Peter MacKay

[Human Resources Development, February 10th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, departmental officials have confirmed that the minister received extensive briefings when she took over the department in August. The minister's executive assistant also confirmed that an extensive briefing took place in that month. This morning the minister herself confirmed that she received extensive briefings in August. Yet she has stood in the House and repeatedly stated that she knew nothing of any problems until the date of November 17.

Would the minister have Canadians believe that she knew there were no problems in her department until the date of November 17?

[Division No. 667, February 10th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, I will also compliment the table and the authors of this new book, which will, I am sure, give all members of the House and all Canadians a greater understanding of procedure.

My point of order refers to the legislation on which we have just seen the debate slammed shut. This legislation is supposed to be so important to the country that the Prime Minister seeks to foist it on the country.

We have just debated legislation over the past number of hours and on one previous occasion in the House that was, in essence, changed by a recent amendment by the Bloc. We all know the Bloc's intention is to remove the legislation for a separatist cause.

There has been no opportunity to debate an amendment brought forward by a federalist party, the Progressive Conservative Party. I seek unanimous consent to move an amendment from a federalist party so that we can debate this in a way that Canadians will understand that this legislation has nothing to do with clarity. It is about furthering the separatist cause.

[Human Resources Development, February 9th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, the minister has told us she knows where the money is, but does she know how the money was spent?

In March 1998, HRDC released a list of TJF grants awarded that year. On the second updated list produced in December 1999, mysteriously 20 companies that received $8.2 million had been deleted.

If there is no cover-up why did these companies disappear from the list and where did the $8 million go?

[Human Resources Development, February 9th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, I have a very straightforward and specific question for the minister. Would the Minister of HRDC please advise the House of the exact date on which she was first advised of the problems that were uncovered by the internal audit of her department?

[Privilege, February 8th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, I am simply looking for a clarification of your earlier ruling. You are reserving the opportunity to review the blues.

The request from the opposition is quite clear. As I understand it, the documents referred to by the Prime Minister both yesterday and today in the House are what is being sought, and the Chair is reserving on whether the reference to those documents therefore demands that they be tabled.

[Points Of Order, February 8th, 2000]

What are you hiding, Don?

[Points Of Order, February 8th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, I know hon. members are very upset by this matter, but I would attach myself very much to the remarks of the previous speakers.

The government House leader is not only an officer of his government. He is also an officer of the House. I respectfully request that the House leader is very familiar with House procedure and with the previous precedents quoted by the opposition House leader.

He is duty bound, I would suggest, to table these documents, not only the documents that were handed quickly as back-up to the Prime Minister throughout question period over the last number of days but, as has been previously stated, all documents being used to fortify and deflect attention away from this issue. Those documents should be before the House and accessible to the opposition and therefore accessible to the Canadian public.

[Human Resources Development, February 8th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, while the Prime Minister engages in the age old tactic of accuse the accuser, aided by the co-driver of the getaway car, the government House leader, Canadians are waiting for answers.

What is missing is some semblance of accountability. We know that money went missing. We know that money went from government coffers to Liberal backers, who turned around and made significant contributions to the government. How can the public have faith in this system that is so politically tainted and advantageous to the government?

Will the minister call for a full, independent financial audit of her department?

[Human Resources Development, February 8th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, what are truly missing here are iron clad assurances that the government will behave responsibly with taxpayers' money.

Given the potential for criminal activity in this matter and a history of such within HRDC, will the solicitor general call on his commissioner today to launch a full and complete investigation to clear the air?

[Supply, February 8th, 2000]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague has brought the name of Pierre Corbeil into this debate. We know there were actually criminal convictions registered in that instance. We know that it arose out of HRDC where a Liberal fundraiser armed with lists of pending HRDC transitional jobs money went knocking on the doors of companies that were perhaps eligible to receive it and said “A little something for the effort and we might be able to speed up the process”.

There were criminal convictions registered. The trail is now cold but I think more and more watchdogs have become aware of it. It comes down to a question of priorities. Do we spend money in this reckless fashion or buy MRIs? Do we allow for some form of accountability or some form of student debt relief? The government has to make priority decisions. The government has mismanaged taxpayer moneys and is now being held to account.