Herb Gray

[Taxation, April 6th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member's assertions are without foundation. The claims that the right hon. Prime Minister has spoken disparagingly of the U.S. president or of the province of Alberta and its major industries are totally unfounded allegations.

[Trade Relations, April 6th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, the press reports on which the hon. member is basing his question are not accurate. The Prime Minister has not spoken in a derogatory way of the new president, for whom he has the greatest respect and with whom he has established a very strong and friendly relationship. Our relations continue on a good foundation and my hon. friend is not helping to keep these relations on a good basis by making these unfounded allegations.

[Trade Relations, April 6th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister and the government have not done anything to create damage in our relationship with the United States. We are working very well with the Americans on the dossiers that the hon. member has mentioned. For example, the Minister for International Trade has opened important new discussions with the new U.S. trade representative on the P.E.I. potato situation.

I might also point out that our Prime Minister is the senior statesman among the G-8 leaders. He is widely respected for his experience and his contribution to world affairs. He will continue to have very good relations with—

[Trade Relations, April 6th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has not insulted the new president of the United States. He has excellent working relations with him, and I am sure this will continue.

[Ethics Counsellor, April 5th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, I will take my hon. friend's comments as a representation.

[Prime Minister, April 2nd, 2001]

Absolutely not, Mr. Speaker. There is no conflict of interest and the Prime Minister did table the documents requested by the Bloc and the other opposition parties.

Now, they are not prepared to make good on their commitment to accept these documents and move on to other issues.

Quebecers and Canadians are disappointed with the opposition, because it is not asking real questions about real issues. We in government are the ones working on problems and proposing real solutions.

[Multiculturalism, April 2nd, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is wrong. He is wrong in not accepting the minister's apology and her admission of making a mistake in this area a few weeks ago.

Why does he not accept the very insightful remarks of the president of the Ethnocultural Council when he said “It is necessary for all Canadians to reflect on the greater issue of tolerance and the equality for all”, rather than dwell on specific unfortunate remarks?

The hon. minister has an outstanding record of fighting racism and discrimination, and she will represent Canada with honour and dignity at the conference.

[Multiculturalism, April 2nd, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is wrong. The disgrace is in his question. For example, the president of the Canadian Ethnocultural Council on March 29 issued a statement, which read, in part:

“The Secretary of State for Multiculturalism, has been and continues to be a strong advocate for anti-racism measures and a supporter for Multiculturalism in Canada. Under very challenging conditions she has persevered and advanced the ideals and principles of equality and justice, the fundamental principles of a Multicultural Canada” noted Mr. Hagopian. “It is necessary for all Canadians to reflect in the greater issue of tolerance and equality for all—

[Prime Minister, April 2nd, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has no conflict of interest whatsoever. In my opinion, the Prime Minister is one of the greatest democrats in our entire country.

Once again, the hon. member had the opportunity to ask questions on matters of importance to her constituents. Once again, she has let the general public down. Why are there no questions on the real concerns of her constituents, of Quebecers in general, and of all Canadians?

[Prime Minister, April 2nd, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, once again, this has no connection with the real concerns of Quebecers. The hon. member is not asking any questions about softwood lumber, for instance, or the economy. She is asking farfetched questions.

Eighty-two percent of Canadians are calling for the opposition to move on to something else. Once again, however, the hon. member has broken her commitment to her parliamentary leader by asking this type of question.