Preston Manning

[Public Inquiries, February 4th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, the issue here is not parties or statements. The issue here is public trust. The thousands of tainted blood victims in the country and their families trusted the blood system and it failed them. They trusted the government to find out why and now the government is failing them. Their trust has been abused.

Instead of acting in the best interests of the victims of the blood system, the government tried to block Justice Krever in the courts and attempted to circumvent his findings with a parallel investigation. What is worse, the Prime Minister has now put the blood system in the hands of a minister who has already abused the public trust over highway funding.

Why should tainted blood victims trust this government to fix the blood system? Why should they trust a minister who has violated the public trust before?

[Public Inquiries, February 4th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, this government has adopted a double standard with respect to public inquiries. It was keen to investigate the murder and cover-up in Somalia when it thought it was a Tory scandal, but as soon as the inquiry started to get close to former deputy minister Bob Fowler, the Prime Minister's friend and golfing buddy, all of a sudden it lost its enthusiasm.

It was okay when Justice Krever's investigation was examining Tory complicity with the tainted blood scandal, but when Krever wanted to examine why the Liberal government in 1984 ignored the early warning signs about tainted blood, the government started throwing legal obstacles in his way.

How can Canadians trust this government when it has two sets of ethical standards, one for Liberals and their friends and the other for everybody else?

[Government Policies, February 3rd, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, we do not have to make the government look bad. It is doing an excellent job on its own.

On June 12, 1991 in this House, when he was in opposition, the Prime Minister promised that every minister in his cabinet would assume full responsibility for any bungling in their departments. When we question the conduct of his ministers, the Prime Minister has said again and again that the buck stops with him.

Will the Prime Minister now assume responsibility and hold these ministers accountable today in this House-the defence minister, the health minister, the justice minister-for the serious blunders they have made in the last two months?

[Government Policies, February 3rd, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, good government includes keeping your word.

The Prime Minister promised to scrap the GST, then he denied making that promise. He promised Canadians jobs, jobs, jobs and there are 1.5 million unemployed. He promised the Somalia inquiry would be allowed to get to the truth. He stood in this House and said that was the case and yet last month the government decided to shut it down. The litany of broken promises, denial of responsibility and abuse of trust goes on and on.

How can Canadians believe what the Prime Minister says in the future when they cannot believe what he has said in the past?

[Government Policies, February 3rd, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, when this Prime Minister came to power in 1993 he promised he would establish a higher standard than the Mulroney administration with respect to accountability, integrity and responsibility.

Since that time he has broken the GST promise, denied that he broke it, has botched the Airbus investigation, has gagged the Somalia inquiry and has stonewalled the tainted blood inquiry on which human lives depend. The trust of the Canadian people in their government has been abused in each of these instances.

Given this record of abuse, why should Canadians trust either him or his government any longer?

[The Government, February 3rd, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, I wish to draw to the attention of the House the greatest failing of the government.

When the Prime Minister came to power in 1993, he promised Canadians accountability, integrity and responsibility. Since then, the government has broken its GST promise, mocked the unemployed, botched the Airbus investigation, gagged the Somalia inquiry and stonewalled the tainted blood investigation.

If Canadians, through their House of Commons, are to hold this government accountable for such abuses, they need the tools to do the job. These tools include free votes in this Chamber, unfettered committees, citizens' initiatives, referenda and the power to recall elected officials.

This is the way to fix the system to restore accountability, integrity and trust to our parliamentary institutions.

[Cbc Town Hall, December 12th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, the issue here is accountability. The Prime Minister should expect to be held accountable to the 1.5 million unemployed for saying: "That's life, lots of luck, try harder".

In the last election when Kim Campbell said that unemployment would remain at double digits until the next century, she accepted the unacceptable and paid the price. By saying "that's life" to 1.5 million unemployed, the Prime Minister is also accepting the unacceptable and he will pay the price.

Does the Prime Minister, like Kim Campbell, consider the present levels of unemployment acceptable and the status quo is good enough? Is that the real reason he rejects public criticism of his jobs policy?

[Cbc Town Hall, December 12th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, if the Prime Minister is not afraid to attend town hall meetings, will he assure the House and all Canadians that he will not retreat back into his bubble, that he will present himself at more town hall meetings and public forums where Canadian voters can hold him accountable for his actions and his deeds?

[Cbc Town Hall, December 12th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, we find it curious that the Prime Minister's colleagues stood when he said he should have stayed at home.

Canadians have every right to hold the Prime Minister accountable for his broken campaign promises on the GST. But that is extremely difficult when the Prime Minister's handlers keep him in a bubble, away from the public. We can understand why they do that, because the last time they let him out he attacked a demonstrator, told a bunch of kids in Winnipeg about imaginary friends and he ended up abusing Canadians at a town hall meeting.

[Cbc Town Hall, December 12th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister's disastrous performance at the CBC town hall has sent the Liberal spin doctors into damage control mode. They have now suggested the CBC, a federal crown corporation established by an act of this House, rigged the town hall, purposely stacking it with hostile questioners who did not reflect the concerns of Canadians.

Unemployment, job security, the GST and national unity are the concerns of real Canadians. The questions raised at the town hall do reflect the worries and anger felt by 1.5 million Canadians who are unemployed.

Does the Prime Minister really think the CBC rigged that town hall and that Canadians are not really concerned about jobs, about taxes, and about national unity?