Debates of Feb. 4th, 2008

Access to Information

[Michael Ignatieff, Liberal, Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON]

Mr. Speaker, Bob Marleau, the Information Commissioner, has protested that a fog has descended over the government's handling of information. Complaints to the commissioner have doubled in the past year.

A former leader of the opposition once said that the public interest should come before government secrecy and that information is the lifeblood of democracy. Who said that? The Prime Minister. If he still believes what he said, why has he allowed a fog of secrecy to descend on his government? Is Bob Marleau the next one to pay for his job with the truth?

[Vic Toews, Conservative, President of the Treasury Board]

Mr. Speaker, it was specifically because of the dedication of the Prime Minister to that particular principle that we expanded the application of the act.

While we do not get personally involved and directly involved in the access to information, we have made excellent progress in that respect. In his last report, the Information Commissioner said that our response to access to information has improved under our government.

[Michael Ignatieff, Liberal, Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON]

Mr. Speaker, all of us who are struggling to make sense of those blacked out pages we received will be skeptical of the minister's reply.

The number of complaints received by the Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada has doubled from last year. The commissioner noted that the government ought to make it a habit to make information available to the public without having to be arm-twisted.

Does the Prime Minister agree with this assessment by the commissioner, or will this commissioner face dismissal?

[Vic Toews, Conservative, President of the Treasury Board]

Mr. Speaker, it is interesting that the member would complain about this issue given that that party voted against the expansion of access to information.

The Liberals voted against the right to western Canadian farmers to see how the Wheat Board is spending their money. They wanted that shroud of secrecy to stay over the board. Our government said no. That information is accessible to the wheat farmers of western Canada as it is to the ordinary citizens of Canada.

[Gilles Duceppe, Bloc, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, a new voice has joined the others who have recently criticized the Prime Minister for his lack of transparency. Indeed, the information commissioner, Robert Marleau, believes that the culture of secrecy has become systemic under the Conservative government and that it is rampant in the government.

Will the Prime Minister, who got elected on a promise that his government would transparent, admit that his government is anything but transparent, as we saw recently with the transfer of detainees and the Dimitri Soudas issues?

[Stephen Harper, Conservative, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, this government invited opposition parties to review the Manley report and the mission in Afghanistan, but they refused to hold public hearings on such an important report and mission. I encourage transparency from the opposition, and I invite opposition parties to assume their responsibilities and to review this report and this mission.

Afghanistan

[Gilles Duceppe, Bloc, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister reaches the heights of hypocrisy when he talks to us about transparency in Afghanistan. For months now, the government has been in possession of a report showing that the governor of Kandahar province is suspected of torture. And the government finds a way to brag about an agreement signed with the Karzai government, which appointed this governor. The Conservatives refuse to admit that there were serious suspicions of torture and they try to give us a lecture.

Will he finally stop making a mockery of transparency, the very issue that got him elected?

[Stephen Harper, Conservative, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, Canadian officers always take allegations against our officers, and other officers, seriously. There is no credible evidence in this case.

Once again, I invite the Bloc Québécois and the opposition parties to speak with the officers in charge of this file and to examine the whole Afghan mission and the Manley report to verify this.

Airbus

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

Mr. Speaker, there is another matter that we should shed some light on as quickly as possible: the Mulroney-Schreiber affair. Last Thursday, the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics decided that the government should launch a public inquiry immediately, without waiting for it to finish its work. The Prime Minister has often said that he wants to respect the will of parliamentarians, so this is his chance.

Will the Prime Minister heed the committee's decision and launch the public inquiry as soon as possible?

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

Mr. Speaker, the government asked Professor Johnston to undertake a third-party review of the matter and to make recommendations concerning a public inquiry and its mandate.

Professor Johnston suggested that a limited public inquiry be conducted based on witness statements made during sittings of the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics. Therefore, it makes sense for the committee to finish its work before the public inquiry begins. We are following Professor Johnston's recommendation.

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

Mr. Speaker, the government says that it does not want to have two inquiries going on at the same time, which makes sense. Nevertheless, I would like to point out that Justice Gomery began his public hearings seven months after his appointment.

What is stopping the government from appointing someone today so that that person can put together the future commission? Is the government trying to buy as much time as possible while perpetuating the culture of secrecy that has become its trademark?

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

Mr. Speaker, the government is already looking for someone.

Government Contracts

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

Mr. Speaker, on Friday his own office had to admit that the finance minister had broken federal rules and awarded a $122,000 untendered contract to write his budget speech. It was awarded to a Conservative friend and insider.

At a time when hundreds of thousands of Canadians are losing their jobs, the government is handing them out, contrary to the rules, at $22 a word. Why should Canadians trust the Prime Minister, when instead of cleaning up the despicable practices of the previous government, the Conservatives are simply replicating them right here?

