Gilles Duceppe

[Sponsorship Program, March 29th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, this morning in committee, Norman Steinberg made the following comment in connection with the fall 2000 internal audit: “I am deeply disturbed by the fact that some people's impression was that we had characterized the problems as administrative in nature. I believe that serious, unacceptables errors were made”.

I am asking the Prime MInister, who was finance minister and vice-president of the Treasury Board at the time, whether he took the trouble to read this internal audit report, which was available to the Treasury Board and included what Mr. Steinberg described as serious, unacceptable errors.

[Sponsorship Program, March 25th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, the government did not announce the existence of that fund, but it announced its abolition. This is rather strange.

The Prime Minister is trying to put the blame on Mr. Mulroney regarding the creation of this fund. However, at the Privy Council, the Prime Minister's own department, they recognize that the conditions governing the use of this secret fund, the conditions that led to the worst abuse, were set in 1996, and it is also in 1996 that the sponsorship scandal began.

Who was finance minister in 1996? It was the Prime Minister. Under these circumstances, how can he claim that he did not know?

[Sponsorship Program, March 25th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, minutes after the release of the Auditor General's report, the Prime Minister stated that he did not know anything about the sponsorship scandal.

How can the Prime Minister plead ignorance when it was he who, as finance minister, for eight years, budget after budget, gave at least $400 million for the Canadian unity fund, which is the secret fund that was used to fund the sponsorship scandal?

[Question No. 27, March 25th, 2004]

With respect to the payments of grants and contributions by Industry Canada, including the Canada Economic Development Agency for Quebec, for the 75 federal ridings in Quebec in fiscal years 2000-2001, 2001-2002, 2002-2003 and 2003-2004, can the government provide the following information: ( a ) the name of the recipient organization; ( b ) the date of the payment; ( c ) the amount; ( d ) the name of the program; and ( e ) the federal riding in which the recipient organization is located?

(Return tabled)

[Health, March 24th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, it would be hard to say there is no financial leeway, when nothing is earmarked for health. It is hard to give less than nothing. That is why the Quebec finance minister, Mr. Séguin, tells us the $2 billion was from Jean Chrétien, not this government.

Why is the Prime Minister not putting health ahead of political gain at the expense of those in need of health care in Quebec? Why has he given nothing?

[Health, March 24th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, barely a week ago, the Prime Minister was telling us “never again”, yet he has quickly returned to old habits. His government has once again underestimated the extent of the federal surplus. As a result, the budget includes no new transfer payment for health care in Quebec.

Will the Prime Minister admit that, far from being over, the scandal of the concealed surplus funds, which he himself initiated, is still going on, at the expense of health care?

[Sponsorship Program, March 23rd, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, the democratic deficit is the Prime Minister who refuses to answer our questions. That is exactly what is going on here.

His Minister of Public Works and Government Services told us, “Ask the Standing Committee on Public Accounts and you will get all the documents related to the Canadian unity fund”. The Prime Minister has confirmed the existence of this fund.

Why does he now refuse to make these documents public? What does he have to hide? Why make some documents public but not others? What is behind all this? Will the Prime Minister please give us an answer?

[Sponsorship Program, March 23rd, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, while the Prime Minister was spouting fine rhetoric about transparency, the Liberal MPs on the Standing Committee on Public Accounts have just rejected our motion asking that all documents related to the Canadian unity fund, the Prime Minister's secret fund that was used to finance the sponsorship scandal, be made public.

Can the Prime Minister tell us why he had the Bloc Quebecois motion rejected? Why hide the truth about this fund that was used to finance the sponsorship scandal?

[Leader of the Opposition, March 22nd, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, I also rise to salute the election of the hon. member for Calgary Southwest as leader of the new Conservative Party of Canada. I have known him since 1991, when we had our first one-on-one debates, not here in the House of Commons, because he had not yet been elected, but in English Canada in the televised debate concerning the future of the Reform Party as well as the Bloc's positions on the upcoming Charlottetown accord.

I will not be revealing any secrets in saying that I disagreed with him on many subjects, and I still do. Nevertheless, over the years we have been able to develop common positions on a number of subjects, in which all the opposition parties agreed to stand up to the government.

However that may be, in a democracy I think it is healthy and normal that various positions clash; if not, there would be no debates. I can say that I have always appreciated his energy, rigour, tenacity and high level of debate.

Therefore, I wish him good luck, especially in English Canada. In Quebec, there will be confrontations. Good luck.

[Question No. 26, March 22nd, 2004]

With respect to HRDC's payment of grants and subsidies, in the 75 ridings in Quebec, for fiscal years 2000-2001, 2001-2002, 2002-2003 and 2003-2004, can the government provide the following information: ( a ) the name of the recipient organization; ( b ) the date; ( c ) the amount; ( d ) the name of the program; and ( e ) the federal riding of the recipient organization?