Stephen Harper

[Goods and Services Tax, December 9th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, we have already had a hat trick of mismanagement. We had a billion dollar boondoggle at HRDC, criminal investigations in public works on sponsorship, another billion dollars squandered on the gun registry, and now the fourth wheel is off the bus. We have these billion dollars losses regarding the GST. The reporting of them and the law have been sidestepped since 1994.

I ask the government, and I expect the Prime Minister to get up and answer the question, why have these not been reported under public accounts for the past eight years?

[Goods and Services Tax, December 9th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, it turns out that the Prime Minister could have actually found a good reason to fire his former finance minister this past summer. We have now learned that backroom deals have allowed the government to hide another $1 billion in GST losses. By law, Parliament is supposed to be informed of GST losses, theft and fraud.

My question is, exactly who in the government is responsible for the illegal cover-up of $1 billion of losses in this boondoggle?

[Kyoto Protocol, December 9th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, it is just bizarre that the minister would cite his negotiations with the provinces. Relationships with the provinces on Kyoto have totally broken down under the minister.

My second question is on relationships with the provinces. All the provinces are challenging the government's approach to Kyoto. They presented 12 principles to ensure that costs will be spread evenly between the provinces and industry. However, so far, the minister has not done anything to explain to Canadians and the provinces how the Kyoto burden will be shared between the provinces and industry.

Twice in as many months the minister was forced to cancel meetings with his provincial counterparts because of his inability to adequately inform provincial governments of his intentions.

What specific measures does the minister propose to get the provinces to accept this plan? Is it a first ministers' conference, or a meeting of environment and energy ministers?

[Kyoto Protocol, December 9th, 2002]

Our House leader just mentioned the GST rebate fiasco.

We have the capacity for this once again. Already an internal audit of the environment department group overseeing Kyoto reveals the potential for, and I quote from its report, “errors, delays in processing requests, and...incomplete records”.

Today we see in the newspapers that the government is playing around by guaranteeing large industries some kind of cap, a cap of maybe $15 a tonne on the costs they would have to incur on emissions reduction, when most international forecasts peg the costs at well above that, up to $80 per tonne.

My question is quite straightforward. Could the Minister of the Environment tell Canadians what steps he has taken or is taking to ensure Kyoto does not become yet another in the long list of multibillion dollar boondoggles?

[Kyoto Protocol, December 9th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, there is no need for me to go on at length about how shameful this is. It speaks for itself. Even the former finance minister has commented on how unsatisfactory the consultations on this issue have been with both Parliament and Canadians.

Now the government is pursuing yet another agenda where its targets and its costs are unclear. The government has an abysmal track record when it comes to ramming policies down Parliament's throat without adequate consideration of costs in particular.

We have a gun registry that has gone 500 times over budget. We have the sponsorship scandal where millions was wasted. The HRDC has a billion dollar boondoggle.

[Supplementary Estimates (A), December 5th, 2002]

This is important. Under vote 1a, I would point out to the hon. member and his party that the amount is $62 million, not $6 million. It is $62,872,916. I believe the government House leader will confirm that.

[Supplementary Estimates (A), December 5th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, we would, with a slight change, be happy to give unanimous consent. I would point out that in question period and before, the government and the official opposition had agreed to this and it was only the childish games of the member that held this up.

[Firearms Registry, December 5th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, there is not one of those things that could not have been achieved without spending $1 billion on a gun registry and Groupaction advertising and promoting.

I will ask my question over again because I think it deserves an answer. The government has spent $1 billion. It is now coming in today pulling $72 million off the table. How much more will it cost to complete the gun registry and how much more will it cost to run it each year after that?

[Firearms Registry, December 5th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, what this party will do is tell the chiefs of police across Canada to put policemen on the street to enforce real laws against real criminals including the thing the minister is unwilling to do today, to have tough laws against child pornographers and pedophiles.

Let me go on. The minister has no idea how the policy will work but he continues to defend it. Let me ask him a couple of straightforward questions.

How much more money will he need to finish the gun registry? How much will it cost annually to maintain after that? Does he have any idea?

[Firearms Registry, December 5th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, society is protected by being tough on crime, not by spending $1 billion on a gun registry.

The government says that it will go ahead. If the government actually needs the $72 million that it is now not asking for and not spending, how will it finish the gun registry when, by its own admission, 2.5 million to 3 million guns still need to be registered? How will this thing go ahead?