Brian Fitzpatrick

[Privilege, November 4th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, let us go to Enron and WorldCom and use that by analogy.

[Privilege, November 4th, 2005]

Sorry, Mr. Speaker. The right thing that these members could do today is stand in the House and say, “We are Liberals”. Jean Chrétien said “a Liberal is a Liberal is a Liberal”. Assume responsibility for this criminal conspiracy. The best thing you could do for Canada is to tell Canadians “I'm sorry--

[Privilege, November 4th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, let us be clear. The gist of the concern of the government members is somebody is bringing excerpts of the Gomery inquiry into the households of Quebec people. Bits and pieces have been taken from it and put into a householder, and the government is very upset about that.

The main part of the Gomery inquiry is what principal party was in this massive conspiracy to steal $100 million from Canadians? Put up your hands on the other side. You guys know what the answer is.

[Privilege, November 4th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, to make this story rather short, an advocacy group, not a lobbyist group, and there is a big distinction, took this matter to court. The Alberta Court of Appeal unanimously agreed that the Canada Elections Act infringed fundamental rights and freedoms. It then went on to the Supreme Court where it became a major case. That was a very important case because it helped to define the limits of freedom of speech and our political freedoms in this country. It might be the landmark decision in this country.

For people to label them as a bunch of lawbreakers, I find that contemptuous of not only the people involved in that organization but contemptuous of the whole concept of political freedom and freedom of expression in this country. I find the whole thing a massive distortion and an insult to the intelligent people here. To label that organization as a lobbyist organization is totally without foundation. It is ridiculous.

In fact, I would not be surprised if the person who made that accusation had been a member of that organization at one time.

[Privilege, November 4th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, what happened at that time? Different organizations in this country took it upon themselves to challenge under the charter what they saw as being a legitimate interference with the democratic process and freedom of speech of Canadians during a political election.

[Privilege, November 4th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, the real issue with this entire debate is our fundamental freedom of expression. That cuts a wide swath on this debate, I am sorry to say. We are talking about freedom of expression of members of Parliament and that covers a lot. If members across want to muzzle and shut people up on freedom of expression, they are welcome to do it, but I am not prepared to take charter rights away from people in the House.

I will give just a bit of a refresher course. The government passed an election act stating that during the election period third parties cannot participate in election campaigns, a very important charter issue.

[Privilege, November 4th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I am trying to determine the sensitivity of government members to the mailout. We have asked questions, and I suddenly understand where they are coming from.

There was a political scandal involving the Devine administration in the province of Saskatchewan in the 1980s. People were convicted of fraud. However, a lot of members of that administration were innocent. They did not partake in it. They were legitimately innocent, and I have always had a good deal of sympathy for them.

What do we have with Judge Gomery's finding? We have a criminal conspiracy. He outlined the accomplices, Corriveau, Pelletier and others. Who was the principal in this criminal conspiracy? To whom did Gomery point as the inner core of this conspiracy that defrauded Canadians of $100 million? It was the Liberal Party of Canada.

I am sure there are members of the Liberal Party of Canada who did not partake in this conspiracy. They were out of the loop. They were sleeping at cabinet meetings when it was discussed. They had their heads stuck in the sand. They feel they are innocent. I can understand that. My parents always told me to be careful because I would be judged by the people and the organizations I associated with.

I have the greatest of sympathy for innocent members of the Liberal Party who are going to have their political careers destroyed by this scandal. There will be many of them. Their political careers are going to be over. I am certain that has happened in Quebec. I see a lot of people from Quebec fighting for their political lives. I can understand that. They are in a lot of trouble.

I want to bring this topic back to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. We should be debating this from a charter standpoint. Even before there was a Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the Supreme Court said that the essence of a democracy was freedom of speech. That is the bedrock foundation of a democracy and the democratic process. Those two principles are embedded right in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Freedom of expression is a fundamental freedom. It is not a secondary freedom.

