Mr. Speaker, I thought the hon. member would start off by attacking and criticizing his colleague for fabricating his radio interview. That is where he should have started. I think he ought to deal with that issue before turning to anybody else.
House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2000, with 54% of the vote.
Multiculturalism March 29th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, I thought the hon. member would start off by attacking and criticizing his colleague for fabricating his radio interview. That is where he should have started. I think he ought to deal with that issue before turning to anybody else.
Multiculturalism March 29th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, I do not condone any questionable conduct from any member on any side of the House.
In particular, I do not condone the unjustified attacks on the hon. secretary of state after she admitted she made a mistake, after she apologized. I do not condone his lack of ethics and his lack of willingness to accept the conventions and traditions of the House.
Multiculturalism March 29th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, I think the House should rise as one and chastise the hon. member for not accepting the conventions of the House that when a member says he or she has made a mistake and apologizes all sides of the House accept that.
Where are her ethics? Why does she not rise and apologize for not living by the traditions and conventions of the House?
Multiculturalism March 29th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, first, when I referred to a member from Calgary running his coffee shop, I should have mentioned a member from Edmonton.
Second, if the member gave the hon. secretary of state four opportunities to say something about what she did, she did not listen four times when the hon. secretary of state certainly confirmed, as did myself and the Prime Minister, that she recognized she made a mistake and she apologized.
Four times in a row the hon. member has shown no sense of ethics when she refused to live by the conventions of the House that when a member says she made a mistake and apologizes we should all accept that and move on to doing the business of the House.
Prime Minister March 29th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, the agreement of 1999 also said that Akimbo received legal advice that Akimbo “retained legal title to the shares since November 1, 1993”.
If the hon. member wants to read the document, let him read all of it. Let him also live up to his commitment that if the sales agreement were tabled he would drop the matter. Where are his ethics? Why does he not live up to his undertaking?
Prime Minister March 29th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, if we look at the agreement dated September 29, 1999, between Prince's company Park Inns and Michaud's company, Placements Michaud, it starts out saying that Akimbo Development purchased from J&AC all the shares in consideration of the terms set out in the agreement. When it talks about all the shares, it refers to the agreement of November 1, 1993.
The hon. member and his party said that if the agreement of November 1, 1993, was tabled it would end the matter. Why do they not live up to their own words?
Multiculturalism March 29th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, my hon. friend did not listen. He does not have the courtesy to say why he and his party are not willing to follow the same conventions they expected us to assume when the member from Calgary misled a radio station in the way he did.
My hon. friend should be willing to accept the conventions of the House with respect to the secretary of state in the same way he and his party expect us to do with respect to the person who apparently thought that running a coffee shop was more important than his duties to the House.
Multiculturalism March 29th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, the hon. secretary of state confirmed she made a mistake in the things she said. She apologized fully for the mistake.
I do not see why we do not follow the usual conventions dating back 100 years in the House, that when a member says he or she made a mistake and apologizes it should be accepted.
The hon. secretary of state is fully committed to fighting against racism and discrimination. Let us all join with her in this necessary fight.
Prime Minister March 29th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, it is my understanding that these documents represented what lawyers felt were necessary to end the matter in a full and final way through, what I guess lawyers call, an abundance of caution.
This does not change the fact that the Prime Minister sold the shares in November 1993 before he became Prime Minister and that it was Mr. Prince who had the full ownership of all the shares the Prime Minister owned before November 1993, who in turn sold them turn to Mr. Michaud. Those are the facts of the matter.
Prime Minister March 29th, 2001
Mr. Speaker, the agreement between the Prime Minister's company and Mr. Prince's company was intended and did cover all the shares owned by the Prime Minister.
The agreement between Mr. Prince's company and Mr. Michaud's company in turn sold those shares to Mr. Michaud's company. There is no missing 3%. It is a figment of the hon. member's imagination.