Stephen Harper

[Sponsorship Program, June 15th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, that is not the arrangement the government made.

While the Prime Minister supports the judge in public, he is making a deal in private to the contrary with Mr. Chrétien. The judge has just asked the government to either deal with Mr. Chrétien's request immediately, or withdraw it so that the judge can do his work in peace.

Will the Prime Minister do what Justice Gomery is asking or not?

[Sponsorship Program, June 15th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, Justice Gomery has written to the government demanding that it reverse its deal with Jean Chrétien. Through his lawyer, Justice Gomery says that the arrangement is not in the public interest. In fact, his lawyer says that “the ability of Justice Gomery to complete his work will be put in jeopardy”. He asked the government directly to either expedite Mr. Chrétien's accusations of bias or have them withdrawn.

Will the government end the arrangement with Mr. Chrétien as Justice Gomery demands, yes or no?

[Sponsorship Program, June 14th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, once again it is an interesting defence, so I will give the Prime Minister this challenge.

Will he stand in the House right now, say that he withdraws the support in the arrangement he made with Mr. Chrétien, and will he assist Justice Gomery in having this application withdrawn for good? Will the Prime Minister do that?

[Sponsorship Program, June 14th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, the minister said the deal was not secret, but when we asked about it, we could not get straightforward answers here in the House of Commons. Yesterday and again today the Prime Minister and the government claim they support the work of Judge Gomery, that he is impartial, and that they stand behind him ferociously.

Can the Prime Minister show us that letter and tell us where anywhere in that letter Justice Gomery is defended?

[Sponsorship Program, June 14th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, two weeks ago the Prime Minister did not tell the House the whole truth about the existence of this correspondence. Yesterday and today he again misleads the House about the nature of that deal. Contrary to what he is claiming, Justice Gomery himself says that the secret deal deliberately undermines his work. His lawyer said, “To have...the outstanding possibility that Mr. Chrétien may renew his application...is, simply put, unacceptable”.

Once again, knowing that this exchange of letters, whatever the Prime Minister wants to call the deal, would undermine Justice Gomery, why did the Prime Minister agree to it?

[Sponsorship Program, June 14th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, we now know that the government concluded a secret agreement that would allow Jean Chrétien to prevent Justice Gomery from completing his task. The government's secret agreement puts Justice Gomery “in an extremely difficult position”, to quote his own lawyer.

Knowing that this undermines the work of Justice Gomery, why did the Prime Minister authorize this secret agreement?

[Sponsorship Program, June 13th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, the House will recall that the minister denied there was any arrangement of any kind between Mr. Chrétien and the government.

Now he admits, because we have all got it, that an exchange of letters between lawyers has taken place that does constitute an arrangement, an arrangement that Justice Gomery was apparently unaware of and is quite concerned about.

Why did the public works minister not divulge the details of this when he was asked about it? Why did he cover it up?

[Sponsorship Program, June 13th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians will wonder why there were no wait times standards all those years the government claimed it was defending the system.

On May 31 and June 1, the government categorically denied in the House that it had concluded a secret agreement with Mr. Chrétien. However, the day before, the government had in fact signed a written, official and secret arrangement with Mr. Chrétien's lawyers.

Why did the Prime Minister allow his government to mislead this House?

[Health, June 13th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I have reviewed last week's health care decision by the Supreme Court of Canada. It did not question the public health care system in our country. However, it did question how the government has managed that system. In particular, it has pointed out that the health care wait times are at an all-time high under the Liberal government.

Could the Prime Minister tell us why, after 12 years in office, there are no national benchmarks for wait times in the country?

[Audiotaped Conversations, June 8th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I will ask the question again of the Prime Minister.

If the Prime Minister believed the member for Newton—North Delta was doing something wrong, why did he and his agents never report it to the appropriate authorities?