Dick Harris

[Public Sector Pension Investment Board Act, April 26th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I have been waiting most of the day to speak. I think the real question is, can Canadians trust the Liberal government? If Canadians could trust the government they would probably say that the promise to take the $30 billion and pay down the debt is a good thing. However, considering the numerous promises that have been broken since the Liberals came to power in 1993, can we really trust them? We in the official opposition certainly cannot. The Liberals have given us an overwhelming amount of reasons to mistrust them.

We have the dreaded fear that when Liberals get their hands on money like $30 billion they simply will not do what they say they are going to do. As my colleague from Medicine Hat pointed out, the Liberals said they were going to scrap the GST during the 1993 campaign. They went house to house, doorstep to doorstep, telling potential voters that if they were elected they would scrap, kill, abolish the GST. This is 1999 and the GST is still there.

Even the member for Port Moody—Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam is still paying GST. When he goes downtown to buy a can of Lysol he still pays GST on it. We are getting a little closer to the truth now.

Government members are telling us once again “Trust us. We are going to appoint this board and, by the way, in case Canadians do not know, this board will not be subject to the scrutiny of the auditor general, the chief watchdog of crown money”.

This board will not be accountable to the auditor general. This is the same thing we argued when we protested the propriety of the board which oversees the multibillion EI fund. The government staunchly refused to allow that board to be accountable to the auditor general. It is doing it again with the public service employee pension fund. One can only look at the Liberal record and say “Can we trust them once again?”

The other thing that really bothers us is that once again the government has cut off debate. This is something which the Liberals, when in opposition, railed against. Former Prime Minister Brian Mulroney, whom we are all thankful is gone, and the dreaded Tory government brought in closure time after time. Liberal members said that was the most disgusting thing a government could do. What have they done? They have beaten the record of the Tories. They have gone way past the Tory record. We are up to the 53rd or 54th time.

Yes, they paid down the debt. However, they have raised taxes by some $40 billion since 1993. These are tax increases, not simply the increase in revenue that the minister talks about because the economy is paying that. They raised taxes in 39 or 40 different areas to the tune of about $40 billion. They beat the deficit on the backs of Canadians.

Even the member for Port Moody—Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam talks about it. The residents of that town tell me they are very happy he is in Ottawa and not still the mayor. That was his best campaign promise: “If you elect me in the federal election I will leave town and go to Ottawa”. Boy, did he pull in the votes.

I want to close by reaffirming that this is all about trust. Who can trust the Liberals? The record speaks for itself. They have broken many promises and we should not give them the opportunity again.

[Public Sector Pension Investment Board Act, April 26th, 1999]

Madam Speaker, while we appreciated whatever the member just said, he did not answer the question from the member for Calgary Centre.

He stood up for 20 minutes in debate and seemed to have at least assured himself that he was talking about a subject he knew about, so the member for Calgary Centre asked him a question regarding the definition of the relationship of a conjugal nature. He wanted to know if two roommates who were close and shared expenses but had no physical relationship would qualify.

The member did not answer the question. I would just like to give him an opportunity to specifically answer the question that the member for Calgary Centre asked him and which I put to him again.

[Public Sector Pension Investment Board Act, April 26th, 1999]

Give us a break.

[Pensions, April 23rd, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberal law is pay more, get less. That is their law. They have scooped $26 billion from the EI surplus and now they will raid another $30 billion surplus from the public service pension fund. It is not their money.

Why are the Liberals so intent on destroying the security of Canadians' pension plans by constantly raiding surpluses? And they have their eyes on another $30 billion. It is not their money.

[Committees Of The House, April 21st, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. When you called for a resumption of debate, the hon. member for Calgary East was quite prepared to stand and continue the debate. Unfortunately he was missed. I wanted to bring that to your attention.

[Committees Of The House, April 21st, 1999]

They support tied selling.

[Committees Of The House, April 21st, 1999]

The Prime Minister said that in May 1994. He said that he would search out an ethics commissioner who would create the code of ethics.

