Jean Chrétien

[Ethics, February 24th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, I just said that the rules were applied. These rules were established after a recommendation by a commission established by the government of the day, the Conservative Party, and were followed by the former minister of finance, and now by the two cabinet ministers who are in the same position. They are all following the rules as they existed in the past and exist now.

[Ethics, February 24th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, I will repeat what I said. All the rules were followed all the time during the time the member for LaSalle—Émard was the minister of finance.

[Ethics, February 24th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, the rules were clear and they were followed. It was made public. Two other members of the government have the same system. Owning a private personal business is not the same as owning stock in public companies. This was the arrangement before we formed the government and after we formed the government.

[Ethics, February 24th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, I just explained to the leader of the Conservative Party that the system used by the minister of finance at that time was a system that was in place since the government of the Progressive Conservatives. This system for that type of company was there to be used. That is why the minister of finance of the day used it. It was according to the rules as they were written when we formed the government.

[Ethics, February 24th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, I do not ask about the personal affairs of anybody. I am informed that this rule existed before we formed the government . It was that system that the former minister of finance used to arrange his own affairs. There was a precedent that existed in the previous administration. That is what I said. It is the truth because when we started, we took exactly the guidelines as they existed before I became Prime Minister.

[Ethics, February 24th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, I have checked the file and these rules were in fact established by the Conservative government before we came. It apparently was used by two ministers at that time. Mr. Wilson, who was in charge at the time, used the rule that was established by the member who was a member of cabinet at that time and who is now the leader of the fifth party in the House of Commons.

[Iraq, February 24th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, I do not think the hon. member realizes that there was a unanimous resolution of the United Nations. Resolution 1441 told Saddam Hussein that he had to conform; otherwise there would be consequences.

Of course the NDP members do not want to be citizens of the world. They think a good singsong will solve all the problems.

[Iraq, February 24th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, we are accepting responsibilities in Afghanistan. We were one of the first to be there. We have had ships in the area for more than a year now doing their job. We are working to build a civil society in Afghanistan and to make sure terrorists do not operate in that gulf. It is the role that our ships and the Canadian army have at the moment and we were vested with more responsibility by the participants last week.

[Iraq, February 24th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, with resolution 1441, we are clearly telling Saddam Hussein that if he does not comply with this resolution, there will be very serious consequences. There is no doubt that if Saddam Hussein sends the inspectors packing and fails to comply with resolution 1441, there will be consequences. That is why resolution 1441 was adopted.

[Iraq, February 24th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, the easiest way to achieve peace is for Saddam Hussein to simply comply with the terms of resolution 1441.

If he does not want war, all he has to say is, “These are the weapons I have; I am destroying them. There will be no war”.

We are saying that resolution 1441 must be complied with by Iraq, and we want to avert war. This has always been our position. While the Americans did not want to go to the UN, we have always clearly stated that there had to be a Security Council resolution; that was resolution 1441, and there will apparently be another one shortly.