Grant Hill

[Government Contracts, February 12th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, on the culture of corruption, the Prime Minister's latest mantra is, “It wasn't me, it wasn't me”. Well, I have seven kids and I have heard that excuse a thousand times.

Will the Prime Minister simply stand up and take his personal responsibility for this Liberal scandal?

[Auditor General's Report, February 11th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, this scam was set up to put money in the hands of Liberal friendly firms. Money was handed over to those firms for a reason.

How much of that money was given in kickbacks to the Liberal Party of Canada?

[Auditor General's Report, February 11th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, the trouble with that is that the Liberal Party is at the bottom of this problem.

The Auditor General said that this goes much higher than she could investigate. She was restricted to going after bureaucrats. She could not go after the Liberal bagmen and backroom boys who are the problem here.

I have a second question for the Prime Minister. Will the public inquiry be able to go right into the Liberal Party and look at those individuals, those bandits, who stole from Canadian taxpayers?

[Auditor General's Report, February 11th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberal culture of corruption is alive and well. Taxpayers' funds poured through Liberal friendly firms in Quebec. This was a money laundering scheme hatched by the Liberal Party for the Liberal Party.

My question is for the Prime Minister. Will the public inquiry be allowed to look right into the heart of the problem, the Liberal Party of Canada?

[Auditor General's Report, February 10th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, one week into the Prime Minister's tenure and we have a scandal unheard of in Canadian history. That is the legacy of this man. The Prime Minister knew about the scandal yet he said nothing and he did nothing.

Why did he choose to be silent instead of speaking up?

[Auditor General's Report, February 10th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister loves to sweep issues like this aside. Does he not know that there are not enough judges in this country to go after the allegations that are made in the Auditor General's report?

Why did the Prime Minister stay silent when long ago he could have just said, “Stop it. This isn't right”?

[Auditor General's Report, February 10th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, today is definitely not a good day to be a Liberal. I quote the Auditor General:

--the federal government ran the Sponsorship Program in a way that showed little regard for Parliament, the Financial Administration Act, contracting rules and regulations, transparency, and value for money.

What an indictment. Did the Prime Minister think he was really going to get away with this?

[Canada Steamship Lines, February 9th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, it sounds like a benefit to me.

The government did not explain why the rules were not followed. Clause 13 is supposed to be part of all contracts and subsidies.

Was clause 13 included in the agreement with the Prime Minister, yes or no?

[Canada Steamship Lines, February 9th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, that is a bizarre excuse.

The Prime Minister happens not to be a person that has just a few shares in a company. He owns 25% of the company in question. Clause 13 is pretty specific. Clause 13 was broken.

If clause 13 is so useless, that a person can sail a steamship through it, then what good is it?

[Canada Steamship Lines, February 9th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister's company received a TPC grant of $4.9 million of taxpayers' money. The problem is that clause 13 in that contract states that no member of Parliament should receive a benefit from any of these contracts.

Why were the rules for the Prime Minister bent to allow him to receive that money?