Debates of June 6th, 2008

Foreign Affairs

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

Mr. Speaker, the government takes security matters very seriously. In this regard, the Department of Foreign Affairs is conducting a review of the incident that took place to review whether processes that related to that are adequate. When that review is completed, if there are any items of importance we will take action on them, as we have in other similar situations where we have had good advice on how processes can be changed.

Ethics

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

Mr. Speaker, last November the Prime Minister committed to holding a public inquiry into the business dealings between Brian Mulroney and Karlheinz Schreiber. Tuesday marked two months since the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics submitted its report, and still no one has been appointed to head this inquiry.

Is the Prime Minister dragging his feet on appointing a commissioner for the same reasons that he refuses to appear before the committee—in order to avoid an inquiry that would discredit him even more?

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

Mr. Speaker, we plan to start the public inquiry soon. We have asked professor David Johnston to examine and establish the terms for a public inquiry. This public inquiry will begin soon.

Aboriginal Affairs

[Jean Crowder, NDP, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

Mr. Speaker, there are only four days left before the residential school apology happens in this House and survivors are still waiting for the details.

This is an official apology, but what plans have been made to receive its acceptance? Will we follow the lead of the labour government in Australia and make allowances for people outside the House of Commons lawn to watch, table the apology at least a day prior, include aboriginal representatives in preparing the House for the apology, and will survivors be provided with the resources needed to come to the ceremony?

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

Mr. Speaker, this is a very important and solemn occasion. The government will be undertaking a solemn and official apology in Parliament in the appropriate context where it should take place. There will be associated with this, of course, a number of residential school survivors coming to Ottawa as part of the program. As well, there will be some additional ceremonies to supplement the government's official apology.

We look forward to this very important day that has been far too long in coming because, of course, previous governments never took this action, and it is time that it happened.

[Jean Crowder, NDP, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

Mr. Speaker, we agree it is an important and solemn occasion and that this apology is for all Canadians to witness and honour. If survivors are allowed to address the House, their words will be broadcast to all Canadians, including the survivors who cannot attend in person and will be watching on television.

Will the minister agree today that the acceptance of the apology is equally important and the government should receive that acceptance right here in this House?

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

Mr. Speaker, we believe very strongly that this is an important event and that the apology should have the full weight of being a solemn, official, parliamentary function. It is our intention to proceed in that fashion to ensure that it does have that.

I did want to thank the leader of the NDP who up to now has been quite constructive in assisting in the preparations and the encouragement for this day to happen which, as I have said, should have happened some time ago, but is now finally going to take place next Wednesday.

Ethics

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Wascana, SK]

Mr. Speaker, rarely does a government try to take the spotlight off of one of its scandals by highlighting another. That is exactly what it tried to do this week. It produced a sworn affidavit from Dona Cadman, the Conservative candidate in Surrey North who said, “on May 17, 2005 my husband told me that earlier that day two Conservative Party representatives had offered him a $1 million insurance policy”. This is a sworn affidavit just two weeks ago.

Is it the government's position that Mrs. Cadman has committed perjury?

[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, it is the government's position that the Liberals, according to two forensic audio experts, have been using a tape that “has been edited and doctored” to misrepresent the event as it actually occurred. That is what we have said.

If the Liberals are short on memory, they should know the Liberals went to the RCMP and RCMP Chief Superintendent Serge Therriault came back and said, “The investigation disclosed no evidence to support a charge under the Criminal Code or under the Parliament of Canada Act”. There is no evidence of any wrongdoing on the part of the Prime Minister or the Conservative Party.

The Liberals should apologize.

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Wascana, SK]

Mr. Speaker, it is a bad sign when they hold a news conference and all the media laugh at them.

Unlike the parliamentary secretary, Dona Cadman's story has been the same from day one. Her husband was offered a million dollar insurance policy. After fumbling for weeks, the parliamentary secretary finally settled on one story. There was one meeting with Chuck Cadman on May 19. Well, Dona Cadman's affidavit says, “the date that my husband told me that he had received the offer of a $1 million insurance policy was May 17, 2005 and not May 19, 2005”.

Which should we believe, the PMO puppet or the sworn testimony of Dona 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, if the member wants to believe Dona Cadman, Dona Cadman says the Prime Minister is telling the truth and she is right.

We have said from day one that the only offer made to Chuck Cadman was the offer for him to rejoin the Conservative caucus, run for the nomination and get re-elected as a Conservative.

The Liberals have made false and malicious attacks against the Prime Minister of this country and they are going to pay for that in a court of law.

