Scott Brison

[Sponsorship Program, February 3rd, 2005]

Mr.Speaker, once again, it was the Leader of the Opposition who said that Gomery was the best way to get to the truth in this. We agree with him on this one.

The Prime Minister had the courage to set up the Gomery commission to get to the bottom of this. We as a government want to get to the truth. It is the Conservatives, the Alliance Party, that is opposed to getting to the truth in this case. That is really offensive. They do not understand the Constitution. They do not understand the Charter of Rights. They do not understand the basic independence of a judicial inquiry.

[Sponsorship Program, February 3rd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, once again the Leader of the Opposition is trying to interfere with the Gomery commission by commenting on day to day testimony. As we have learned repeatedly, we have heard testimony contradicted, in some cases the same day, if not perhaps the next, by the same witness. That is why we have an independent inquiry that ought to be allowed to do its work and report back to us so that we have the truth. That is what Canadians want. I am shocked that the hon. member is interfering with the Gomery commission.

[Question No. 57, February 2nd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, PWGSC, as the custodian of the lands and buildings located at 101 Colonel By Drive, presently being occupied by National Defence Headquarters, developed a document entitled “Department of National Defence Accommodation Strategy in the National Capital Region”, in March 2004 which included a potential relocation of NDHQ functions presently being carried out at 101 Colonel By Drive, to the JDS Uniphase complex at 3000 Merivale Road. The Department of National Defence DND ultimately advised PWGSC that they did not need the building. PWGSC did not purchase this building because we have no client requirements to support this type of acquisition at this time. As long as the property remains vacant, however, we will continue to consider its availability in the analysis of accommodation needs of other federal departments.

[Public Works and Government Services, February 2nd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, the fact is that Canada is a trading nation. We benefit as a trading nation not only from what we purchase here from other countries, but more importantly, from what other countries purchase from Canadian companies. For us to benefit from those external markets and for Canadian companies to be protected under the principle of national treatment, it is essential that we respect that principle as part of all our trade agreements and as such protect Canadian investment anywhere in the world.

[Public Works and Government Services, February 2nd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, the--

[Public Works and Government Services, February 2nd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, certainly we as the Government of Canada and my department as the chief procurement officer for the Government of Canada endeavour to purchase the best quality materials for Canadians and at the same time achieve the best possible value for Canadian taxpayers. We do so within the confines of our trade agreements and particularly respecting the principle of national treatment, which is an essential part of all our trade agreements.

[Sponsorship Program, February 2nd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, once again, we have a public inquiry that was set up by the Prime Minister and the government to get to the bottom of the issue. The inquiry is in fact working very well and that is why Canadians across the country support Justice Gomery in his work. I would urge the hon. member to do exactly what Canadians want all of us to do, support Justice Gomery, not comment on day to day testimony.

I understand the hon. member recently received a couple of speeding tickets. He is obviously driving a little faster than he is thinking.

[Sponsorship Program, February 2nd, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, once again the hon. member is commenting on day to day testimony, testimony than can be contradicted by other days' testimony. It is not appropriate. We should not be surprised at this because earlier this week the hon. member and his leader were asking the Prime Minister to tell Mr. Chrétien how to conduct himself before the inquiry.

Let us be clear what they were asking the Prime Minister to do. They were asking the Prime Minister to engage in witness tampering.

It is little wonder that the Vancouver Province today in reference to the member for Central Nova said that he had forgotten basic legal training.

[Sponsorship Program, February 1st, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to say that the Gomery commission costs are in fact reasonable when we consider the importance of his mandate in getting to the bottom of this issue.

Furthermore, Justice Gomery is working to provide prescriptives that can help prevent this kind of activity in the future. As such, it will pay, for decades, benefits to the Canadian taxpayer. Even the Conservative Party leader has said that in fact the costs of the Gomery commission are reasonable when we consider the benefits. The Canadian Taxpayers Federation has in fact today said that the Gomery costs are reasonable.

We are committed to--

[Sponsorship Program, February 1st, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I am certain the hon. member realizes that some of what he is describing does result from testimony before the Gomery inquiry. We are not going to comment on day to day testimony before the Gomery inquiry because we respect the independence of a judicial inquiry. The government supports Justice Gomery in his work. In fact, all members of Parliament within the Liberal Party support Justice Gomery's work. We look forward to receiving his report.

I would urge some patience over there. I would also urge the hon. member not to interfere in Justice Gomery's work by commenting on it.