René Laurin

[Business Development Bank Of Canada Act, May 30th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, Bloc members will be voting nay.

[Access To Quebec Market, May 19th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I remind our colleagues from the maritimes and Ontario that, this year, trade between Quebec and the rest of Canada will amount to over $70 billion in goods and services. In Ontario, hundreds of thousands of jobs are tied to exports to Quebec. As for the maritimes, let us just say that access to the Quebec market accounts for a large part of their GDP.

Make no mistake about it: the Quebec market is the second export market for the rest of Canada. Ontario's three largest private employers, GM, Ford and Chrysler, would really suffer if they were to suddenly lose the Quebec market, which absorbs one quarter of their total production.

The federalists' bluff must be denounced. If Quebec becomes sovereign, no politician from Ontario or the maritimes in this House would be able to ignore these facts and what they mean for the economy of their respective ridings. Negotiating the maintenance of a common economic space will then be a question of common sense and economic interest for all partners.

I leave it to the members of this House to draw their own conclusion.

[Royal Canadian Mint Act, May 19th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, when a member has the floor, I think his colleagues should at least give him a chance to express his views and other people a chance to listen. The comments being made right and left make it impossible for us to listen undisturbed to what the speaker for our party has to say. I would appreciate, Mr. Speaker, if you would call my colleagues to order.

[Foreign Affairs, May 17th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, will the President of the Treasury Board confirm that this privilege, introduced in 1993, was designed to allow diplomats posted overseas to avoid the salary freeze now affecting public servants?

[Foreign Affairs, May 17th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the President of the Treasury Board. Contrary to what the Minister of Foreign Affairs said yesterday, Foreign Service Directives Nos. 45 and 50 still allow diplomats to cash in their plane tickets to Ottawa, to pay for vacations anywhere in the world. The auditor general is critical of Treasury Board's decision to no longer ask for vouchers.

Given the condition of our public finances and the fact that the government is about to eliminate 45,000 jobs in the public service, how can the President of the Treasury Board still allow such a privilege for diplomats, which will cost over $8 million this year to Canadian taxpayers?

[Auditor General's Report, May 16th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, despite the reduction in the number of diplomats posted overseas, the total cost of their vacations, paid for by taxpayers, continues to increase at the rate of 9 per cent a year.

Can the President of the Treasury Board tell us why public officials posted overseas can enjoy all-expenses-paid vacations in an era of budget cuts?

[Auditor General's Report, May 16th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the President of the Treasury Board.

All federal public servants have had their wages frozen for several years. In his latest report, the auditor general reveals that, since 1993, diplomats have been allowed to cash in their plane tickets to and from Ottawa to pay for vacations anywhere in the world, without even having to submit vouchers.

How does the President of the Treasury Board justify this 1993 directive, which nets Canadian diplomats posted overseas $8.4 million a year, or about $5,000 tax free per person?

[Seagram, April 28th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, given the answer just provided by the Minister of Canadian Heritage, I will direct my supplementary to the Minister of National Defence.

How does the Minister of National Defence explain the fact that, this morning, his department refused to release information concerning the use of Challenger jets by cabinet members during that period, this at the specific request of the Prime Minister's office? What is the Minister of National Defence also trying to hide?

[Seagram, April 28th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Canadian Heritage.

Two weeks ago, the heritage minister put himself in a conflict of interest by making a secret trip to Los Angeles, to meet Liberal friends conducting a megatransaction which involves Canadian cultural interests and which will require Investment Canada's approval.

Will the Minister of Canadian Heritage tell the House if he used a government aircraft and will he also tell us who accompanied him on that trip out west?

[Minister Of Canadian Heritage, April 28th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Canadian Heritage, like lightning, strikes again.

After betraying Canada's interests in the Ginn Publishing case, sending a letter to the CRTC in an attempt to unduly influence a decision regarding a broadcasting licence, delivering Radio-Canada into the hands of the Minister of Finance and sacrificing Canadian content and our satellites in the Power DirecTv deal, he demonstrated his lack of judgment yet again and put himself in an apparent conflict of interest by being in the

entourage of the Bronfman family when it was signing a deal regarding Seagram which requires Investment Canada's approval.

Here is a man who has a taste for controversy. I would even say a thirst. Only one word comes to mind following these events: incompetence.