Tony Clement

[Economic Action Plan 2013 Act, No. 1, June 3rd, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, in each of those cases there were very good reasons, mostly involving the fact that there had been quite considerable debate in this chamber or in various parliamentary committees before time allocation proceeded, which sets the rules for further debate in the House of Commons.

In this case, the budget bill has been a matter of discussion, both inside and outside the House, since March, almost 70 days ago. The bill has been before the finance committee, the industry committee, the veterans affairs committee, the human resources committee, the citizenship and immigration committee and the foreign affairs committee.

Many parliamentarians have participated in the debate, either in this chamber or in our House of Commons committees. That debate has been quite extensive and it is now time we have a motion to deal with further debate in the House and reach its logical conclusion.

[Economic Action Plan 2013 Act, No. 1, June 3rd, 2013]

moved:

That, in relation to Bill C-60, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 21, 2013 and other measures, not more than one further sitting day shall be allotted to the consideration at report stage of the Bill and one sitting day shall be allotted to the consideration at third reading stage of the said Bill; and

That, 15 minutes before the expiry of the time provided for Government Orders on the day allotted to the consideration at report stage and on the day allotted to the consideration at third reading stage of the said Bill, any proceedings before the House shall be interrupted, if required for the purpose of this Order, and in turn every question necessary for the disposal of the stage of the Bill then under consideration shall be put forthwith and successively without further debate or amendment.

[Government Accountability, May 24th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I have already answered that question.

I would further direct the hon. member and other members of this House to the new database we have established, which will assist all parliamentarians, and indeed members of the public, to track various spending items by different departments, according to department and year, and other indices as well. I think this is a step in the right direction, and you are welcome.

[Government Accountability, May 24th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, in fact, the opposite is true. Various departments are co-operating with the acting Parliamentary Budget Officer. We are providing many documents, according to her requests, and that process will continue.

[Government Expenditures, May 23rd, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member and the other members of her caucus, in the same amount of time, could have merely looked up this public material that was passed by previous Parliaments in the public accounts of 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2009. It is all there.

[Ethics, May 23rd, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to stand in the House today and talk about the great plans we have with respect to open government.

We are one of the world leaders on the world stage, through the Open Government Partnership. There are 273,000 data sets online right now at open.gc.ca available for researchers, citizens and entrepreneurs. That is the kind of leadership we are pursuing in many different facets of open government, and we are proud of it.

[Public Works and Government Services, May 9th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member does make a fair point. I do not think it is too much to ask that when departments engage in management contracts for perfectly appropriate reasons, such as first nations health branch using nurses, for instance, that there be a line or two added for publication on exactly what the contract is.

I agree with the hon. member, and I think we should require this in the future.

[Government Expenditures, May 9th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I hate to disagree with the hon. member. I certainly do not want to be disagreeable.

However, again I will quote the Auditor General:

...[departments] are responsible for accounting and reporting their spending through the Public Accounts of Canada....

That is a direct quote from the Auditor General. He said that spending within the departments would have undergone normal control procedures in those departments. He concludes:

We didn't identify anything that would cause us to say that we felt that anything was going on outside of those processes.

These are the words of the Auditor General.

[Government Expenditures, May 9th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I will remind the hon. member that the public accounts are tabled in this chamber each and every year from 2001 to 2009, or if he wishes, 2001 to 2012. These are a matter of public record.

Parliamentarians vote on the public accounts. This is part of our responsibility as parliamentarians. Those are clear. In fact, the Auditor General says that each department is responsible for its own spending and “normal control procedures in those departments”.

Again, the Auditor General said:

...so there are internal controls in departments about spending and they would go through all of those normal processes.

I rely on him.

[Government Expenditures, May 9th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member asks whether I should be quoting the Auditor General. Who else should I be quoting?

He goes on to say:

We didn't identify anything that would cause us to say that we felt that anything was going on outside of these processes.

He is very clear that the opposition characterization of these funds as lost in any way is completely inappropriate. He indicated that there was nothing:

...that gave us cause for concern that the money...was used in any way that it should not have been.

Those are the words of the Auditor General.