Grant Hill

[Krever Commission, December 3rd, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, the feeble Liberal excuses for not releasing the documents to Krever are not working. Excuse number one, they had to have the permission of former Prime Ministers; excuse number two, the Canada Evidence Act had tied their little hands and they could not act; and now excuse number three, Judge Krever just has to subpoena some more witnesses. But who do we think Judge Krever subpoenaed the documents from? From this Liberal cabinet. Since the feeble excuses are not working, why do the Liberals not just release the documents now?

[Krever Commission, November 29th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, why do we care about these documents?

In 1985 Saxon William Forbes was born. He was given a tablespoon of blood to bring colour to his cheeks. He was constantly sick, diagnosed with HIV and today he has full blown AIDS. This did not have to happen.

Regulations were drafted in 1984. The government of the day decided to quash them. Today the government also has a choice. If it wanted to, it could release the documents to Krever. Why will the Deputy Prime Minister not release those documents?

[Krever Commission, November 29th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, the Canada Evidence Act defence to hide cabinet documents from Krever is bogus.

The McDonald commission in 1979 obtained secret cabinet documents by an order in council and the then clerk of the privy council, Michael Pitfield, admits the decision is discretionary and lies with the Prime Minister.

Since there is a choice, why has this Prime Minister chosen to hide the files?

[Tobacco Legislation, November 28th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, we are making progress. Last week we had a promised announcement; today we will hear about the strategy.

However, Reform is really interested in legislation. When will the government bring this legislation in? Is the minister ready to fast track this legislation so we can get it into law as fast as possible?

[Tobacco Legislation, November 28th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, today the finance minister, who has been the biggest obstacle to anti-tobacco legislation, has announced a hike in the tobacco taxes. I guess the finance minister and the health minister have kissed and made up.

Since the finance minister is now on side, where is the health minister's anti-smoking bill?

[Krever Inquiry, November 27th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, this is criminal. It is nonsense. Nonsense.

The health and safety of Canadians is paramount. No excuse will allow the government to escape from this issue. One of my campaign workers got hepatitis C from a tooth transfusion. She deserves the plain, straight answer from Krever. We want that answer and we will not rest until those documents are tabled.

[Krever Inquiry, November 27th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, back to Krever.

Former prime ministers can divulge information with their permission. This is an issue of Canadian health and safety. There is no one in this government who can hide from the fact that the information is important and necessary.

Once again, if the Deputy Prime Minister will not seek this permission, will she tell the House of Commons why not?

[Krever Inquiry, November 27th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, there is no cabinet nor partisan consideration that would take precedence over the health and safety of Canadians.

Since Pierre Trudeau, John Turner and Brian Mulroney will want to get to the bottom of the tainted blood scandal, I ask very plainly, will the justice minister seek the permission of those prime ministers to release the documents? Will he table his letter in the House of Commons forthwith?

[Krever Inquiry, November 27th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, secret cabinet documents from 1984 that the Krever commission needs can be released with the former prime ministers' permission.

My question for the justice minister is: Has that permission been sought?

[Health, November 26th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, we now know that there is a procedure under the Canada Evidence Act to get at these secret documents that the government is hiding. In fact, a prominent Osgoode law professor, Peter W. Hogg, says: "It is a matter of a competing balance of public interest". The public interest in this case is the health of blood infected Canadians; the government interest, secrecy on bad decisions.

Which minister will stand up today to defend government secrecy over public safety?