The RCMP have said that nothing inappropriate happened here. Two forensic audio experts have said that the tape was doctored and edited in a way that misrepresents the conversation. The Liberals have falsely smeared thePrime Minister of this country and we will see them in court.

Canada-U.S. Relations

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the investigation into the NAFTA-gate affair clearly was a whitewash. Key individuals who had access to the diplomatic memo were not interviewed or even contacted.

The Republican farm team over there, the Canadian Conservatives, were obviously trying to help their bush league friends. Why was Frank Sensenbrenner, the Republican operative that the government embedded in the Canadian embassy, not even questioned as part of this so-called investigation?

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

Mr. Speaker, there was a thorough inquiry into this and involved an outside firm and it was actually criticized by the opposition. Members of the opposition criticized that it was taking too long. Now that it is out, I am hearing them say that time should have been spent interviewing another 200-plus people who had been recipients of the email, although it was assessed where it had been redistributed, where possible, by those individuals.

The bottom line findings of the inquiry were twofold. First, there was no leak of classified information by the Prime Minister's chief of staff. Second, there was an error in how the document was classified and to whom it was distributed.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it is just another phony investigation by the government.

It is no surprise that the government conveniently finds itself innocent when it investigates itself. What a joke. Canadians are not going to believe that.

Not only is the report a charade, but parliamentary committees are now being stonewalled from looking further into the issue. What is the government trying to hide? It only asks more questions.

How can Canadians trust the government and accept the findings of its report when it is clouded in secrecy and so obviously flawed?

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

On the contrary, Mr. Speaker, the problem here was that the document was inappropriately classified. It was not clouded in secrecy, it was public when it should have been a little more confidential.

What we do know from the findings of the inquiry into the matter, and the Liberals keep ignoring this, is that there is no evidence that Mr. Brodie disclosed any classified information.

The Liberals kept getting up in the House time and again saying that Mr. Brodie was the cause of it. Once the inquiry demonstrated that it was not, did they once acknowledge it, let alone apologize? Not once.

That is what is causing a decline in our Parliament, a decline in our confidence in the system, and then they go on to blame it on senior civil servants. It is a terrible--

[The Speaker, Peter Milliken]

The hon. member for Drummond.

Economic Development

[Pauline Picard, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Mr. Speaker, in Quebec, everyone is criticizing the way Economic Development Canada is treating not for profit organizations and the minister's inability to get the necessary budgetary envelope. Furthermore, the minister responsible for EDC justified his fiasco by saying, “the decision that sparked all of this was made by the [Conservative] government cabinet”.

Are we to gather from this alarming confession that the minister has no weight in cabinet, or is he knowingly attacking the economic structure of Quebec?

[Lawrence Cannon, Conservative, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, I am particularly pleased that the hon. member mentioned Quebec's economy. She probably missed it, but, this morning, statistics show that in the month of May, the Canadian economy created 18,000 new jobs in Quebec. It is odd that the Bloc Québécois has not said a word about that.

And, do they know where those 18,000 jobs were created? In the manufacturing industry. That means that my colleague, the hon. Minister of the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec, is doing a good job.

[Pauline Picard, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Mr. Speaker, he failed to mention that 19,000 jobs were lost.

The minister has no respect for the organizations that have built modern day Quebec. Even his counterpart in Quebec City, who described him as an ideologue and Machiavellian, accused him of attacking the very structure of economic development in Quebec. The minister has absolutely no respect for the Quebec model.

Will he transfer money to Quebec, where competent people will know very well how to manage it without resorting to favouritism?

[Lawrence Cannon, Conservative, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, unfortunately I have to cite the document. In the section entitled, “Employment gains in Quebec” it says: “In Quebec, ... employment rose by 18,000 in May. With an increase in the number of Quebecers in the labour market...” Further on—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[Lawrence Cannon, Conservative, Pontiac, QC]

I know the truth hurts.

Further on, it says, “Employment in Quebec's manufacturing industry increased in May”. What can I say—

[The Speaker, Peter Milliken]

The hon. member for Vaudreuil-Soulanges.

400th Anniversary of Quebec City

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

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Canadian Heritage, Status of Women and Official Languages is also launching a campaign of disinformation about the history of Quebec. The minister responsible for the Quebec City region no longer talks about the 400th anniversary of the founding of Quebec City, but of the founding of the Canadian state.

Does the Minister of Canadian Heritage, Status of Women and Official Languages not realize that to say such a thing is as ridiculous as saying that Italy was founded by Romulus and Remus?

[Sylvie Boucher, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister and for Status of Women]

Mr. Speaker, unlike the Bloc, we on this side of the House are proud to promote the French fact in Quebec City and to publicize Quebec City as a francophone city across Canada and around the world.