He did not confer with the leader of the opposition or the leader of the Reform Party. We were the third party then. We are now the official opposition. Not only did he not fulfil that promise, but now he says that there is a code of ethics he is unable or unwilling to present to the House.

In short, the conclusion I draw is that there must be something the Prime Minister is not telling us about this code of ethics.

[Committees Of The House, April 21st, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, the only conclusion I can draw is that either there is not a code of ethics, as he says there is, or he has some fear that his cabinet ministers might breach that code of ethics.

He has not only refused to produce the so-called code of ethics. He failed on another promise that he made in May 1994. He was asked if there would be a code of ethics and he said yes. He said “As a matter of fact I will consult with the leader of the opposition and the leader of the Reform Party before making that appointment”.

[Committees Of The House, April 21st, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, on the wall of my constituency office is a code of ethics that I signed in front of over 100 witnesses when I was first elected in 1993. I had no hesitation in making that code of ethics public. It hangs in my office for all my constituents to see. It outlines all the promises I made to my riding and how I would conduct my duties as a member of parliament, their elected representative.

I ask nothing less than that of the government. Let it put forward its code of ethics. Let the Prime Minister tell the Canadian people exactly how he expects his ministers to do their job. The Prime Minister has not done that. Every single Liberal member of that government voted against it last night. This was a shameful thing for them to do and they should be ashamed of themselves. They have once again betrayed the trust of the Canadian people.

[Committees Of The House, April 21st, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, of course I withdraw that. Let me rephrase that. I see you are anticipating this new phrase.

The Prime Minister has told us that this code of ethics exists and that it is a real thing but he has been reluctant or has refused to deliver it.

Either this code of ethics does not in fact exist—and the Canadian public, the opposition and even the government's own backbenchers can draw whatever conclusion they want from that—or this code of ethics does in fact exist and the Prime Minister, in his refusal to present it in the House, is doing it because he does not want his own cabinet members, the most powerful decision makers in the country, to be subject by the Canadian people to the close scrutiny that would be available if that code of ethics was made public.

One has to then draw the conclusion that either it does not exist, even though the Prime Minister has said it does, or it does exist and the Prime Minister feels that he may just possibly be embarrassed by the conduct of his ministers. Given that those must be the only two conclusions we can draw, I say in the House that both of them, either one of them, are totally unacceptable in parliament.

When the Canadian people look at the House of Commons and see the Prime Minister, the cabinet, the government and the opposition benches, I think we would all want them to have as much confidence as possible in the decision making that goes on in the House.

Incidentally, the Prime Minister, in both of his red books, promised over and over again openness, transparency, honesty and straightforwardness in how the government would run the country. We see no example of that.

This is a very simple request. If the Prime Minister has a code of ethics for his ministers, which he says he holds them responsible to, he should just simply present it to Canadians so they can benefit from it and be able look at it and say “This is fantastic. I can see now that every cabinet minister in this government must hold themselves to the highest standards in the operation of their jobs and in the performance of their duties”.

That is what we in the Reform Party want for Canadians and what I want for Canadians. However, that is obviously not what the Prime Minister and every single one of his Liberal members want for Canadians. That is a shameful display of arrogance in this House.

I have received many letters from constituents all across the country asking me why the Prime Minister will not table this code of ethics. They what to know what he is afraid of. Only the Prime Minister knows what he is afraid of. Only the Prime Minister knows the danger that might be present if he were to table that code of ethics for his ministers. Not only could we judge and scrutinize the way cabinet ministers carry out their duties, but indeed all Canadians could do that. Maybe then the Teflon jacket on our Prime Minister would start to fray.

The vote last night by all the Liberal members in unison was an absolute shame. It was a black mark on democracy. It was a slap in the face of Canadians who want to trust the government. The Liberals should be ashamed of themselves. I hope the people of Canada will hold each and every one of them responsible for it. I would ask them to check out their local newspapers when they get back to their ridings.