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Speaker, Liberal, Peter Milliken]

Order, please. The noise level has been excessive, in my view, throughout question period. Now I cannot hear anything. We have to have some order in the House.

I would encourage members who want to have discussions, like perhaps the member for Wascana and the member for Peterborough, to go out into the foyer of the House and have their discussions there while question period goes on in the House. It is very difficult. I see the chief government whip is suggesting the member for Abbotsford might like to carry on some discussions as well, and I agree this could be done.

There are several members on both sides who seem to constantly make excessive noise while we go on with questions. We are now into a question and we will have an answer, and I hope we will have a little more quiet.

The hon. member for Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca has the floor.

[Keith Martin, Liberal, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

Mr. Speaker, an offer was made. The Prime Minister's words were caught on tape. When specifically asked about the $1 million insurance policy, did he deny it? No, he did not. He said of the offer to Chuck, “it was only to replace financial considerations”. He went on to say that the Conservative envoys “were legitimately representing the party”. Those are the facts.

Will the Prime Minister come clean with Canadians on his role in this sordid affair and agree to tell everything he knows to the RCMP?

[James Moore, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Works and Government Services and for the Pacific Gateway and the Vancouver-Whistler Olympics]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, when the first question on this came up by the Leader of the Opposition, he started off by saying that Chuck Cadman was an honourable man. Everybody in the House gave him a standing ovation, including the member for Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca.

Chuck Cadman said that no offer was made. The member for Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca just said an offer was made. In doing so, he is saying that Chuck Cadman is a liar. That is what he is saying now.

Chuck Cadman said “no offer was made”. He said it in two nationally televised interviews. That is the truth. Those are the facts. The member should accept it.

[Keith Martin, Liberal, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

Mr. Speaker, maybe the hon. member ought to speak to his own Prime Minister who has admitted an offer was made and such an offer is a criminal offence. His own words were already captured on tape and they prove he knew about the plan to offer the bribe.

My question for the member is this. Can the Prime Minister table any proof that there was an internal investigation into the actions of the officials, or will he just admit that there was no investigation because he condoned it right from the start?

[James Moore, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Works and Government Services and for the Pacific Gateway and the Vancouver-Whistler Olympics]

Mr. Speaker, again, there is one central fact here that the Liberals refuse to accept. It is a simple and obvious fact. There were three people at the meeting. All three of them said that no offer was made. It is simple. It is clear. It is obvious. It is on the record. Chuck Cadman said so in nationally televised interviews on both Global and CTV.

My friend from Esquimalt knows that Chuck Cadman was an honourable man. He would not go on national television and lie about this file. He spoke the truth. He said there was no offer. I hope my colleague accepts his word.

Public Works

[Meili Faille, Bloc, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

Mr. Speaker, there was political interference and scheming in the Prime Minister's Office and the fact that it failed does not mean that there was no interference. There were apparently several meetings and communications between Soudas, the unelected Minister Fortier and his office.

Is this not a prime example of superficial ethics, duplicity and hypocrisy on the part of this government?

[Peter Van Loan, Conservative, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for Democratic Reform]

Mr. Speaker, the record is clear: no special favours were handed out to the parties involved. It is clear and simple.

[Meili Faille, Bloc, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

Mr. Speaker, Minister Michael Fortier said yesterday, upon leaving committee, that pressure did come from the Prime Minister's Office, but it came from him, the minister. Even if he is just bragging, Michael Fortier is admitting that there was political interference.

Will the Prime Minister acknowledge that the many interventions between his office and that of Mr. Fortier meet all the definitions of the term “political interference”?

[Peter Van Loan, Conservative, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for Democratic Reform]

Mr. Speaker, there was no political interference. It is clear: no favours were granted.

Jean Lapierre said that in all honesty, after examining the Radio-Canada and other reports, he did not see any smoking gun or scandal. And so it has been for all the other scandals the opposition has come up with.

Airbus

[Carole Lavallée, Bloc, Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics has completed an important step: gathering information and holding public hearings. On January 11, the Prime Minister stated publicly that he would set up his commission of public inquiry as soon as the hearings ended.

The hearings are now over. Will the Prime Minister keep his word and appoint a commissioner as soon as possible to launch this public inquiry?