Ralph Goodale

[Supply, June 4th, 2002]

Mr. Chairman, ACAN is obviously a process by which a bid or a potential contract award can be publicized before it is finalized to determine whether or not there are any objections.

I asked for the statistics on this matter because I too was curious about it. I found out that of the 3,311 ACANs published in the year 2001, objections were raised in about 10% of the cases. That would be 323 cases. Of those cases that were objected to, the objections to 245 cases were found to be justified and the process went to tender. I think those statistics tend to verify that the process is working. In the vast majority of cases there are no objections but in cases where objections are raised they are in fact treated seriously.

If the hon. gentleman has some specific suggestions on how a properly functioning ACAN system can in fact be improved in the interests of competitiveness, I would very much like to hear what those suggestions are and I will treat them seriously.

[Supply, June 4th, 2002]

Mr. Chairman, the fact of the matter is that I do not have policy responsibility for this matter. That rests with another minister.

However, in the spirit of being forthcoming with the hon. gentleman, if there are serious questions that he wishes to raise with that other minister I will certainly undertake to make sure that this matter is drawn to that other minister's attention so that he can reply to the questions that the member for St. Albert might wish to raise.

However, as I am not the minister responsible, and as much as I might want to reply, I simply cannot reply to a question that is outside my jurisdiction.

[Supply, June 4th, 2002]

Mr. Chairman, I am advised by my officials that the Department of Public Works and Government Services is the mechanical device by which this transfer of funding takes place. The policy responsibility rests with the minister responsible for the crown corporation and that is not the Minister of Public Works and Government Services.

[Supply, June 4th, 2002]

Mr. Chairman, it is not within my jurisdiction to recall ambassadors. However in relation to the Groupaction matter the set of files was referred to the RCMP by the auditor general. The auditor general was invited to make her inquiry in the first place by my predecessor who is now the government House leader.

It was my predecessor who initiated the process. The process led to an inquiry by the auditor general. The auditor general made the reference to the RCMP. The RCMP has confirmed publicly that it is pursuing an investigation. The RCMP has said in the media that it will pursue the investigation wherever it leads.

[Supply, June 4th, 2002]

Mr. Chairman, I do not have responsibility for the Canada Lands Corporation. It is my understanding that the responsibility would fall to the crown corporation that is in the hands of the Deputy Prime Minister. Quite frankly, I am not sure whether in the last 24 hours there has been some rearrangement in that regard because of the Deputy Prime Minister's new responsibilities. That question would properly be referred to the Prime Minister. However Canada Lands is not within my portfolio.

[Supply, June 4th, 2002]

Mr. Chairman, as much as I would dearly love to be able to respond to the hon. gentleman's question I must point out that I am not the minister responsible for the Canada Lands Corporation. That is within another minister's portfolio. I would certainly wish the other minister the joy of a committee of the whole proceeding so that he might answer the question, but it is not within my portfolio of responsibilities.

[Supply, June 4th, 2002]

Mr. Chairman, as I indicated, I do not believe we have the provincial breakdown available tonight. We are checking to see if it is accessible this evening. If it is, fine, we will provide it. If not, I will provide the best breakdown I can as soon as possible.

As to the earlier point about being forthcoming with information, making references to the police where appropriate, fully providing information to the auditor general and so forth, I made that commitment last Monday, less than 24 hours after coming into office.

[Supply, June 4th, 2002]

Mr. Chairman, first, I will deal with the first part of the hon. gentleman's question. He is going to considerable lengths to leave the impression that I am not being forthcoming, that I am declining to disclose information or that I am hiding something. The record in the House for the last nine days discloses exactly the opposite.

I have indicated very clearly that where there are administrative mistakes we will find them and root them out. Where there are overpayments we will recollect and ensure the Government of Canada is reimbursed. If there is any evidence of illegal or criminal activity it will be instantly referred to the RCMP. I have said that over and over again. Any implication on the part of the hon. gentleman to the contrary leaves the misimpression that there is an effort to hide something. I know enough about being House leader that I cannot use unparliamentary language, but I would appreciate that he not do so because on my part it is flatly untrue.

Second, with respect to the advertising question, the global amount on an annual basis is in the neighbourhood of $200 million. I do not have a province by province breakdown with me tonight but I will try to obtain the information and provide it subsequently if it is available.

The hon. New Democratic member from Manitoba raised the issue of regional balance and fairness in government programs. I would indicate again my absolute commitment to that. Coming from a region of the country I am very anxious to see a balance from coast to coast to coast.

[Supply, June 4th, 2002]

Mr. Chairman, the sections of the Financial Administration Act I referred to a moment ago are by no means passive or reactive. They impose a positive duty on public officials to make the kind of disclosure the hon. gentleman has referred to. The duty exists in the law already.

However as I have said on many occasions in the House, there will be full co-operation on my part and on the part of all my officials with any investigation that may go forward whether by another government department, the auditor general or the RCMP. The proof is that we have already made references to the RCMP as we are obliged to. We will continue to do so.

[Supply, June 4th, 2002]

Mr. Chairman, this is my first formal opportunity for an encounter with the hon. member for St. Albert. I do not know whether that is good or bad but it will certainly be interesting. In any event, I am pleased that we are in our respective roles. I hope we will have a constructive relationship pursuing what we both want in terms of the public interest.

On the issue of disclosure, it is an operating principle and practice of my department and my officials. Complete co-operation with the auditor general is a fundamental dimension of what my department does and would do in all circumstances. The auditor general has a function to perform and it is the obligation of government departments to co-operate and collaborate with her. There are specific provisions in the law including the Financial Administration Act that require collaboration and disclosure when certain kinds of information come to the attention of officials.