Mr. Speaker, I simply wanted to tell you that, even when we were talking about Montreal Sports International—I would not talk about it—there were Serge Savard, Groupe Everest, and the member for Bourassa was there, but —
House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2006, with 62% of the vote.
Privilege November 3rd, 2005
Mr. Speaker, I simply wanted to tell you that, even when we were talking about Montreal Sports International—I would not talk about it—there were Serge Savard, Groupe Everest, and the member for Bourassa was there, but —
Privilege November 3rd, 2005
Since I am being asked to go on, I shall.
However, the most interesting part is in the June 17, 2004 issue of Le Journal de Montréal . No direct mention is made of the sponsorship scandal, but you will see that even though the stage changes, the characters often remain the same.
We read the following: “A large number of personalities close to the federal Liberal Party have hovered around ISM since their inception in June 1998.”
On the other hand, when ISM—
Privilege November 3rd, 2005
Mr. Speaker, I will ask him, through you, if he said that or if he did not.
According to the member for Bourassa, he is not named at any time in the Gomery report and thus has no reason to be named in the Bloc document tracing where the money went. He has perhaps forgotten to read some of the pages of the report, so I will read them out for him. Had he taken the time to look at page 363, he would have seen the following:
Mr. Guité's claims are rejected. He used sponsorship funds to make hockey tickets in a luxury box at the Corel Centre available to himself and to his guests, including PWGSC personnel, senior public servants such as Roger Collet, and politicians such as [the member for Glengarry—Prescott—Russell] and [the member for Bourassa].
I will just speak about the person who has introduced the motion. It is interesting that he says he had nothing at all to do with the sponsorship scandal, did nothing that could in any way lay him open to reproach, incriminate him or cast doubt on his integrity in connection with the sponsorship scandal. Before it occurred to him to institute proceedings against the Bloc, he ought perhaps to have done so against certain newspapers. I will quote from a few of the ones that have mentioned him. In those days he seems to have had a thicker skin than he does today.
In the November 2 edition of Le Quotidien , we can read the following on page 6:
The commissioner recalls that Mr. Lafleur, the only ad agency owner in a club called the cigar club, did not hesitate to invite several politicians to his box to watch a Canadiens hockey game.
In the previous quote it was a box at the Corel Centre; now it is a box to see a Canadiens hockey game in Montreal. I will now continue with what it says on page 6 of
Le Quotidien:
Chief among these were Jean Pelletier, Jean Carle, Alfonso Gagliano, [the member for Bourassa] and Martin Cauchon. “There was a sort of culture of entitlement according to which persons enjoying Mr. Lafleur’s largesse [there is no need for me to name them] apparently did not feel that there was anything wrong in being entertained by someone who was receiving, and hoped to continue to receive, obviously lucrative federal contracts”, as Justice Gomery points out.
Not that this was ever referred to.
In the November 1 issue of Le Soleil we read the following—maybe the member will feel like suing other people:
The Liberals themselves await the release of the report with resignation, hoping to limit the damage. And as the member [for Bourassa] and former minister said on his way out of the Commons, “One should not defend the indefensible. It there was embezzlement, I have no pity for that and it must be punished accordingly”.
This was written by Raymond Giroux. I hope the member agrees with him.
The member for Bourassa tells us he should not be associated with the Gomery report as his name is not cited therein. I am going to read from page 51 of the summary. This may ring a bell. I quote:
Mr. Lemay is a respectable businessman whose enterprises, Polygone and Expour, arranged and managed shows and exhibitions and also published specialized magazines. In 1996 one of Mr. Lemay’s employees was [the member for Bourassa], a personal friend of Mr. Renaud. In August or September 1996, most probably at the initiative of [the member for Bourassa], Messrs. Brault and Renaud were invited to meet Mr. Lemay, his associate Michel Bibeau, and Mr. Corriveau, where Mr. Corriveau explained a major exhibition that was planned at the Olympic Stadium in Montreal in 1997—the Salon National du Grand Air de Montreal. Mr. Lemay says that Mr. Corriveau put him in touch with Claude Boulay of Groupe Everest, which was contracted to handle publicity and public relations for the Salon.
