Jean Chrétien

[Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, June 16th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, there is a law governing the operation of the CBC, and I will ask that the CBC respect that law. The law says, in defining the mandate of the CBC, that it must inform people on the advantages offered by Canada. This is the reason for the creation of the corporation. Objectivity is all we ask for.

I never called the CBC and I do not intend to. Freedom of the press is a fact of life I am used to. It did not always make my life easy, but I survived.

[Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, June 16th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, it seems that it was not very effective, and I dislike being ineffective.

[Ethics Counsellor, June 16th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, if you conclude that the deal was made because of the lobbyists, you know the counsellor will look at the lobby business and intervene. At the end of the day, any deals, any contracts by the government are made by the government.

We cannot deny our responsibilities as government. We have been the government for eight months. The people are very pleased. You just made reference to that. It is not like it was before. Why? It is because the government is committed to honesty and integrity in the public eye.

This government will remain this way. The ethics counsellor can help us. That is why I appointed him, to help us. In the final analysis, as I said this morning, the government remains the government. We have been elected to make the decisions. We are trying to get the best advice possible.

Mr. Howard Wilson is a man of credibility that has done his job properly, advising ministers over a long period of time. He is competent and we are very happy that he has accepted to face these new responsibilities. His job is not to replace the government. The government will remain the government.

[Ethics Counsellor, June 16th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, a deal like that will not occur again simply because the government will never sign such a deal. I do not know if it is very easy. The ethics counsellor is there. There is legislation. The members of the committee will have an opportunity to interview him. He is a very competent person. He will give advice to the government.

As I said, in the final analysis, it is the government that decides. When we have a bad government like the previous Tory government, you know it is the type of government that produced things like that. You can be reassured that will not happen with a Liberal government.

[Integrity In Government, June 16th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to talk about trust; the trust citizens place in their government, the trust politicians earn from the public, the trust in institutions that is as vital to a democracy as the air we breathe, a trust that once shattered, is difficult, almost impossible to rebuild.

Since our election in October no goal has been more important to this government, or to me personally as Prime Minister, than restoring the trust of Canadians in their institutions.

When we took office there was an unprecedented level of public cynicism about our national institutions and the people to whom they were entrusted by the voters. The political process had been thrown into disrepute. People saw a political system which served its own interests and not those of the public. When trust is gone the system cannot work.

That is why we have worked so hard to re-establish those bonds of trust. The most important thing we have done is to keep our word. We said we would cancel the helicopter contract and we did. We had to be satisfied that NAFTA would meet our concerns before it was finalized and we were.

We said we would create a $6 billion infrastructure program with all three orders of government and we have.

We brought in a budget that restores hope for Canadians while meeting our campaign commitment of reducing the deficit to3 per cent of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and we did; and we have addressed the stabilization of Canada's fisheries-particularly the Atlantic fisheries-and foreign overfishing as we said we would.

Honouring the promises we made is a key part of restoring the trust of Canadians. We have also worked hard to restore trust by restoring relevance to the House of Commons. We have given MPs a larger role in drafting legislation and greater influence over government expenditures.

For the first time ever, MPs debated the budget before it was tabled. We have also had policy debates on issues like cruise missile testing. We have had two debates, here in this House, about what should be the government's position on Canada's presence in the former Yugoslavia. Everyone agrees that those discussions have produced positive results; and they took place before the government made a decision.

Finally, we have worked to restore trust by showing Canadians that as far as this government is concerned, integrity is more than just nice words or photo ops, it is a way of life.

There is no better example of this than our cancellation of the Pearson airport deal. We sent out a strong, clear message that the integrity of this country's institutions is not for sale, that this government and this Parliament would serve the interests of all Canadians, not the interests of the privileged few, no matter how well connected.

Keeping our promises, giving a meaningful voice to the elected representatives in this House and putting an end to the politics of cronyism and secret back door deals is how this government has been restoring faith and trust among Canadians.

