Lorne Nystrom

[Sponsorship Program, April 2nd, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, this memo I have today was never raised in the House of Commons. It is from the then chief of staff to the Prime Minister, Terrie O'Leary, and the Prime Minister is clearly copied on the memo, which is now public for the first time and I am willing to table it.

It tells officials which Liberal ad firms are to compete for this multi-million dollar ad campaign. The top firm on the list is McKim Communications, the same firm that assisted the Prime Minister in his Liberal leadership bid.

In light of this, will the government agree to expand the standing committee's terms of reference to include a probe into the activities of the Prime Minister?

[Sponsorship Program, April 2nd, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Deputy Prime Minister.

The Prime Minister has claimed that he wants to get to the truth and to the bottom of the Liberal corruption scandal. It is time that the truth did come out. I would like to now blow the whistle on another Liberal ad scam.

I want to know whether or not the Deputy Prime Minister can confirm that the Prime Minister received a memo dated April 19, 1994, from his then chief of staff, pushing officials in government about which Liberal ad firms to use in the Canada savings bonds ad strategy campaign which was worth millions of dollars?

[Budget Implementation Act, 2004, April 1st, 2004]

The member said he is Conrad Black, Jr., this fellow over here. He actually looks a bit like him, except he has taken off a little bit too much weight.

He mentioned the GST. I want to remind people that it was his party, the Conservative Party, and his former leader, Brian Mulroney, that brought in the GST.

My uncle used to say, “A Conservative is a Conservative is a Conservative”. We had the member from Calgary and we had Brian Mulroney. They are all Conservatives.

I want to ask my Conservative friend across the way a question because he talks about debts and deficits. History would show that it was Conservatives that ran up the biggest debts. I was here for Brian Mulroney's days, his former leader. There were huge debts by Brian Mulroney. I was in Saskatchewan during the Grant Devine days and Grant Devine was a good friend of the member from Calgary and the Saskatchewan Taxpayers Federation. However, in those days he was a Liberal, not Grant Devine, but the member from Calgary.

The member knows about the huge debts and deficits of Grant Devine. It almost bankrupt our province.

Then of course, the best example of all is the hero of the member from Calgary, George W. Bush, the President of the United States. Billions and billions of dollars of deficit in the United States by another ideological conservative. This is the man who lied to the American people and lied to the world about weapons of mass destruction before he invaded Iraq. He is a hero of the Conservative Party.

Here are their leaders and heroes: Grant Devine, Brian Mulroney, George Bush, Ronald Reagan, debt and more debt.

Why is he preaching fiscal responsibility when he knows that the leaders of the Conservative Party around the world are the epitome of fiscal irresponsibility? He comes from Saskatchewan. He knows the proud history of the CCF-NDP and the social democrats in balancing budgets, people like Tommy Douglas, Woodrow Lloyd, Allan Blakeney, Roy Romanow, Manitoba's Ed Schreyer, Howard Pauley and Gary Doer. He knows all of that.

I know he is frightened. He has lost a lot of weight. That might affect him. How can he explain that with a straight face?

[Budget Implementation Act, 2004, April 1st, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to make a comment and ask my good friend from the Conservative Party a question.

[National Security, March 31st, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, I also want to give our party's support for a committee on national security. It would be a positive thing to have.

I also want to register my disappointment that in her remarks today the minister did not make any reference to the charges that were made by the Auditor General the other day about major problems in terms of the work she has done in terms of national security. It would have been very helpful if she would have made a comment today in response to the Auditor General. Those were very serious charges and they should have been responded to by the minister responsible.

We do support the establishment of this particular committee. It comes as part of the democratic reform package of the government. However I want to point out one thing that counteracts democratic reform.

The Liberals are talking about this being a joint committee of parliamentarians, members of the House of Commons and members of the Senate. Members of the Senate are not elected and are not accountable. It is not a democratic institution and this is part of democratic reform. I am sure this committee should be a committee of elected parliamentarians.

I see the parliamentary secretary smiling. He knows the point I make. He knows the member from Sarnia would make exactly the same speech if he were speaking in the House today on this particular issue. If we are serious about parliamentary reform then there is no place in a modern democratic society for a legislative body that is not accountable to the people of the country.

