House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2000, with 51% of the vote.
Health October 25th, 2002
Mr. Speaker, I realize that this is a place for a lot of rhetoric, but the spending on programs, out of total government expenditures, is 37¢ on the dollar. Before that come transfers to the elderly and to the provinces as well as payment on interest on the debt, which we have brought down quite sharply since we have been in office.
If he wants to be specific, yesterday they were asking for us to transfer the air security charge to the overall taxpayer. They want us to increase defence--
Health October 25th, 2002
Mr. Speaker, we will review the report carefully.
If the hon. member would like to be part of the prebudget consultations, I invite him to do so. I would be very interested in hearing him make very specific suggestions about where he thinks any additional spending ought to come from. If he is not prepared to do that, then we will just make the decisions based on the consultations we have on our side.
Taxation October 24th, 2002
Mr. Speaker, the member raises an important question. He will know that the Income Tax Act itself does not specifically permit this deduction, but it has been determined by the courts that in certain circumstances fines and penalties that have been incurred are expenses of doing business.
I am prepared to review this as well as any other provision of the act. We would want to consult thoroughly before making a change that may create unforeseen consequences.
Ethics October 24th, 2002
Mr. Speaker, I believe there is sufficient information available in the press or in the Debates . I believe we have presented a draft bill and a draft code of ethics.
There will be plenty of opportunity for all members to express their views and make recommendations, and we are prepared to listen to them.
Ethics October 24th, 2002
Mr. Speaker, as I have just said in English, there is provision for consultation as part of the selection process. This is exactly the same as for other officers of Parliament, such as the Auditor General of Canada and the Privacy Commissioner.
What has been presented is certainly a draft version and, if there are other suggestions, we are prepared to entertain them.
Ethics October 24th, 2002
Mr. Speaker, I suggest that the hon. member review the bill again. It does not say by order in council. In fact, the language is precisely the same as that which is in the Auditor General Act which provides for a similar process for the selection.
I would not recommend that the appointment be capable of being held up by opposition parties. However, I do take very seriously the importance of having credibility in the name of the person to be selected. We heard, for example, suggestions yesterday from the leader of the Progressive Conservative Party that are very useful as to the manner of selection. We--
Ethics October 24th, 2002
Mr. Speaker, I refer the hon. member to Standing Order 111 which provides for the election by the House of Commons of officers of Parliament of which the ethics commissioner is one.
Ethics October 23rd, 2002
These documents have also been tabled in the other place.
Given that these issues affect members of both Houses, the House and Senate committees examining these documents may wish to consider meeting together to hear witnesses of common interest.
The Prime Minister has stated that the government is open to considering changes which maintain an effective code and serve the interests of members and their constituents. That is why we have tabled these documents in draft form to give the committee flexibility on these matters.
I am pleased to work with the committee and all parliamentarians on these important matters.
Ethics October 23rd, 2002
Mr. Speaker, three initiatives from the Prime Minister's eight point ethics plan have just been presented in the House: a draft bill to establish an independent ethics commissioner reporting directly to Parliament; a draft code of conduct for parliamentarians; and changes to the Lobbyists Registration Act.
In 1994 the government created the post of ethics counsellor, the first of its kind in a Commonwealth country, to implement our 1993 red book commitment and to fulfill the promise that we made to Canadians at that time.
Today we have introduced a draft bill that will go beyond the scope of our campaign promise. It establishes an independent ethics commissioner reporting directly to Parliament.
The ethics commissioner would be a senior officer of Parliament. He would be independent and would have broad powers for the investigation of ethical matters involving ministers.
MPs, Senators and the public would be able to file complaints about ministers with the ethics commissioner. The commissioner would report to the Prime Minister, to the person who has made the complaint, and to the minister being investigated.
The Prime Minister would be able to seek the ethics commissioner's advice on issues concerning ministers, as is the case with such officers at the provincial level. The ethics commissioner would also report annually to Parliament on these matters.
The ethics commissioner would also administer a code of conduct for all parliamentarians, including ministers.
I have also tabled a draft of the code of ethics, based on the Milliken-Oliver report of 1997. The ethics commissioner, who would administer the code, would report directly to the committees of the House and Senate in connection with the code, and would fall under their authority.
The draft parliamentary code is based on the Milliken-Oliver proposals with three modifications which address concerns that have already been raised by parliamentarians.
First, there is a single ethics commissioner for ministerial ethical issues and the code for parliamentarians. This is the approach used in the provinces, where it works well.
Second, there would be no disclosure of spousal interests under the code's disclosure regime to reflect the prevailing view, although disclosure of spousal interests would still apply to ministers and to parliamentary secretaries. This disclosure regime would, of course, be less detailed than what applies to ministers under the Prime Minister's requirements for public office holders. Ministers would continue to make a confidential report of interests for themselves and their spouses to the ethics commissioner. A summary of the information for ministers would continue to be made public.
The third change we have proposed to the Milliken-Oliver code is that only parliamentarians could complain against other parliamentarians in their respective House, and each House would administer the code in its respective Chamber.
The code would serve the interests of Canadians and of Parliament. It would modernize our present rules, as has already been done in the provinces, as well as in the U.K., France and Australia.
Under this code, the ethics commissioner would be an independent source of advice on ethical matters and would provide an independent complaint resolution mechanism.
A code for members must be non-partisan and must serve all members in all parties. The Milliken-Oliver code, on which this document is based, was prepared by an all party committee.
The Leader of the Opposition's September 18 document “Building Trust II” calls for a code for parliamentarians. The House leader of the Progressive Conservative Party put forward a motion in the last session calling for a code based on the Milliken-Oliver report. The leader of the New Democratic Party introduced a bill to implement the Milliken-Oliver report in the last session.
The draft ethics commissioner bill and code will be referred to the procedure and House affairs committee. These documents have also been--
Ethics October 23rd, 2002
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to table, in both official languages, two documents entitled “Proposals to amend the Parliament of Canada Act (Ethics Commissioner) and other Acts as a consequence”, and “Proposals to amend the Rules of the Senate and the Standing Orders of the House of Commons to implement the 1997 Milliken-Oliver Report”.