I am pleased to announce today that we are continuing to re-establish trust by delivering on a number of key commitments we made to Canadians during the election and by taking unprecedented action to open up the process of government in Ottawa.

Today we are introducing amendments to strengthen the Lobbyists Registration Act. These improvements are in line with the unanimous June 1993 report of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Consumer and Corporate Affairs respecting the Lobbyists Registration Act.

These changes will force lobbying out from the shadows into the open and make it clear to everyone who is representing whom, on which issue, and what they are doing.

We have no disagreement with individuals or companies that choose to have someone represent them. That is their business and their right. But Canadians nonetheless have a right to know who is trying to influence elected and public officials.

Deals like the Pearson Airport deal must never be allowed to happen again. That is why, through our changes to the Lobbyists Registration Act, we will be able to force the disclosure of lobbying fees related to government contracts.

That is why we are building in tough penalties-up to and including prison sentences-for those who break these new rules. That is why we are prohibiting the inclusion of contingency fees in lobbyists' contracts. That is why we are appointing an official who will have the teeth to investigate and take action.

I am pleased to announce today the appointment of Canada's first ethics counsellor, the current assistant deputy registrar general, Mr. Howard Wilson. Mr. Wilson's experience and his well-earned reputation for probity and integrity make him an ideal choice for this important post.

The ethics counsellor will oversee and enforce both the strengthened Lobbyists Registration Act and a revised, more comprehensive conflict of interest code that will replace the old conflict of interest guidelines.

We have broadened the powers and responsibilities of the ethics counsellor from what we laid out in the red book. In the red book, the ethics counsellor was to deal with the activities of lobbyists, but as we started examining implementation, it became clear that this will only address half of the problem, basically from the outside in.

We wanted to be sure that our system would also be effective at withstanding lobbying pressure from the inside. That is why we have decided to expand the role of the ethics counsellor to include conflict of interest.

By merging the Ethics Counsellor's function with the Assistant Deputy Registrar General's existing role in enforcing guidelines on conflict of interest, we will have both a stronger and a more unified oversight role, one with real teeth and strong investigative powers. We will also avoid the wasteful overlap and duplication inherent in creating an entirely new office.

We also said in the red book that we wanted a Code of Conduct for Members of Parliament and Senators. This Code would guide their dealings with lobbyists. We will ask a Committee of Parliament to take this matter on and have a Code of Conduct in place as soon as possible, because I feel that MPs themselves must take responsibility for those decisions, as I myself have taken responsibility for the activities of the government, lobbyists, parliamentary secretaries and others.

We also consulted with the Leader of the Opposition and the leader of the Reform Party on the choice of the Ethics Counsellor a few weeks ago, and I know that they look forward to this person's annual reports to Parliament as much as I do. They know, as we all do, that trust in the institutions of government is not a partisan issue, but something all of us elected to public office have an obligation to restore.

I know they will work as hard as we will on this side of the House to build on the renewed trust Canadians are showing in Parliament and in the political process.

The steps we have announced today are important. They will go a long way toward guarding against the excesses of the past and making the system more transparent and open.

There can be no substitute for responsibility at the top. The Prime Minister sets the moral tone for the government and must make the ultimate decisions when issues of trust or integrity are raised. That is what leadership is all about.

As Harry Truman put it, the buck stops here. I vow to you, to this House, to Canadians, that I will never abdicate that responsibility. I will never pass the buck.

Of all the lessons we learn in life, many of the most valuable are the ones we learn at a young age from our parents. My father taught me early on that nothing, not wealth, nor social status, nor fame, nor glory, is more important than your good name.

In the end, it is all that we really have. It cannot be bartered or traded. When it is gone, it can never come back. My father's teaching has also been the credo of my political life. For more than 30 years it has served me quite well.

What is true for an individual is also true for a government. We pledge to you and to all Canadians that we will guard our good name with all that we can and that we will not betray the hopes so many Canadians have vested in us.