[Jim Flaherty, Conservative, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, we were provided good value for money. I can assure taxpayers of that. There was good value for money in the work done in the preparation of the largest budget in Canadian history, budget 2007.

It is correct, though, that administrative functions were not followed with respect to the contracting. Those procedures are now being followed.

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

Mr. Speaker, let us listen to what the colleague of the minister who just spoke had to say about exactly this issue. The Minister of Human Resources said of taxpayers:

I think it breaks their hearts when they see their tax dollars go to the finance minister who then turns around and gives it to his friends in the form of untendered contracts...That is completely wrong.

My question is for the Prime Minister, who has the responsibility here. Does he agree with his Minister of Human Resources that this kind of thing is not only illegal but “completely wrong”? If so, what are the consequences for his ministers when they break the rules?

[Jim Flaherty, Conservative, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, the question is repetitive. I hope the House will forgive me if I am repetitive also. There was good value for money provided. The work was done. It was documented. It was compensated.

Having said that, I note that the administrative functions were not followed with respect to these contracts. I can assure the House that they are being followed now.

Canadian Wheat Board

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Mr. Speaker, on Friday's firing at the Canadian Wheat Board, the Prime Minister's hands are all over it. The firing of the board's vice-president of farmer relations without cause is another example of the government's reign of terror against the board.

In 2006, the government fired the CEO, fired board members and undermined elected board members. Now the government pressures the board to fire staff. Why does the Prime Minister subvert democracy, undermine freedom of speech and cause to be fired anybody who stands up to his undemocratic tactics?

[Gerry Ritz, Conservative, Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food and Minister for the Canadian Wheat Board]

Mr. Speaker, the member for Malpeque just proved he is on a slippery slope as he leaped to his feet there.

As for the huge public outcry he is talking about, I can assure the House that I have responded to both letters.

Government Boards, Agencies and Commissions

[Marlene Jennings, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC]

Mr. Speaker, it is becoming increasingly clear that this government has no respect for scientists. The Conservatives offhandedly dismissed the president of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission. They then muzzled scientists at Environment Canada and, most recently, they just forced the National Science Advisor into retirement.

When scientists do their job correctly, based on science, they end up getting fired by the Conservatives. Who will be next?

[Jim Prentice, Conservative, Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, my friend refers in part to Dr. Carty. Dr. Carty, as the Prime Minister has indicated, announced his retirement for March 2008.

Some of the functions that Dr. Carty fulfilled are being replaced by the new Science, Technology and Innovation Council. It contains some of Canada's most respected and distinguished citizens: the president of the University of McGill, the president of the University of Saskatchewan, the president of the University of Calgary, the chairman of the Royal Bank and EnCana, and other very respected Canadians. It is chaired by Dr. Howard Alper, who may be our most distinguished scientist.

I can assure the House that our science policy and science investments are in good hands.

Public Works and Government Services

[Marcel Proulx, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister's press secretary, Dimitri Soudas, tried to explain his attempt to intercede in the Rosdev affair by stating that his interest in the file came at the request of a city councillor.

Over the weekend, however, councillors Tamburello and Tremblay denied Mr. Soudas' claims. They destroyed the alibi he was trying to create for himself.

Would the Prime Minister like to provide a new version of the facts regarding the actions of his press secretary, a version that indicates what really happened?

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

Mr. Speaker, I have already indicated several times that no special favours were granted to any of the parties in question. The leader of the Liberal Party had to apologize for the accusations he made regarding this matter. The hon. member should do the same.

[Marcel Proulx, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

Mr. Speaker, let us see if I have this right. If people do their jobs and uphold the law, as independent public servants at the Canadian Wheat Board and the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission have done, they get fired by the Prime Minister because they do not do what the Conservative Party wants.

But if the person is the Prime Minister's press secretary and breaks the law by meeting with unregistered lobbyists, the Prime Minister circles the wagons to protect that person. Is this how the government operates?

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

Mr. Speaker, I have said it many times: the member's facts are simply incorrect. Nothing improper was done.

The thing that upsets Liberals is that special favours were not handed out. We are not practising politics the way they always did. God forbid that there be a new way for politics to be done in this country, but that is what Canadians want. That is why the Liberal leader had to apologize for his wild accusations in this matter. It would be a good time now for that hon. member to do the same.

Manufacturing and Forestry Industries

[Paul Crête, Bloc, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance is claiming, falsely, that he is not aware of our demands concerning the manufacturing and forestry industries. On November 28, the Bloc unveiled its emergency plan funded out of the $11.6 billion surplus for the current year. More recently, on January 24, we made public our demands for the next budget. Moreover, I will be pleased to explain all that to the minister at our meeting on Wednesday.

In the meantime, will the minister acknowledge that it is irresponsible to use $10 billion of this year's surplus to pay down the debt when he is allocating only $1 billion to help the manufacturing and forestry industries?