I heard the Prime Minister say that he would never permit his Liberal government to take away charter rights from any Canadian citizen. I have heard him say that in the House numerous times. What are we doing here today? Through their motion, Liberal members are trying to muzzle a party in Quebec from communicating the contents of the Gomery report to the citizens of Quebec. I can understand why Liberal members in Quebec do not want the contents to be communicated to Quebeckers. It is making them nervous and it is very unsettling, but it is freedom of speech. The Bloc has a perfect right to communicate the contents of the Gomery report.

I want to bring to the forefront another bit of hypocrisy that took place in the House today and which pertains to the same issue.

The Minister of Public Works today--

[Parliament of Canada Act, November 2nd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I will ask this question for the fourth time because it is relevant. This government, on October 21, announced a special program of $50 million to assist forestry communities in the province of Quebec in dealing with problems that are being caused for the forestry communities.

I am not criticizing a program that would help forestry communities, but I am absolutely amazed by this. What really bothers me and my constituents is why this government would design a program for only one province in the country.

There are hundreds of communities in Atlantic Canada, northern Ontario, the prairie provinces and B.C. that are dealing with major, profound problems in the forestry industry. They cannot access funding under this program. The task force that the NDP government set up in Saskatchewan cannot access funding under that program.

Why does this NDP-Liberal coalition government design programs that leave hundreds of forestry communities on the outside looking in?

[Parliament of Canada Act, November 2nd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I intend to address an issue that arose in my riding, the closure of a pulp and paper mill at Prince Albert. Once that plant closes, there will be 700 people out of work.

From what I can gather we have approximately 300 forestry communities across the country that are suffering from various problems associated with the forestry industry. Clearly, one of the major causes of problems in the country is the ongoing softwood lumber dispute with the United States and the $5 billion that has been stripped out of the books and the revenues of our forestry producers in Canada. It is making it very difficult for those employers to weather the storms that exist in that industry.

It is quite apparent that for the past four or five years since this problem began, the government has been hoping the matter would just go away. It has had no action plan to assist communities with the troubles they are facing.

The Conservative Party and its predecessor the Canadian Alliance, back in 2002, proposed a plan to assist these communities and the employees affected by backstopping the industry through the export development agency to turn these accounts receivable, the duties collected illegally in the United States, and have that cash flow into the books of the companies. Then they would have the cash to deal with the many problems and challenges they are facing.

The Liberal government has refused to accept that proposal. It uses Export Development for the aeronautics industry and other things to backstop an industry, but it refuses to stand up for an industry that is responsible for employing a million people directly and indirectly in the country. I find that disturbing.

What is even more disturbing is the recent announcement that the two negotiators, Mr. Ritchie and Mr. Tellier, are now resigning as negotiators. They are saying that the government is not serious about trying to resolve this matter and that it is not going to get resolved until after the election.

The clear implication of that announcement is that the government wants to use the problems of the forestry industry to conjure up its core of anti-American sentiment that it caters to. It wants to use that as an election issue. That is very unfortunate.

I have a very specific question. On October 21 the government announced a $50 million program to assist forestry communities. There was one slight problem. The program was restricted to forest communities in the province of Quebec. There are hundreds of communities outside of Quebec. My community of Prince Albert cannot access that fund.

Tonight I am asking the parliamentary secretary to explain how this NDP-Liberal coalition government could design a forestry program to assist communities that basically leaves communities like Prince Albert and hundreds of other communities on the outside looking in.

[Agriculture, October 24th, 2005]

Madam Speaker, over the past four years, farmers in my constituency have experienced two droughts, one devastating frost and now a flood.

Extraordinary levels of rainfall this past September have basically wiped out another crop for farmers in my riding. The CAIS program and other federal farm programs provide absolutely no relief.

Historically low commodity prices, a rising Canadian dollar, record high fuel prices and BSE have simply created a perfect storm for our agricultural producers.

Farmers have nowhere to turn. They can only hope that the Liberal-NDP coalition government will come to their assistance. The Liberal-NDP coalition government must take immediate and effective action to help our farmers.

If the Liberal-NDP coalition continues to ignore the problems of Canadian farmers there is only one choice. We will need an immediate federal election that will bring to power a new Conservative government that is committed to standing up for Canadian farmers.