At the end of the first part of the session, I would like to pay tribute to all members of Parliament.

After a long career in politics, and in spite of some pretty tough debates and some pretty exciting Question Periods, I think that is what observers are saying; I would like to thank the Leader of the Opposition and his party-

I would like to say thank you to the Reform Party and its leader. This Parliament has operated a a level that was not known before. It is my duty to thank all members of Parliament, the Leader of the Opposition and the leader of the Reform Party for having helped us to achieve that.

I think the finest compliment this Parliament has received since we opened this session in the middle of January was the poll taken by an American firm and reported in the newspapers here in Canada a few weeks ago.

A poll was taken in April in the world's nine largest democracies, including Mexico, the United States, Canada, Great Britain, France and Germany. Canadians were the ones who said they had the most trust in their government.

That poll is a compliment to all of us and we should take credit for it. During the campaign when I was trying to get candidates sometimes people were very reluctant to run in politics because of the disrepute unfortunately into which the profession had slipped. Today we have managed to restore the prestige of this institution. It is a credit to all members of Parliament who were elected, whatever their political opinions and options.

Public service is a great calling. Public service is a very honourable profession. A public calling is the desire of all of us to try to make society better for all our citizens. I have been a professional politician and I am very proud of it. I could not have had a better career because perhaps in my riding or travelling in the nation I have been able to do something good, making some progress in the quality of life. Every member of Parliament will have this experience.

I am telling hon. members that when they are alone and they think about it they will feel good that perhaps some people are happier because we have offered our service.

[Goods And Services Tax, June 15th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, we are waiting for the report of the committee. We are very interested. We have made a commitment that the GST will be replaced within two years.

We were elected less than eight months ago and we have made a lot of progress. We said we would establish a committee on this subject very early in the process. It will report next week I understand. We will study the report and make a decision about the replacement. There will be no spectacular flip-flop like the one made by the leader of the Reform Party.

[Goods And Services Tax, June 15th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, not only did I say that in 1990, it was in the red book. It stated clearly in the red book the conditions for a replacement of the GST. We have always said that because it is the policy of the government.

We have a committee on the GST and the member sits on it. I remember it was some time ago when the leader of the Reform Party made a promise, a solemn commitment, that he would get rid of the GST. He changed his mind.

[Social Program Reform, June 15th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, when the Minister of Finance tabled his budget, he made it quite clear that we were not going to reduce transfer payments. This was clearly indicated. The provinces were also said to want some idea of what the spending would be like over the next two or three years, and the Minister of Finance provided them with just that, a precise account of the expenditures for this year, next year and the year after that. The provinces know exactly what funds are currently available, pursuant to the commitment made to include in transfer payment arrangements procedures allowing for the necessary planning by the provinces. The budget is perfectly clear on this issue. I do not understand the provincial ministers' concern. In fact, that is what the minister will reiterate in the meetings, bilateral or multilateral meetings as the case may be, he will be having with the provincial ministers.

[Social Program Reform, June 15th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, the lead minister has consulted on several occasions with the ministers in question. In the joint statement released earlier today, all the provincial ministers agreed that a Canada-wide reform of social programs was required and they invited the minister to discuss the process with them. He has done that in the past and intends to do so again in the weeks to come. The deadlock exists only in the hon. member's mind, because consultations are ongoing and these consultations are the reason why things are taking longer. Last week, we were criticized for not imposing immediately our choice of a solution and the

reason for that was simple: we were not through consulting with the provinces.

[Policy On Lobbyists, June 15th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, we had the courtesy to consult the Leader of the Opposition and the leader of the Reform Party on this issue; the Government House Leader and Mr. Pelletier from my office have met with them, told them whom we wanted to appoint as ethics counsellor and given them an outline of the bill.

The leader of the Reform Party had the courtesy to respond, while the Leader of the Opposition did not even respond to our consultations with him.