Stephen Harper

[Health, April 28th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, unlike that Prime Minister, this leader does not need a press conference every day to clarify his health care position.

Last year, Mr. Chrétien and the provinces produced a five year proposal for the reform of health care, including a drug plan, home care, primary care reform and a promise of performance measures on things like waiting lists.

Yet the Prime Minister hedged on whether he supported the deal and has done nothing to implement it. Why does the Prime Minister want to scrap a detailed five year reform proposal in favour of a non-existent 10 year agenda?

[Health, April 28th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberal government has spent the last four years overseeing the expansion of private health care delivery within the public system.

Yesterday the minister said, “If some provinces want to experiment with the private delivery option...we should be examining these efforts”. Today he said it is not his intention to favour private delivery, except that last week he said, “We know the public administration principle of the Canada Health Act already provides flexibility on private delivery”.

Is it not the case that the government is so busy trying to attack this party on health care it does not have a clue on what its own position is?

[Public Service, April 27th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians will also be looking for those asset declarations conforming with conflict of interest guidelines, if they actually exist, for this cabinet.

We have a government notable for widespread mismanagement and incompetence, yet nothing changes. The President of the Treasury Board said last year, “My God, if 96% of executives are getting merit pay to reward superior performance, then obviously something is wrong”. Yet this year the government rewarded 93% of executives with bonuses. Nothing has changed.

Does the Prime Minister really think this is the way to clean up his mess?

[Ethics, April 27th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians will understand that the Prime Minister attacks me because he cannot defend his own record.

We have a government mired in scandal and corruption, yet still unable to follow even the most basic ethical guidelines. Cabinet ministers and parliamentary secretaries had 120 days after being appointed to file asset declarations, yet six ministers and nine parliamentary secretaries failed to comply with conflict of interest guidelines.

Why is the Prime Minister unable to enforce even his most minimum ethical standards on his own cabinet?

[Government Contracts, April 27th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, I hear the Prime Minister continuing to beat his election drum, but the Liberal Gong Show is also continuing.

In the decade that the Prime Minister has been at the helm, he has gutted health care and national defence, and yet is now spending $6.5 billion per year on consulting contracts for firms like Earnscliffe. That is the equivalent of the taxes from all the taxpayers of New Brunswick.

Why does the Prime Minister value funding consultants ahead of funding things like health care and national defence?

[National Unity Fund, April 26th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, if it was so legitimate, it would have been front and centre in the government's spending reports for the last 10 years.

Over the last 10 years the Liberal government has funnelled about half a billion dollars into the unity slush fund. That is in addition to the quarter billion dollars on the fraudulent sponsorship program; $1 billion for HRDC boondoggles; approaching $2 billion for the gun registry fiasco; and of course the money that went to Canada Steamship Lines. On all of these things, the Prime Minister claimed he knew nothing about the way the spending was going.

Why did the Prime Minister not speak up when all of these questionable cheques were being signed in the first place?

[National Unity Fund, April 26th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, more money, just like CSL all over again.

It is clear that this so-called unity fund was used when the Liberals wanted to hide questionable spending from Canadians: $4.5 million to top up the sponsorship program; $3 million for ministers to campaign in western Canada; $4.5 million to supposedly fight Quebec separatism in Europe, now all double the amount the minister claimed.

Why does the Prime Minister not simply come clean and admit to Canadians that the unity fund was a secret Liberal slush fund to hide questionable spending?

[National Unity Fund, April 26th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, when the Liberals' secret national unity fund was revealed last month, the Minister of Finance assured this House that it amounted to only $40 million per year. However, we have learned today that the federal government actually spent twice the finance minister's original estimate.

My question is simple. Why did the Minister of Finance mislead this House regarding the size of this secret fund?

[Government Contracts, April 22nd, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, in all fairness the Prime Minister should simply have got up and admitted he was wrong and mistaken, instead of weaseling out of the truth once again. He obviously is not going to do that.

However, there is another question on Earnscliffe. The Prime Minister was asked if he would reveal the total amounts of contracts that had been funnelled to Earnscliffe under the government. Will he agree to do that?

[Foreign Affairs, April 22nd, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, earlier in question period the member for Okanagan--Coquihalla asked the Prime Minister about Earnscliffe's announcement of a new secretariat of the Government of Canada in Washington. The Prime Minister responded that he should have known about this because it was in the throne speech. Tell the Prime Minister it was not in the throne speech.

Has the Prime Minister had time to consult with Earnscliffe, and will he tell us that this announcement was in fact not in the throne speech?