Scott Brison

[Sponsorship Program, March 23rd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, once again the transport minister has been clear, the Prime Minister has been clear, the government has been clear, and the party has been clear that in fact, any funds will be returned to the treasury, if they are proven to have been received inappropriately. However, we cannot do that unless we have all the facts.

The fact is that the Prime Minister deserves tremendous credit for having established Justice Gomery's inquiry to do exactly that, to get the facts and to make a difference so that we can make the proper decisions on a go forward basis.

[Sponsorship Program, March 23rd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, civil proceedings have already been launched to recover funds. However, the courts have not yet ruled, and Justice Gomery has not yet tabled his report. Therefore, it is reasonable to expect that the party will act, but only in full knowledge of all the facts.

[Sponsorship Program, March 23rd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has been clear, as have the minister, the government and the party: if the party received funds from agencies or individuals your found guilty, the party has volunteered to repay taxpayers.

However, this is not possible until all the facts are known. Therefore, we must wait for Justice Gomery's report.

[Sponsorship Program, March 22nd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, raising the volume does not make the argument any more reasonable. The fact is the hon. member can huff and puff, yell and scream, but his basic premise is false.

The fact is that the party has been clear and the government has been clear. We are taking action. We are getting to the bottom of this and we are defending the interests of the Canadian taxpayer because that is the right thing to do.

When we go after the funds from some of these individuals, what happens? That party attacks the government for going after the funds. We are going after those funds. We are defending the taxpayer. We are standing up for justice and those members are attacking us.

So let us be clear. We are walking the walk, they are talking the talk.

[Sponsorship Program, March 22nd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, as I answered the identical question a few minutes ago, there is no need to pursue legal proceedings against the Liberal Party because the Liberal Party has volunteered that any funds received inappropriately will be returned to the Canadian taxpayer.

Beyond that, I would like to bring the hon. member's attention to the National Post of a few weeks ago that said after the Prime Minister's testimony: “The Prime Minister's relationship to the sponsorship program appears tangential at best. Canadians, except for perhaps the Leader of the Opposition, will probably believe that the Prime Minister was not intimately involved in the planning and execution of the sponsorship program”.

[Sponsorship Program, March 22nd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, the party has been absolutely clear. If any funds were received inappropriately, those funds would be returned to Canadian taxpayers.

I would counsel the hon. member, and all members of the House, to wait until we have the report from Justice Gomery. The fact is that we will benefit as Canadians from the work that Justice Gomery is doing only if we have the patience to wait for that report and to act on his recommendations.

[Sponsorship Program, March 22nd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, once again the Liberal Party has voluntarily committed to return any funds gained inappropriately to the Canadian taxpayer once we have all the facts. The fact is we will have a greater clarity on this issue once we have Justice Gomery's report.

Yes, we have pursued legal action to retrieve funds as that is the right thing to do for the Canadian taxpayer, but we do not have a verdict.

[Sponsorship Program, March 22nd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, there is no need to sue the party because the party has voluntarily committed to return any funds gained inappropriately to the Canadian taxpayer--

[Sponsorship Program, March 22nd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, once again the hon. member is referring to specific testimony. This is curious behaviour because the fact is that on a daily basis we see contradictory testimony. Even his own leader is saying that some of the testimony before Justice Gomery has been false and that some of the witnesses are lying to Justice Gomery. If his leader believes that witnesses are lying to Justice Gomery, why is he in his line of questioning using individual sporadic testimony instead of waiting for Justice Gomery to do his report?

[Sponsorship Program, March 22nd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, once again the Liberal Party has been absolutely clear that any funds which were received in a way that would be inappropriate will be returned to the Canadian taxpayer. We have been absolutely clear as a government that we are going to get to the bottom of this issue and that is exactly what we are doing.

The Prime Minister, by establishing Justice Gomery to do his work, by pursuing the action we have to recover funds, by ensuring that we take this issue seriously, we are demonstrating respect for the Canadian taxpayer. We are walking the walk over here. They are merely talking the talk.