Grant Hill

[Ethics Counsellor, May 1st, 2002]

There is more, Mr. Speaker.

Here is another example of what I call sleaze. The opposition brings forward an issue on Groupaction and how the government paid twice for it. The auditor general is now called in on that issue. When the auditor general says that should go to the police, what is the Prime Minister going to say then?

[Ethics Counsellor, May 1st, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister said, he has been really useful to the Liberals. Indeed.

In fact, there is a little stench of sleaze and corruption hanging over the government like a cloud. The Prime Minister interestingly enough claims that there is no corruption because no ministers have resigned. Might I remind the Prime Minister that our ambassador to Denmark did not get there as a promotion?

The Prime Minister also says that everything is fine because no authorities have been called in. Might I remind him that on the Shawinigan affair, two of those individuals have been convicted by the courts?

My question is, do those things not count?

[Immigration, April 30th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the immigration minister wondered if there was a franchise for Le Pen here in Canada. With the odours of corruption coming from the government, we quite frankly think that maybe it is another French personality, Pépé Le Pew. That is what the minister is, Pépé Le Pew.

[Immigration, April 30th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, the UN says through the Geneva convention that we do not have to accept anybody at our border who claims to be a refugee and is coming from a safe country.

Is the Prime Minister trying to tell us that we cannot turn away failed refugee claimants at our border just because they are coming here from the States? Is that what he is trying to say?

[Ethics Counsellor, April 29th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, they tried this on Friday too. That is called deflecting. I asked a very specific question about the ethics commissioner and why we do not have one. Now we know why we do not have one. It turns out that this guy is actually writing answers to questions for question period for the Prime Minister on an important issue of could he golf with a celebrity.

I will ask the question again. Why did the Liberals break their promise? Why do we not have an ethics commissioner independent of the Prime Minister reporting to parliament?

[Ethics Counsellor, April 29th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, in 1993 the Prime Minister promised us an independent ethics commissioner reporting to parliament. Instead he hired this counsellor and the counsellor is actually covering for the Prime Minister.

Since these two things are so different, they are not the same at all, why did Liberals break that promise?

[Leadership Campaigns, April 26th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, too many questions are raised regarding the ethics of this government.

Canadians want to see action taken. Taxpayers want the government to be accountable. People want things to change.

Will the Deputy Prime Minister promise to immediately introduce an act to appoint an independent ethics counsellor who will report to parliament, as was promised? Yes or no?

[Leadership Campaigns, April 26th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, let us clarify the letter that we did receive. We put in an access to information request for all documents from Industry Canada on the interchange between Mr. Palmer and the finance minister, and they said to us that there was no information in the department, none.

We were told by the finance minister that there had been consultations. That is why this government looks corrupt to the Canadian people.

What does the Deputy Prime Minister have to say to that?

[Leadership Campaigns, April 26th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, the Deputy Prime Minister wants specific examples to explain why 70% of Canadians say that this government is corrupt.

Here is one. The finance minister's secret fundraiser, raising funds for his phantom leadership bid, is also on the department payroll. That is unethical.

How many more examples does the Deputy Prime Minister need to understand why Canadians think this government is rotten to the core?

[Hepatitis C, April 26th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, four years ago April 28 there was an infamous vote in the House of Commons, Liberals crushing a motion to provide compensation to all the hepatitis C victims of tainted blood. Liberals chose only to help victims during the period of 1986-90.

A young victim, Joey Haché from the Ottawa area, became the hero of the debate. He asked the Prime Minister to explain and said “tell me the difference between someone infected with tainted blood on December 31, 1985 and January 1, 1986”.

I am sure that the forgotten victims outside this artificial legal window of compensation are still waiting and suffering. I am equally sure that Joey Haché is still watching carefully. On this issue he is the Prime Minister's conscience.