House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word was health.

Last in Parliament September 2008, as Liberal MP for West Nova (Nova Scotia)

Lost his last election, in 2011, with 36% of the vote.

Statements in the House

November 13th, 2007

Mr. Speaker, perhaps I should clarify a few facts for the gentleman opposite. An order to surrender can only be put into effect by a minister and can only be reversed by a minister. A stay can be done by a minister. If it is so important that he speaks to this matter then why would they try to scurry him out at 6 o'clock in the morning. All we are asking is that we ensure he is here to testify in those investigations.

First, the government does set the terms of reference. The Prime Minister can delegate authority for somebody to give him some recommendations but he maintains the responsibility for the terms of reference. Only the Prime Minister can do that because that is his responsibility.

The member spoke about new allegations on which they acted so quickly. The Prime Minister had that information in his office for seven months. When those same letters came to the Leader of the Opposition, the Leader of the Opposition turned it over to the RCMP within 14 days--

November 13th, 2007

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise this evening to discuss the issue of a public inquiry into the Airbus affair.

This question has been quite active in the last five sitting days of the House. The Liberal Party has been hammering away asking for a public inquiry and giving the reasons why there should be a public inquiry. Finally we learned today that such an inquiry will be called. Unfortunately, we do not know the scope of the inquiry and we do not know when the inquiry will begin. Therefore, it is important that we take a step back and see how this all came to be.

Members will remember hearing this in the House and seeing media reports about it shortly after the government took power. When it became public in government documents, in documents filed with the court, that Mr. Mulroney had accepted a $300,000 cash payment from Mr. Schreiber and did not declare the taxes on it at the time but declared them some five years later through voluntary disclosure to avoid penalty, the current President of the Treasury Board, who was then the minister of justice, asked the department for a briefing on this matter. His thinking, which was right at the time, was that perhaps we should recover the $2.1 million in taxpayer funds that had been given to Mr. Mulroney and that if some of the funds had not been paid out, then they should not be.

We subsequently learned that an order from somewhere on high went to the ministry that they should not brief the minister. Therefore, the minister was not briefed.

The person who is making these allegations against Mr. Mulroney is in a holding facility awaiting deportation to Germany where he faces some tax evasion charges. The day that he was going to court to hear exactly whether or not his appeal would be heard and if he would be able to remain in Canada because he raises certain points, at six o'clock in the morning, the RCMP went to the holding facility and told him they had to bring him with them because new charges were being laid and he had to go to court. He contacted his lawyer and found out that that was not true. Obviously, the government was preparing to, the minute that the court rendered its decision, throw him on a plane and get him out of the country so that he could not file a leave for appeal or ask for a stay of surrender. It would have been very convenient for the Conservative government because nobody else is going to speak in this matter, nobody else has the information that he has. Luckily, his lawyers were able to keep him in the country.

Then we started to find out a lot of other things about the Schreiber-Mulroney affair. We found out that he put a lot of pressure and finally Mr. Schreiber told us that he saw Mr. Mulroney when he was still in office, that he made a deal with Mr. Mulroney for the $300,000 while Mr. Mulroney was still the prime minister and that he gave him the first $100,000 when Mr. Mulroney was still a sitting member of Parliament.

Those allegations came to light and that forced the Prime Minister to react. Last Friday he told us that he is going to name an independent person to advise him on what he should know is his duty to call for a full public inquiry. Today after more pressure and suggestions by Mr. Mulroney that there should be such an inquiry, he said that that person will tell him what the scope of the inquiry should be.

I will tell the minister, through the parliamentary secretary, what the scope should be. It should be a full inquiry, looking at all of the activities among Mr. Schreiber, Mr. Mulroney and the Conservative Party going back to the early 1980s. He should be able to look at the whole question.

Perhaps Mr. Mulroney is innocent of a major crime. Perhaps his only sin is accepting $300,000 in cash and negotiating--

Airbus November 13th, 2007

Mr. Speaker, on January 22, the Prime Minister's Office wrote to Karlheinz Schreiber and said:

On behalf of the Prime Minister I would like to acknowledge receipt of your correspondence of January 16.

I have forwarded a copy of your letter and enclosures to the Honourable [Minister of Justice and Attorney General Canada], for his information.

After January 22, who in the Prime Minister's Office decided to stop all correspondence with Mr. Schreiber? Was this just their scheme to cover up the paper trail? When did the pen pal relationship end?

Airbus November 13th, 2007

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is telling Canadians that he had no knowledge of the specific letter that was sent to his office by Karlheinz Schreiber last March, seven months ago, nor did he have any knowledge of a similar letter that was sent to him just six weeks ago.

Canadians are finding such stories very hard to believe. Let the Prime Minister be clear. In total, how many letters has the Prime Minister received from Karlheinz Schreiber?

Points of Order November 2nd, 2007

Mr. Speaker, during question period, the Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities provided information that should perhaps be corrected, and I invite him to consider doing so.

He referred to the 400th anniversary celebrations for Quebec City as the 400th anniversary celebrations for Canada as well. We know that the 400th anniversary of the arrival of francophones in Saint Croix, New Brunswick, and Port Royal, Nova Scotia, was celebrated in 2004 and 2005. Many of our Quebec friends celebrated with us and many Acadians will join the people of Quebec City to celebrate the 400th anniversary of the founding of that city.

Airbus November 2nd, 2007

Mr. Speaker, what are they afraid of? If everything was above board, the government would be trying to help Mr. Mulroney restore his reputation. We must not forget that Mr. Schreiber also has friends in the current government. After all, the Minister of National Defence used to work for Mr. Schreiber.

Maybe the Conservatives do not want anyone to find out the whole truth. Why not call a public inquiry immediately?

Airbus November 2nd, 2007

Mr. Speaker, I know this is very difficult for the Conservatives. Many of them are close personal friends of Mr. Mulroney. Some even served in his government. But that does not excuse the government from taking immediate action to clear up this matter.

Until it opens a full public inquiry, will the government immediately order the Canada Revenue Agency to investigate whether Mr. Mulroney declared the $100,000 in cash when he returned to Canada from New York, as Canadian law requires?

Airbus November 2nd, 2007

Mr. Speaker, let me be clear about this. Had the RCMP known in 1997 that Mr. Mulroney received $300,000 in cash from Karlheinz Schreiber, Canadian taxpayers would not have had to pay Mr. Mulroney $2 million.

The government must act on this troubling new information about Mr. Mulroney.

What is it waiting for? Will it call a public inquiry immediately?

Airbus November 1st, 2007

Mr. Speaker, the government House leader must answer for a lot of ministers in the government.

We know that the Minister of Justice shut down an inquiry into Mr. Mulroney's actions as soon as he got his new job, and we know that Mr. Mulroney is a personal friend and confidant of the Prime Minister. However, these new allegations concerning Mr. Mulroney and cash payments of $300,000 he received demand immediate action on the part of the government.

Why is the government not doing anything? What is it afraid of? Will it call a public inquiry?

Airbus November 1st, 2007

Mr. Speaker, perhaps the government House leader would be interested to know that after that interview, I went home to watch The Fifth Estate.

In February of this year the justice department launched an investigation into Mr. Mulroney, but when the Prime Minister shuffled his cabinet, his new Minister of Justice apparently had one top priority: To protect his former boss, he shut down the investigation.

Now that the people of Canada know what he knew, that Mulroney received $300,000 in cash from Schreiber, will he now change his mind, recover the $2 million and launch a full public inquiry?