Deborah Grey

[Political Contributions, October 6th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, this truly is a wait and see government. It says wait and see about everything. In fact, this $600,000 grant to Videon was reported and announced a full month after a letter went to the police from the minister of HRD to turn in this Liberal money man. Therefore, it is no surprise. We do not need to wait and see. The tainted grant went ahead anyway and the Liberal bagman was still working for the Liberal Party.

If the Prime Minister is not bothered by these sort of fundraising tactics, will he at least put this grant on hold until the police clear up the Shawinigan shakedown?

[Political Contributions, October 6th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, a company called Videon Inc. wanted to build a hotel in Shawinigan, so it applied for a $600,000 federal grant. Videon had not donated a cent to the Liberals ever before, but the very year it applied for this grant it made a donation of over $5,000 to the Liberal Party. In fact the Liberal fundraiser in that area is now under criminal investigation.

Will the prime minister suspend this grant until the police can confirm that this was not extortion of Videon Inc.?

[Foreign Affairs, October 2nd, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, if they have not seen the passports, I am wondering how the minister can determine that they are forged, make that assumption and say it in the House.

If they have not actually seen these passports, how in the world does anyone from the government know they are forged?

[Foreign Affairs, October 2nd, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, the minister just said a few minutes ago that these Canadian passports were forged. I would like to know if an official from his department has actually seen these passports to determine whether or not they are forged.

[Revenue Canada, October 1st, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, it is funny he should talk about personal needs. I am not sure what the qualifications for personal needs would be to go work for FedEx during the time they are unpaid.

I want to ask the minister something specific. There is a veteran customs officer we have just heard about who is going to be blowing the whistle on the corruption at Revenue Canada. It is not just an isolated case like the minister would like to talk about. Documents are about to be filed. This officer reports that when the minister's staff members were supposed to be searching aeroplanes at Toronto's Pearson airport they were actually pulled away from their jobs to expedite FedEx shipments. There is no excuse for this and I want to ask—

[Revenue Canada, October 1st, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, it looks like FedEx is the courier of choice at Revenue Canada. Not only does Federal Express get special treatment at the border, but Revenue Canada employees are actually going on temporary leave to work at this private company.

What does the minister plan to do to stop this blatant conflict of interest?

[Justice, September 29th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the justice minister. When she was appointed and gave her first speech to the bar association this summer it was tough talk all the way. She was going to tighten up victims' rights, tighten up the Young Offenders Act even more and tighten up parole reform. There was not one word about any of that stuff in the throne speech.

What happened to all that tough talk? Who in cabinet vetoed her for the throne speech?

[Throne Speech, September 24th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, the concept of equality and the word equality is what is important. Speaking of justice ministers, it is a wonder that this justice minister did not notice the absence of the word equality and insist that it be put in the throne speech.

It is very strange that the government would mention the unique character of Quebec society and the diversity inherent in the federation and yet not mention equality.

If it is important to him, let me ask the prime minister this question one more time. Why does the prime minister not believe in the inherent equality of all provinces and all citizens, and why was it not in the throne speech?

[Throne Speech, September 24th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, the equality of citizens and provinces became a huge factor and played a large part in the Calgary premiers conference last week. In fact their framework for discussion listed the word equality five times. Yet yesterday in the throne speech we did not hear the word equality even once; uniqueness, diversity, all kinds of words, but not equality.

My question for the Prime Minister is in yesterday's throne speech why in the world was the equality of citizens and provinces deliberately left out?

[Questions On The Order Paper, April 25th, 1997]

Can the Prime Minister's Office and the Privy Council Office indicate whether anyone within those offices, or on contract, was involved in any way in the Airbus affair, or the ensuing investigations, and the nature of their involvement?