Grant Hill

[Finance, October 1st, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, the throne speech has 59 promises in it, some, of course, recycled. We deserve to know what these promises will cost. That means a budget. A return to an annual budget in fact would be real nice.

Could Canada have a budget this year to cost out this Prime Minister's legacy promises, yes or no?

[Finance, October 1st, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberal Party's last budget was tabled in the fall of 2001. According to the Prime Minister, the next budget will be tabled in 2003. We cannot wait that long, considering the huge costs included in the Speech from the Throne.

Why does the Prime Minister not table a budget this fall?

[Agriculture, June 21st, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister knows that trade is a federal responsibility. The government knew that this U.S. farm bill was coming. What did it do? Absolutely nothing. It has failed internationally and it has failed now domestically.

My question to the Prime Minister is this. Is the government going to launch a WTO and a NAFTA challenge so that the farmers in this country will not be hurt by this U.S. farm bill? Yes or no.

[Agriculture, June 21st, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, if the wheat board is such a great success, why does it not operate in the eastern part of the country as well as the west?

It is very interesting to me that three provinces, B.C., Saskatchewan and Manitoba, have all said that they cannot afford 40% of the farm aid package. My question to the government is this. If those provinces do not come up with the 40%, will the farm families in those provinces be treated equally with the rest of the farm families in Canada?

[Government Contracts, June 20th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, when was the action taken? The action was taken almost six years later when it was exposed in public.

The minister knew back in 1996 about Groupaction and the $330,000 for work that was never asked for and work that was never done. The Liberal policy is to find friends, give them a juicy contract and then get some money back.

Why did the minister not act back in 1996? This is 2002. That is a long time not to act?

[Government Contracts, June 20th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, I wonder if that diversionary tactic will work for Canadians.

Back in 1996, when Groupaction was caught on the gun registry issue, it received $330,000 and did not provide anything for that money. The Prime Minister, the Deputy Prime Minister and all the government knew about that back then. Why for six years did they let this scam go on?

[Government Contracts, June 19th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, if the Minister of Justice has not immediately stopped shelling out taxpayers' money to Groupaction, perhaps it is because he is also the political minister for Quebec and does not want to lose this major Liberal Party donor.

[Government Contracts, June 19th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, why not before now?

Let me go back and quote the minister of public works. He said the following in a previous portfolio: I will call for a drastic reduction in the blatant abuse of taxpayers' money for political advertising at public expense.

For the last nine years why did this minister sit quietly when these abuses were going on day after day?

[Government Contracts, June 19th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, the public works minister has said that Groupaction's contracts were bad enough that he had advised the government not to take any more contracts from it. The problem is that the justice department has not stopped shovelling money to Groupaction. How many RCMP investigations will it take before that flow of taxpayers' money will stop?

[Government Contracts, June 14th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, literally every day another ad scam is revealed. Canadians will probably never know how many RCMP investigations have been ordered but this is what they do know. They know that the government has smeared the ethical reputation of the country.

When will we get a public inquiry so that Canadians do not have to face this water torture of ad scam sleaze?