This is in the Gomery report.
Privilege November 3rd, 2005
Mr. Speaker, I am a little uncomfortable speaking right after the President of the Privy Council because she is telling us that we should feel guilty and she is almost asking us to apologize. However, I would like to remind her of a few facts and maybe she could tell us who should be apologizing.
We are always being asked to quote from the Gomery report, so I will do that. We read on page 14:
From 1994 to 2003, the amount expended by the Government of Canada for special programs and sponsorships totalled $332 million, of which 44.4%, or $147 million, was spent on fees and commissions paid to communication and advertising agencies.
I wonder who should be apologizing.
In his testimony before Gomery, Marc-Yvan Côté said that in 18 ridings of eastern Quebec, brown envelopes containing dirty money had been given out, and that 9 of those had been given to candidates.
The member for Ahuntsic tells us to quote the Gomery report to make sure that we are not making any mistake. I would remind her that she may, if she is interested, refer to page 305 of the report, which states:
Mr. Côté divided the money into ten envelopes, which he gave to the candidates in need of assistance at the time the Liberal campaign was officially launched in Shawinigan, for payment of their personal expenses.
I could repeat it outside, here in the House, at home or even to her face. I am quoting from the Gomery report. That is what was said.
They talk to us of ethics and respect. I wonder where the ethics and respect of the member for Bourassa were when he said, and I do not have a date, to Osvaldo Nunez, then member for Bourassa that if he was not proud of his country, he could go back to Chile.
We could have asked him where his respect was then—
Privilege November 3rd, 2005
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Is the minister talking about the Bloc Québécois subamendment? Is it actually on that matter that she is speaking?
Sponsorship Program November 3rd, 2005
Mr. Speaker, things are not right. The Minister of Transport claims that the decision on the lifetime banishment of certain persons from the Liberal Party applied to all those directly or indirectly connected with the dirty money by the Gomery report, yet a dozen or so Liberal Party of Canada candidates are directly implicated as having personally received some of the dirty money in 1997, according to that report.
Why would this lifetime ban not apply to those individuals? What makes them any different?
Sponsorship Program November 3rd, 2005
Mr. Speaker, let us read from the Gomery report. On page 305, it states: “Mr. Côté divided the money into ten envelopes, which he gave to the candidates in need of assistance at the time the Liberal campaign was officially launched in Shawinigan, for payment of their personal expenses”.
How can the Prime Minister claim to accept the Gomery report, announce a major cleanup of his party, and yet not take this compromising revelation into consideration?
Sponsorship Program November 2nd, 2005
Mr. Speaker, there is a serious problem. The ministers assured us dozens of times, here, from their seats, that the Treasury Board rules were followed to the letter in the sponsorship program. Yesterday, Jean Chrétien said that his ministers had assured him of this personally on a number of occasions.
Based on that statement, how can the Prime Minister explain that, as vice-chair of the Treasury Board, he gave guarantees of this nature to Jean Chrétien, when he knew they were false?
Sponsorship Program November 2nd, 2005
Mr. Speaker, the government is refusing to say whether what Jean Chrétien said yesterday was true about the ministers of the Treasury Board responsible for the administration of the sponsorship money assuring him that the rules were followed. The former President of the Treasury Board is shaking her head no.
Can she tell us outright whether in her opinion Jean Chrétien was lying yesterday or not?
Sponsorship Program November 1st, 2005
Mr. Speaker, the culture of corruption runs deep in the Liberal Party of Canada. The Prime Minister and his party continue to act as though taxpayer dollars belong to them. They no longer have any credibility for cleaning things up.
Does the Prime Minister realize that the only way to clean things up and to clear the air is to call an election in order to get rid of this corrupt government?