Michel Gauthier

[National Defence, February 10th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, instead of dumping the responsibility for keeping this information from him on all levels of command in the military, would the minister not agree that he only has himself to blame, since he did not even take the trouble to screen the evidence that was available, evidence of which he had been aware since January 23 and to which he had access? Is he not the author of his own misfortune?

[National Defence, February 10th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians from coast to coast had a chance to view two videotapes showing particularly offensive behaviour on the part of members of the Airborne Regiment in Petawawa.

The Minister of National Defence ordered an internal investigation. He obtained a report from the chief of defence staff which referred to the existence of a third videotape, and he subsequently ordered that the Airborne Regiment was to be disbanded.

Considering the particularly vivid scenes contained in the two first tapes, what explanation does the Minister of National Defence have for the fact that he decided to disband en entire regiment against the recommendations of his chief of defence staff, a decision with far reaching consequences, without taking the elementary precaution of personally screening the third

videotape that was mentioned in the report from General de Chastelain?

[Business Of The House, February 9th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask my hon. colleague, the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, to announce the business of the House for the coming week.

[National Defence, February 9th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, the minister says he has no proof of the existence of this tape. It

seems to me that if the chief of defence staff mentions it in his report, that should be sufficient proof for the minister.

Are we to conclude that the minister was so prompt to disband the Airborne Regiment in Petawawa without, as he himself admitted, being aware of all the facts and all the available evidence, because he was probably trying to put a lid on it? Was he trying to cover up reprehensible acts engaged in by senior officers of the Canadian Forces, acts that would tarnish the army's reputation?

[National Defence, February 9th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, by all means, by all means. Considering the controversy around the regiment in Petawawa and the fact that this controversy has even led to the immediate disbanding of the regiment, how can the minister seriously say, two weeks after reading the report from the chief of defence staff, no less, how can he seriously say that yesterday he had no knowledge of the existence of a videotape and today, that he is not sure that the report from his chief of defence staff gives an accurate description of the content of the tape?

[National Defence, February 9th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday when the Minister of National Defence answered one of our questions in the House, he said he had absolutely no knowledge of the existence of a third videotape concerning the Airborne Regiment in Petawawa.

How could the Minister of National Defence say he had no knowledge of the existence of a third videotape, when General de Chastelain specifically informed him of the existence of this third tape in a memo he sent to him personally on January 23?

[Business Of The House, December 15th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I was under the impression that I could dispense with the Thursday

question today, but it seems that my hon. colleague has a number of items to announce, so I would ask him to proceed.

[Taxation, December 15th, 1994]

Let me get back to my question to the Minister of Finance, Mr. Speaker. Perhaps I will get a serious answer. Does the Minister of Finance see the commitment his Prime Minister made during the election campaign not to raise taxes for two years, a solemn commitment made to all Canadians, as a commitment that should be honoured? And if so, why does he not come out and say so clearly, today, instead of letting uncertainty hang over the heads of taxpayers?

[Taxation, December 15th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, it may be that I do not understand what an account receivable is at Revenue Canada, but the Auditor General of Canada and I think alike. Neither of us understand. These members do not understand and neither does the public. The minister is the only one to understand.

[Taxation, December 15th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, this being the festive season, I will cordially remind the Minister of Finance that we have been suggesting tax expenditure cuts for more than a year now. What I cannot understand is why he does not implement our suggestions. We will make some more before the holidays, if he wants to keep an ear out.

I will even offer him a suggestion today. The national Treasury should make a priority of recovering $6.6 billion in unpaid taxes owed to the government. We are not talking about people who have paid their taxes, but about unpaid taxes totalling $6.6 billion. Since he should first recover this amount, could the Minister of Finance then undertake not to look at taxing group dental and medical plans, which have a particular impact on families?