Jason Kenney

[National Revenue, October 3rd, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday I tabled an affidavit by Mr. Dennis Coffey, a 25-year customs investigator, in which he confirmed allegations of fraud, nepotism and abuse in the Department of National Revenue. The minister has repeatedly denied these allegations. He must have some pretty compelling evidence to offhandedly dismiss Mr. Coffey's claims.

Has the government conducted an investigation into these troubling allegations, what evidence does it have if any, and will it table such evidence in the House today?

[Speech From The Throne, October 2nd, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Etobicoke North mentioned that he is in favour of tax incentives. It is a marvellous idea. It is one that the Liberal government tried in the 1970s to generate economic growth. Instead what it did was it helped to create a $600 billion debt and stagnant unemployment today.

Instead of tax incentives, why does the member not encourage his government to give Canadians tax relief? Instead of picking winners and losers in the economy, why does the member not encourage his government to let Canadians decide what to do with their own money?

Does this minister believe that Canadian taxpayers, small business people and homemakers know better how to spend an extra dollar than do the Liberal politicians and bureaucrats?

[Speech From The Throne, October 2nd, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate the minister on his remarks. This minister is a very accomplished and distinguished minister who has set a tone of constructiveness in his government. While I disagree with much of what he said, I believe that he is a constructive force for federalism in this country and I commend him on that.

This minister does talk a great deal about children and families, which is nice to hear. Liberals do like to talk about those issues but the unfortunate thing is they do not like to act very much on them. In particular, this minister talked about the child tax credit, a commendable albeit very modest effort on the part of this government.

I would like to ask this minister if he thinks it would not be a laudable public policy for the government to pursue tax fairness for families, that is to say to remove the intrinsic penalty that exists in the current code against single income families, families that choose to keep one parent at home to raise their children. There are millions of such Canadian families penalized by the fact that the child care deduction is limited to double income families.

Would the minister support measures such as converting the child care deduction into a refundable credit available to all families? Would he also agree in principle to raising the basic spousal exemption in the tax code to a level equivalent to the basic personal exemption so that stay at home parents are no longer penalized by this government's tax code?

[Speech From The Throne, October 2nd, 1997]

They pay more than their fair share.

[Points Of Order, October 2nd, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Yesterday in the House the Minister of National Revenue challenged me during question period at page 330 of Hansard to produce in the House facts and table them here regarding the question I asked both yesterday and today. He repeated that request today.

Therefore I seek the unanimous leave of the House to table a sworn affidavit from senior customs officer Dennis Coffey with respect to his appeal to the Public Service Employment Commission Appeal Board which substantiates the allegations which he has made.

[Customs, October 2nd, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, I offered just a moment ago to table a sworn affidavit from a 25-year veteran of this minister's department.

That is evidence introduced before a quasi-judicial body of the government. One of the minister's top customs officers has threatened to muzzle and fire this officer of the minister's department for making these allegations.

Is that how the minister treats employees who try to expose fraud, waste and corruption in his department?

[Customs, October 2nd, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Minister of National Revenue dismissed allegations made by a 25-year customs official, Dennis Coffey, allegations of fraud, nepotism and abuse rampant in the Department of National Revenue.

Today we have obtained a sworn affidavit from Mr. Coffey which I am prepared to table in the House confirming his allegations and contradicting the minister.

Given that Revenue Canada has not denied Mr. Coffey's allegations, is the minister prepared to investigate this matter and if not, why not?

[Speech From The Throne, October 2nd, 1997]

Madam Speaker, I want to comment on some of the remarks by the hon. member, some of which were regrettably partisan, to the Speech from the Throne.

There were some very eloquent remarks from the member from Scarborough Centre on Canadian patriotism and the importance of national unity. I would like to strongly second some of the sentiments he expressed. I and my colleagues have always believed that patriotism, a genuine love for one's country, is better expressed through actions than through mere words.

How does the hon. member believe his government can express that love and passion for Canadian unity through actions of fundamentally reforming the federation so that we do not hear the kind of remarks from Senator Carney and so we no longer have the presence of the secessionists in this great Chamber?

Is this hon. member willing to look at reforming the upper chamber of the House so Canada will no longer be the only major federal government in the developed world which does not have proper regional representation in its halls of power? Is the hon. member willing to look at concrete reforms of federal institutions so that all Canadians feel included and can share in the kind of magnificent patriotism expressed by this member?

[Speech From The Throne, October 2nd, 1997]

Madam Speaker, I would like to congratulate the member on his eloquent speech in reply to the Speech from the Throne.

During the member's comments he indicated that he felt the government had restored health to the nation's finances. I wonder if the member could comment on what his definition of economic and fiscal health is.

Does it include 9 percent stagnant unemployment, shrinking family incomes, 17 percent youth unemployment, 100 billion additional dollars in the national debt, the highest personal income tax rates in the industrialized world, a $600 billion Canada pension plan unfunded liability that future Canadians will have to pay for? Is this his idea of giving hope to young Canadians?

I am always entertained to hear members opposite talk with such great passion about the future and youth. This is a caucus that does not have a single member under the age of 30 talking condescendingly about hope for future generations, which it has forever indebted and made poorer because of the choices of the government to add $100 billion to the public debt and the previous government, of which this Prime Minister was an integral member, created the debt to begin with.

Does this minister think that debt and that kind of serious economic problem creates hope for young Canadians?

[Customs, October 1st, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, the minister seems to think that his officials are flawless. Evidence has been introduced at a hearing and Mr. Coffey has made the allegations publicly. I would be happy to table them in the House.

We have learned also that the minister has instructed his lawyers to muzzle and intimidate Mr. Coffey to prevent him from making these allegations of fraud, nepotism and abuse public.

What is the minister trying to hide? Rather than trying to gag a 25-year veteran of his department, why does he not fully investigate these allegations today?