Gilles Duceppe

[Sponsorship Program, February 26th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, we can also ask questions here in this place. The minister's silence speaks volumes. By contrast, the Minister of Finance was not afraid to answer from his seat. With the President of the Privy Council, who attended the June 10, 2002 meeting, there are the only two ministers who are still here. Unless they both spoke at once. Since the minister is refusing to answer, it may be that she is hiding something.

I am asking the President of the Privy Council if it was him who, on June 10, 2002, defended the firms that were friends of the Liberal Party. We know that the Minister of Finance rose to the challenge and was not afraid to answer. Now, I am putting the question to the President of the Privy Council.

[Sponsorship Program, February 26th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, we now know that the Minister of Finance is not the person who defended the firms that were friends of the Liberal Party during that June 10, 2002 meeting.

My question is for the Minister of Labour, who held the same office back then and who attended the June 10, 2002 meeting. To this day, she is the only one who has not answered the question. Can she tell us with certainty, from her seat, if she is the one who defended the firms that were friends of the Liberals and that were involved in the sponsorship scandal, at the June 10, 2002 meeting?

[Sponsorship Program, February 26th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, we have questions and we think that the House of Commons is as good a place as any to ask them.

The President of the Privy Council has no recollection. The former ministers of intergovernmental affairs, transport, fisheries and oceans and natural resources all have amnesia.

Unless he too is suffering from amnesia, can the Minister of Finance, who promised to clean up the Department of Public Works and Government Services, and who attended the June 10, 2002, meeting, tell the House from his seat, with certainty, if he is the one who made the comment in defence of the firms run by friends of the Liberal Party? He was there. Was it him or not? We want to know.

[Sponsorship Program, February 26th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, there were seven ministers at the cabinet communications committee meeting of June 10, 2002. Today, most of them say they do not remember which minister continued to defend the firms run by friends of the Liberal Party.

Since the Prime Minister says he wants to get to the bottom of things, can we know which minister continued to defend the firms run by Liberal Party friends one month after the Auditor General published her report on Groupaction, when everyone knew about the sponsorship scandal?

[Sponsorship Program, February 25th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, I did not say that it was him. However, I would like to know who this minister was.

The Prime Minister, who told us that, in May 2002, he noticed that this may possibly have been criminal behaviour, cannot now remain silent. He must—with all his talk about transparency—have the decency to tell us who, among the President of the Privy Council, the former minister of intergovernmental affairs and the other ministers on the cabinet's communication committee, continued to defend the firms that were friends of the Liberal Party. He can tell us, because these are cabinet documents.

Perhaps it was not him—

[Sponsorship Program, February 25th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, according to the National Post , cabinet documents show that, in June 2002, after the release of the Auditor General's damning report on Groupaction, when everyone knew about the sponsorship scandal, an unidentified minister continued to defend the firms that were friends of the Liberal Party.

Can the Prime Minister, who claims to be totally transparent, tell us which minister of the cabinet's communication committee persisted, despite all the abuse, in defending the firms that were friends of the Liberal Party?

[Sponsorship Program, February 24th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, I said that I was not satisfied because something was overlooked, namely individual funds and foundations, such as The Friends of Alfonso Gagliano Inc.

Since the government has nothing to hide, because all the millions in the slush funds of individual Liberal members were transferred to either the Liberal Party of Canada or the Liberal riding associations on December 31, 2003—we asked that this be clarified, but it was not—why is the government refusing to open the books immediately on where the funds now in the Liberal Party coffers came from?

I want to hear what the Prime Minister has to say about this.

[Sponsorship Program, February 24th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday in the House, the government House leader was unequivocal. He said that Liberal transparency had its limits, and there was no question of forcing Liberal members to immediately open the books of their personal slush funds, if they had any.

Will the Prime Minister, who said he wants to get to the bottom of things, admit that the public has the right to know before the election if the money from the sponsorship scandal ended up, for example, in the coffers of The Friends of Alfonso Gagliano Inc., registered with Industry Canada?

[Sponsorship Program, February 23rd, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, if there is no problem, then let them make everything public. Moreover, let them make public the funds denounced by the Chief Electoral Officer of Canada, who talked about the personal trust funds of MPs who laundered this money on December 31—it is impossible to tell who made which contributions—before turning it over to the Liberal Party.

So if they say there is no problem with the Liberal funds—and I do believe them—let them also show that there is no problem with the other funds, and make it all public. Is the government prepared to do that?

[Sponsorship Program, February 23rd, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, the people have the right to know whether the money from the sponsorship scandal ended up in Liberal Party trust funds or in Liberal MPs' funds. As the Chief Electoral Officer has pointed out, it is impossible to know who financed these slush funds.

Will the Prime Minister, who says he wants to get to the bottom of things, open the books of these Liberal slush funds before the election, so that we can find out, at last, whether the sponsorship scandal benefited Liberal members and ministers?