When we appoint people to a commission, such as the CRTC or any other commission, those people are accountable because they have term limitations and are accountable to the government and to the House of Commons. When their terms expire they are replaced by someone else. Some of those commissions review regulations and some issue licences. They are not institutions that are legislative bodies that make decisions on public policy.

I say to the government across the way that the Prime Minister speaks loudly when it comes to democratic reform but he tiptoes through the tulips when it comes to any real reform of democratic institutions. This is another indication today of the Prime Minister not changing anything in terms of democratic reform.

The committee to be established would review security in the country, which is a very positive thing and something we certainly support. We support the idea that it will have broad responsibilities for issues of national security.

The second thing I want to stress is the non-partisan environment. Security is too important an issue to be controlled by a partisan agenda. I want to suggest, and I wish the minister was here, that the committee be composed of an equal number of government and opposition MPs so it will be truly non-partisan in nature. I would like the government to take a look at that as a possibility.

The committee should also have broad access to information because, without that, it will be ineffective and any work it does will be superficial at best.

Finally, the sensitive nature of the information must be respected by all members of the committee but, at the same time, it should not amount to a gag order on members of the committee being unable to speak out about national security.

We support this. I wish the minister had commented on the Auditor General's report. I also wish the government would not put members of the Senate, the unelected and undemocratic body, on this particular parliamentary committee.

[Canada Elections Act, March 31st, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the right hon. Prime Minister. The Law Commission of Canada is issuing a report today that calls for the ending of our first past the post electoral system and bringing in a mixed member proportional system similar to Germany's and New Zealand's. This commission is a highly respected organization.

I want to ask the Prime Minister whether or not he will now stop talking big and acting small when it comes to democracy and act on this report, because I hear a rumour that he may be considering calling an election. If there is no election, would he consider putting a referendum question to the Canadian people to ask whether or not they want to have a referendum on changing our electoral system?

[Petitions, March 24th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, I have a petition signed by several hundred people.

It is about the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency. The petitioners state that it should be held to the same standards as any other instrument of justice by applying the principles of natural justice, the charter, and common law and that the citizens of Canada as taxpayers should enjoy all the protections provided by the law and that the tax courts in Canada recognize that taxpayers should be assumed innocent until proven guilty.

Therefore, the people have said in the petition that the government should introduce legislation to ensure that all Canadians have the same rights with respect to tax obligations as people accused of crimes, that is, to be presumed innocent until proven guilty, and that relevant legislation should be amended to this end.

The petition is signed by several hundred of my constituents and people from across the country.

[The Senate, March 23rd, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the right hon. Prime Minister.

The Prime Minister often speaks of a democratic deficit, so I want to know what his position is on one of the institutions that is blatantly undemocratic.

The Senate is undemocratic, unaccountable and costs $60 million a year. There will be 14 vacancies in that place by the end of this year.

Will the Prime Minister commit to starting a process of consultation with the provinces with a view of abolishing this unelected, unaccountable, undemocratic, highly priced debating society?

[Terrorism, March 11th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today, on behalf of the NDP, to express my deep sympathy and sorrow at the horrible slaughter of innocent people in the heart of Madrid. This is yet again another cowardly and malicious act against humanity.

Terror is beyond discussion and rationality because the perpetrators have rejected humanity and the values that we all share. Whatever the country which they strike or the cause to which they claim allegiance, organized terrorists share the common goal of weakening freedom and destroying democracy, which was so costly to build.

Our challenge today, amidst the horror and grief, is to fight terror with resolve while refraining from falling into the malicious intent of terror, which is to divide, spread hatred and destroy.

No religion, race or people should be held responsible for these terrible acts. These crimes should be recognized for what they are: acts revealing the absolute madness of terrorist groups who only have the cause of death, chaos and blood to hope for.

We would like today to extend our deepest sympathy to the families of the people involved and the people of Spain.

[Equalization, March 10th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister.

Under the perverse equalization formula, the federal government is now clawing back more than 100% of Saskatchewan's energy revenue, up to $1.25 for every $1 raised by the Saskatchewan government. As a result, Saskatchewan families are now seeing more demand on their provincial tax base.

Will the Prime Minister guarantee that Saskatchewan will not be shafted and that it will be treated in exactly the same way as Newfoundland and Nova Scotia with respect to energy revenue and the equalization formula? It is a very important question for the people of Saskatchewan.