Michel Gauthier

[Government Contracts, February 17th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the Prime Minister of Canada toured Quebec telling everyone, in every television station, how angry he was about the sponsorship scandal and how he would be doing everything in his power to reveal the truth. The Deputy Prime Minister has repeated about ten times now that they have nothing to hide. I have a test for them. All I am asking for is one little piece of information.

Who are the ten ministers in your gang who paid $270,000 for a $27,000 study? That should be easy to answer.

[Auditor General's Report, February 16th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, the government should not think those listening are fools. I repeat my question.

Ten ministers among those present purchased the same poll at a cost of $27,000 for the first copy, $27,000 for the second copy, $27,000 for the third copy and so on, ten times.

Does the government not realize that these are not more or less appropriate practices but rather practices strangely similar to those used with regard to the Groupaction report that has yet to be found? That is unacceptable. A total of $270,000 was paid for a report that cost $27,000.

[Auditor General's Report, February 16th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, in her report, the Auditor General states that one poll costing $27,000 was sold ten times to ten different ministers of this government.

I ask the government the following question. If the Prime Minister is serious when he says he wants the truth, and questionable practices, to be revealed, could someone tell us which ten ministers each paid $27,000 for a report, for a total of $270,000?

[Government Contracts, February 12th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, by hiding behind a flimsy argument like that, he makes it obvious that this action is criminal. In the case of the Prime Minister, who was finance minister and vice-president of the Treasury Board, could we speak not of departmental solidarity, but rather of departmental complicity?

[Government Contracts, February 12th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, the member for Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine said she raised the sponsorship issue in caucus as early as 1999. She asked, among other things, why grants were going to companies that had not done anything. The Prime Minister said it was an administrative problem. It is not administrative, but criminal to pay money to people who have done nothing.

My question is for the Prime Minister. In light of the principle he has just announced at a press conference, that those who knew and did nothing should step down, should he not lead by example and step down himself?

[Auditor General's Report, February 11th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, in addition to the 441 questions asked by the Bloc Quebecois, on May 9, 2001 the Globe and Mail had a full article on the scandals that were beginning to surface. The Prime Minister does read the Globe and Mail , I assume. After that, all the newspapers— La Presse , Le Devoir , Le Journal de Montréal —were talking about it. I hope the Prime Minister reads one of them. They reported that there was a scandal in the government.

How does the Prime Minister dare to tell the world, without blushing, that he did not know?

[Auditor General's Report, February 11th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, in this House in May 2000, my colleague, the hon. member for Rimouski-Neigette-et-la Mitis, raised the first instance of the use of front men in the federal government's communications contracts. The Bloc Quebecois did so again in June 2000, at the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology.

We asked questions in the House on May 7, 2001, May 9, 2001, and in March 2002. In all, the Bloc Quebecois has asked 441 questions about the sponsorship scandal.

How dare the Prime Minister claim that he did not know?

[Auditor General's Report, February 10th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, when the Prime Minister says we do not know how things work, it is clear from watching them that they do know how things work. For five years now, they have known how things work. Now, when the Prime Minister wants the public's sympathy, he tries to slough off his responsibilities with respect to Alfonso Gagliano.

I am asking the Prime Minister this. Can he assure me that the inquiry will target all his colleagues who contacted Alfonso Gagliano when he was responsible for the program in which the Prime Minister, when he was finance minister, invested $50 million per year for 5 years?

[Auditor General's Report, February 10th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, the leader of the Bloc Quebecois has just asked the Prime Minister to ensure that the members of the commission, aside from the chair, are approved by all the opposition parties in this House, since the government is involved in the scandal right up to its neck. This is not a huge request. We would like to have objective commissioners.

Yes or no, will the opposition be asked to approve the appointment of an objective commissioner who is not linked to this government that is so deeply involved in the sponsorship scandal?

[Auberge Grand-Mère, February 9th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, as Judge Denis clearly indicated, the former prime minister, Jean Chrétien, intervened not once, but three times to insist that Auberge Grand-Mère obtain that loan. He even acted, it seems, as if he were the bank's sole shareholder. That is a very serious accusation.

Given that former prime minister Chrétien told us in the House that he had simply done his job as a member of Parliament, it is clear that he lied to the House. I would ask that the government allow him to be called before the committee to clarify this issue. It is extremely important.