Michel Gauthier

[Young Offenders, May 28th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, all of us here are experienced parliamentarians and we know that the legislator never includes anything in a bill for no reason. Conversely, when it does not include something in a bill, it is because it does not want to.

What are we to think of a government that says through its Prime Minister that Quebec will continue to apply the Young Offenders Act, but whose Minister of Justice systematically refuses to put it in the bill? Who is telling the truth? The Minister of Justice and the legislator, or the Prime Minister?

[Young Offenders, May 28th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, the time for academic replies is over.

My question is for the Prime Minister. He himself said twice in the House, at the beginning of this oral question period, that Quebec could continue to enforce its young offenders system.

I hold out my hand to him today. If the Prime Minister is serious when he says this, let him rise in the House and include it in the bill so that everyone will be happy. That is all that Quebec wants.

[Young Offenders, May 28th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, twice just now, in response to questions from the leader of the Bloc Quebecois and the member for Berthier—Montcalm, the Prime Minister said that Quebec will be able to enforce the legislation as it sees fit and keep the existing system.

If the Prime Minister is serious, why will he not agree to include this in the bill? Just a few words will keep everyone happy.

[Summit Of The Americas, April 23rd, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister basically told those who wanted to be heard on this issue to run for office. That was his answer.

Is there not an extremely serious credibility problem when the Prime Minister tells people to get elected if they want to take part in the talks, considering that he himself kept all the members of this House in the dark and let only cabinet ministers have access to the documents?

[Summit Of The Americas, April 23rd, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, the Quebec City summit gave civil society an opportunity to express to the heads of state who were gathered for the FTAA its disapproval of the fact that negotiations are being conducted behind closed doors, and it sent, through a peaceful protest by close to 30,000 participants, a clear message to the Prime Minister that these talks cannot go on without civil society's involvement.

Did the Prime Minister take note of the lesson in democracy civil society gave him, and does he realize that there can be no talks on the future of our fellow citizens without consulting them, without even discussing the issue?

[Prime Minister, April 5th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is setting himself up as judge and jury in this matter. He is deciding on his own that there is no problem, that the opposition need not get in a state.

I put the following question to him. When the opposition has documents, including a contract signed in 1999 which incriminates him up to here, how can the Prime Minister think there are matters more important than the integrity of the Prime Minister to all those watching?

[Prime Minister, April 5th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, will the Prime Minister not admit that it is rather odd, for those watching in the habit of doing transactions, to have a person who sold property in 1993 end up six years later a signatory to a document giving the vendor's guarantee, promising to assume the legal costs and transferring his property rights.

How does he explain that?

[Canadian International Development Agency, April 3rd, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, we have been asking for the documents for 13 months. CIDA is violating the Access to Information Act. That is the issue. The minister did not understand at all.

In 1996 Claude Gauthier was the one who bought some of the land adjacent to the Grand-Mère golf club, at the much inflated price of $525,000. The connections between Gauthier, the golf club, Placeteco, Transelec and the Prime Minister are most obvious.

Should CIDA's refusal for the past 13 months to give us the information not be perceived as another attempt by the government to cover tracks to prevent us from finding out what really went on in the golf club affair?

[Canadian International Development Agency, April 3rd, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister refuses to order a public inquiry into the Auberge Grand-Mère affair. Moreover, the government is doing all it can to prevent us from having access to information on this case.

How can the government justify that, 13 months after we submitted our request, CIDA still refuses to give us any information on Claude Gauthier, this other friend of the Prime Minister who is also involved in the Grand-Mère golf club?

[Prime Minister, April 2nd, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, it was understood by everyone that when I said to the Prime Minister “Table the bill of sale and we will stop asking questions”, that was because we had his assurance that the bill of sale was exactly that, and proved that the Prime Minister had sold his shares in 1993.

What was tabled, however, proved exactly the opposite. The shares were sold in 1999. That is why we are asking questions.