John Reynolds

[Finance, November 25th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, it is quite interesting to hear the gentleman and that party talk about meanness after what they have done to our country over the last 10 years. In less than 60 days, there will be a prime minister in the House who has the respect of all Canadians.

The Liberals continue to threaten to punish Canadians if there is an election soon. They threaten to withhold benefits from seniors and soldiers if there is an election. Now the member for Vancouver Centre is claiming that the 2010 winter Olympics will be jeopardized if Canadians go to the polls. That makes as much sense as their previous accusations that British Columbians were burning crosses on their lawns.

Why do the Liberals not stop trying--

[Finance, November 25th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, there is still $40 million missing. Nobody knows where it went. There is nothing to apologize for on this side of the House.

No one can keep track of how many billions of tax dollars the Liberals have made in bogus promises this week. According to the former senior finance official Don Drummond, “The fall update isn't even two weeks old, but already we need a scorecard”. Liberal insider Warren Kinsella says that it is “like 100 monkeys on drugs, writing cheques”.

How do the Liberals plan to pay for this reckless pre-election spending spree? Do they plan to raise taxes, run up deficits or just ignore their promises?

[Finance, November 25th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, in its dying days, the Liberal government has resorted to trying to bribe Canadians with their own tax dollars on an unprecedented scale. According to media estimates, the Liberals have made over $20 billion in bogus pledges over the past two weeks, new spending that was not included in any of the three budgets that the minister brought in over the past year.

Is it not true that the Liberals have thrown away any fiscal plan they may have had in their desperate effort to distract voters from their decade of corruption?

[Wine Industry, November 25th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, history was made here in Ottawa recently at a very exclusive wine tasting featuring Canadian and French wines.

I am delighted to report to the House that the experts and the general public both rated Canadian wines in the top categories over competitive wines from Bordeaux.

A Platinum Reserve Meritage from Cedar Creek in British Columbia scored number one over 17 other wines, both domestic and French. Experts ranked Reserve Merlot from Colio as their number two choice, while Canadian public tasters ranked a Meritage from Burrowing Owl in British Columbia as their number two choice.

This was a great day for Canadian vintners and their wines and it was a great day for Canada. We can take pride in the fact that our Canadian produced wines have been tested and judged as among the best in the world.

More must be done to inform Canadians of the fine quality domestic wines that are available to them. Canadians must be encouraged to choose Canadian wines when the price and quality are comparable.

On behalf of the official opposition, the Conservative Party of Canada, I want to extend congratulations to the Canadian vintners for what they have accomplished and wish them continued success in all their future endeavours.

They deserve our applause for producing wines that compete internationally against the best that France has to offer.

[Question No. 198, November 24th, 2005]

In relation to the dinner that followed the installation of Her Excellency the Governor General: ( a ) who made the decision not to hold the reception at Rideau Hall, as is customarily done; ( b ) why was the decision made; and ( c ) who was on the guest list?

(Return tabled)

[The Environment, October 25th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, they bought the site in the 1970s and they discovered it is toxic in the 1990s. It took 20 years to discover that. The cost to the taxpayers on this land by the end of the lease is going to exceed $1 billion; $1 billion for a piece of empty land. The government never learns. It will never admit to making a mistake and it is compounding a mistake it made over 30 years ago.

When will the Liberals take some action to plug this hole and save the Canadian taxpayers $1 billion?

[The Environment, October 25th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, in 1974 the federal Liberal government signed a 71-year lease with the Squamish First Nation and promised to build the Pacific Environmental Centre. The annual rent for that unoccupied land now exceeds $6 million. The rent over the last 30 years on this now toxic property approaches $100 million. This is more Liberal waste, incompetence and another terrible burden on Canadian taxpayers.

My question is for the environment minister. Why are the Liberals continuing to pay rent on this vacant land?

[Public Works and Government Services, October 20th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, fully two months ago, Cascade Aerospace in British Columbia was informed that based on merit and price the company had been awarded a federal contract for maintenance work on Canada's fleet of Hercules C-130 aircraft.

Then, weeks later, Cascade was informed that the contract was being re-evaluated.

I would like to ask the government if it will guarantee to the House that the contract will go to the best bid, based on merit and price.

[Privilege, June 3rd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, as members of this House know, some time ago there was a report tabled by unanimous consent in the House from the Ethics Commissioner regarding the former immigration minister. It was done by unanimous consent and it supposedly cleared the minister at that time of any wrongdoing.

Yesterday in committee, Mr. Shapiro was questioned quite roundly by members of all parties. He said at that meeting that he had not given anyone, except the former immigration minister, a copy of the actual report.

Mr. Rob Walsh, a parliamentary clerk and legal counsel, told the committee that allowing the former minister to see the full report ahead of the Prime Minister, the complainant and the public breached Shapiro's mandate.

The fact is that we found out at that committee meeting that the report that was tabled was an altered report and had names taken out of it. I think that's unheard of and I would hope that when we get the final report we can be guaranteed that it is unaltered. This is not a job for the government but maybe a committee and that is why I bring it up as a question of privilege. Somehow or other we have to get the message through to the Ethics Commissioner that this House does not want altered reports.

If we had seen the original report, the minister would not have been cleared as everybody said because it was her chief of staff who knew what was going on with the stripper, and she is responsible for the chief of staff.

Mr. Speaker, I would ask you to review this and see if there is a question of privilege. If there is, I would be happy to move the proper motion. We need guidance to ensure that the Ethics Commissioner, who reports to this House, lives up to his mandate and ensures we get all the information that is required on a very serious issue.

[Member for Newton--North Delta, June 3rd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, we know that the chief of staff and the health minister met and talked numerous times with the member for Newton—North Delta. There are two possible explanations: either the chief of staff and the health minister have too much time on their hands, or they are addicted to meetings. There is no other explanation for all those meetings between the Minister of Health and the chief of staff, especially after the Prime Minister ordered them not to make any offers.

How many meetings do Liberals have to have before they can say no?