John Manley

[Prime Minister, October 22nd, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, has this country become a place where people are presumed guilty? I think not.

[Prime Minister, October 22nd, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister and the officials responsible for this fund have discussed this situation with the ethics counsellor. The fact is that all the money in this account came from the Prime Minister's personal funds. There is therefore no problem.

[Ethics, October 22nd, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is tripping over the facts.

The facts are that both ministers consulted the ethics counsellor. They received advice and they both followed the advice. That is what is meant by compliance with the ethics counsellor's instructions.

[Ethics, October 22nd, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, let me try to simplify this a little bit.

Both ministers asked for the ethics counsellor's advice. Both ministers followed it exactly.

[1995 Referendum, October 22nd, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, first, the Prime Minister denied the allegations. Second, the current Minister of Transport—who was the Minister of National Defence—also answered questions yesterday, outside the House. I think things are clear.

There is nothing to add except that we have now agreed that if there is to be a secession debate here in this House, then there needs to be a very clear question.

[1995 Referendum, October 22nd, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, let us not forget that in reality, the result of the referendum was no. It is also clear that the Government of Quebec and Mr. Parizeau had very different intentions, with respect to accepting the results simply as a consultation.

What mattered most was knowing what the Quebec government's intentions were with such a complicated question.

[Ethics, October 22nd, 2003]

Apparently they do not, Mr. Speaker. Sometimes the facts are inconvenient for the opposition.

In this case, the issue of dealing with a restructuring at the Irving yards was something that commenced quite a few years earlier. In fact, I was the industry minister at the time. It came to a decision at the time of the budget in 2003. That was a budget decision taken by the Minister of Finance in consultation with the Prime Minister. That was the end of the matter. The money was authorized in the budget and voted on in the House while the recusal period was being respected by the minister.

[Ethics, October 22nd, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, I think that it is--

[Government Contracts, October 21st, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, the fact that we use the best Canadian technology is something that Canadians ought to expect of us. The fact that we acquired them in a year when we had an $8.7 billion fiscal surplus demonstrated our prudence.

We do not sell our technology by showcasing the old stuff. We sell it by showcasing our best and newest.

[Government Contracts, October 21st, 2003]

Let us just speculate on the--