Jean Chrétien

[Federal-Provincial Fiscal Arrangements, September 22nd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member said all provincial ministers are in agreement to more or less dismantle medicare and that is not true. Yesterday the minister of health for Quebec said the universality we are proposing is the best. He said if you start to accept some private clinics, that is the crack in the dam and he was opposed to doing that.

Do not affirm that everybody is against the policy of the government. The great majority of provincial governments want to keep medicare as it is.

[Federal-Provincial Fiscal Arrangements, September 22nd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, we are still contributing a lot of money to those programs. It is the consensus in the House of Commons and in all the provinces, including a lot of the people living in Alberta, that medicare should be the same for the rich and the poor. That is clear in my mind.

I campaigned in Alberta for medicare and I will keep doing it because it is the one element in our social programs that the people believe in the most. They do not want to be subjected to the pressures that existed before: better services for the rich, second class services for the poor and the risk of losing everything when you are sick.

The best system is Canadian medicare. It is the same for the people of Alberta, the people of Newfoundland, Quebec, Ontario and British Columbia.

[Pearson Airport, September 22nd, 1995]

That is absolutely true. I declare that we never spoke about the Toronto airport at that time. The meeting concerned the Matthews group's plan regarding the offer they wanted to make to the government with respect to the Department of Transport headquarters.

There were a lot of bids going on at the time in Ottawa competing for this building that has never been built. They came to ask me if the procedures they were following were the proper ones to maximize their chances of winning the bid.

I told them what was positive in their bids, in my judgment, and what was not positive. Eventually nobody won the bid because the building was never built.

[Pearson Airport, September 22nd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, at this very moment, I am testifying before the House of Commons. I have said all that I have to say on this matter, and I

have given dates which have been confirmed by the legal firm where I used to work. I had one meeting with that man-

[Pearson Airport, September 22nd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, the chairman of the committee himself told me this had nothing to do with the issue. The chairman, a Conservative senator, told us that they do not want to ask the Prime Minister to appear, and will not do so.

No one has asked me to appear there. I stand here in this House to say clearly what I know. If the hon. member has any courage, let him accuse me specifically of lying to this House, and let his seat in this House hang in the balance as a consequence.

[Privatization Of Pearson Airport, September 22nd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I am going by the precedents in this House for testimony by prime ministers. If you want to bring a Bible here, I will swear on the Bible in front of the entire country. Bring the Bible. I will swear on the Bible. I have no objection.

Mr. Speaker, do you have a Bible? I will swear on the Bible right now. If the hon. member will not respect a parliamentary tradition that says that when a member rises in this House, his word is as good as his oath, bring me a Bible and I will swear on the Bible, in English and in French.

[Privatization Of Pearson Airport, September 22nd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, when a minister rises in the House and gives his word, that is generally good enough for hon. members.

Especially since according to one of his claims, he received a call from someone who is now one of my collaborators, Mr. Goldenberg, who allegedly also asked him for a contribution. Mr. Goldenberg has asked him, through his lawyers, to withdraw what he said. He never met Mr. Matthews and never spoke to him on the telephone.

Mr. Matthews will have to face charges before the courts, since Mr. Goldenberg has instructed his lawyers to start legal proceedings against Mr. Matthews if he does not withdraw his statement.

[Privatization Of Pearson Airport, September 22nd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I am the Prime Minister of Canada at the moment. I repeat that I was not a member of Parliament at the time, I was a lawyer, and we discussed the proposal for the Department of Transport building.

There was no question of an election campaign at that point, and all those who know me know very well that I have never solicited funds on my own behalf for my election campaigns and that the facts are very clear in this regard. I give my word that I never discussed the Toronto airport with this man, who is having considerable difficulty himself remembering the dates and everything. I am not going to take the time to analyze all the many contradictions in his testimony.

[Privatization Of Pearson Airport, September 22nd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I met with Mr. Matthews in the circumstances I described to this House in April 1989. We discussed the Transport Canada building, which, at that time, was the subject of various proposals the government wanted. I was a lawyer. I gave my opinion on whether they were following the right procedure and on the chances of successfully obtaining the contract. It was in April 1989, as has been confirmed by Mr. LaBarge, who had it in his notes. And about the telephone call that was recorded without Mr. LaBarge's knowledge, I really do not know. All I know is that the dates are confirmed in the file in the office of the firm of lawyers I belonged to.

[Privatization Of Pearson Airport, September 22nd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I continue in my denial. Particularly because the meeting was held on April 14, 1989 in the company of a lawyer, who testified under oath and kept notes in his files and because we discussed with Mr. Matthews the possibility of building a head office for Transport Canada on property in Ottawa.

There was absolutely no discussion of Pearson airport and, what is more, I have never solicited funds from anyone during my political career. People were solicited by my supporters. He has got it mixed up again; he has the date wrong and everything. Mr. LaBarge has testified that he had no interest in it and that he is a lawyer. He testified very clearly confirming my version that we discussed the Transport Canada building and nothing else and that, at that point in time-April 1989-the then leader of the Liberal Party was still in office and had not yet resigned. I therefore have nothing to add to what I have said in this House.