Résumé de la séance
- L'affaire des commandites Groupaction a dominé la période des questions, les membres de l'opposition pressant le ministre des Travaux publics et des Services gouvernementaux de clarifier si le mandat de la vérificatrice générale était assez large pour couvrir toutes les pratiques contractuelles douteuses, et pas seulement Groupaction.
- La nomination d'Alfonso Gagliano comme ambassadeur au Danemark a été contestée à plusieurs reprises, l'Alliance canadienne et le NPD remettant en question l'usage du patronage par le premier ministre et demandant si la nomination serait reconsidérée advenant des irrégularités dans le rapport de la vérificatrice générale.
- Des préoccupations de conflits d'intérêts liées aux campagnes à la direction libérale ont émergé, notamment au sujet de Jim Palmer de Calgary, qui détenait un contrat de 75 000 $ avec le ministère des Finances tout en recueillant des fonds pour la campagne à la direction du ministre des Finances; le vice-premier ministre a confirmé que l'affaire avait été renvoyée au conseiller en éthique et que des mesures correctives avaient été prises.
- Les négociations sur le bois d'œuvre résineux avec les États-Unis étaient activement en cours, le ministre du Commerce international étant personnellement à Washington; le vice-premier ministre s'est engagé fermement à ce que la souveraineté canadienne ne soit pas cédée aux représentants américains.
- La surpêche étrangère au large de Terre-Neuve a été soulevée : un navire russe, l'Olga, sous contrôle islandais, a été arrêté pour pollution des eaux canadiennes et aurait eu à son bord 70 à 80 tonnes de morues adultes reproductrices sous moratoire; un navire sister, l'Otto, aurait changé de cap vers l'Islande.
- Le Protocole de Kyoto et les crédits pour l'exportation d'énergie propre ont été débattus; le ministre de l'Environnement a reconnu que le Canada fait face à une bataille difficile pour convaincre d'autres nations d'accepter les exportations d'énergie propre comme mécanisme de crédit, et a confirmé que la première période de Kyoto de 2008 à 2012 serait suivie d'actions subséquentes.
Don Boudria a confirmé au compte rendu officiel que ni lui ni le ministère n'avaient jamais eu le rapport Groupaction en leur possession — contredisant directement toute suggestion selon laquelle des fonctionnaires l'auraient examiné — et a déclaré que c'est précisément pour cette raison qu'il ne l'avait pas déposé, ce qui constitue la révélation factuelle la plus concrète de la séance.
Clark asks specifically whether Gagliano will be fully accessible to the auditor general for interview and whether anything will prevent her from doing so, grounding it in the concrete issue of political or ministerial involvement in paying $575,000 for what he describes as a photocopy of an already-held study.
Paradis a répondu à une question précise sur les raisons pour lesquelles le ministère des Affaires étrangères avait sollicité des séances d'information auprès de personnes contre lesquelles son propre délégué commercial avait mis en garde, en se contentant de dire qu'il 'prendrait note des questions et répondrait dans les prochains jours', sans fournir la moindre information.
Questions sans réponse
- M. Vic Toews a demandé si le ministre pouvait assurer à la Chambre que la vérificatrice générale examinerait l'ensemble du système d'attribution de contrats publicitaires lucratifs aux donateurs les plus généreux du Parti libéral — le ministre a invoqué le mandat général de la vérificatrice générale sans s'engager à une révision systémique.
- M. Joe Clark a demandé si la vérificatrice générale aurait pleinement accès à Alfonso Gagliano pour un entretien complet — le ministre a répété le mandat en cinq points sans confirmer ni infirmer que Gagliano serait mis à disposition.
- M. Bill Blaikie a demandé un engagement précis de la part du vice-premier ministre à l'effet que si le rapport de la vérificatrice générale révélait des irrégularités sous la surveillance de l'ancien ministre, le gouvernement reconsidérerait la nomination de Gagliano comme ambassadeur — aucun tel engagement n'a été donné.
- M. Randy White a demandé au vice-premier ministre de confirmer qu'aucun autre ministre n'avait accordé de contrats ou de nominations à des membres de son équipe de direction — le vice-premier ministre a refusé de donner cette confirmation.
- M. Keith Martin a demandé pourquoi le ministère des Affaires étrangères, contrairement aux conseils de son propre délégué commercial, avait sollicité des renseignements auprès d'Ari Ben-Menashe et d'Alex Legault, et si le gouvernement les extraderait vers les États-Unis pour les accusations de fraude en suspens — Denis Paradis n'a fourni aucune réponse substantielle à l'une ou l'autre de ces questions.
Toews demande si le ministre des Travaux publics et des Services gouvernementaux assurera à la Chambre que la vérificatrice générale examinera l'ensemble du système d'attribution de contrats publicitaires lucratifs aux donateurs libéraux les plus généreux.
Cites the Groupaction recycled-document scandal and draws a parallel to the Pierre Corbeil kickback scheme, asking a specific question about auditor general involvement, though the ask is framed rhetorically.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, Groupaction tried to pass off a recycled document as a $550,000 original. The document is not the only thing that seems to have been copied. The entire Gagliano-Groupaction affair is a carbon copy of the kickback scheme run by Pierre Corbeil which led to influence peddling charges. Will the Minister of Public Works and Government Services assure the House that the auditor general will look into the entire system of giving lucrative advertising contracts to the most generous Liberal donators?
Boudria affirme que la vérificatrice générale a déjà le mandat d'examiner toute activité du gouvernement du Canada, laissant entendre qu'aucun renvoi particulier n'est nécessaire.
Rather than addressing whether he would ask the auditor general to investigate, Boudria dismisses the question by noting the auditor general already has a general mandate, deflecting without any substantive commitment.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member knows that the Auditor General of Canada has a mandate to inquire into any activity in which the Government of Canada is involved. If he does not, I am confident his colleague, the chairman of the committee dealing with public accounts, could brief him on that at the earliest opportunity.
Toews demande au ministre de dissiper tout doute en priant la vérificatrice générale d'enquêter sur la gestion par Charles Guité de tous les contrats de commandite alors qu'il était directeur de la publicité aux travaux publics, soulignant que la société Oro Communications de M. Guité était l'un des principaux donateurs à la campagne de réélection du ministre.
Names Charles Guité specifically, identifies his company Oro Communications as a top donor to the current minister's re-election campaign, and makes a specific ask about investigating Guité's handling of all sponsorship contracts.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, the contracts for the phoney reports and all the sponsorship contracts were signed off by Charles Guité who left public works and is now a lobbyist for the ad industry. Today we learned that Mr. Guité's private company, Oro Communications, was one of the top donators to the re-election campaign of the current Minister of Public Works and Government Services. Will the minister clear the air by asking the auditor general to investigate Mr. Guité's handling of all sponsorship contracts while he was head of advertising at public works?
Boudria esquive la question en soulignant qu'il n'est ministre que depuis quatre semaines et qu'il n'y a pas eu d'élection depuis, laissant entendre que l'allégation de don est mal adressée.
Boudria deflects entirely by quibbling that he has only been minister four weeks and there has been no election since then, completely ignoring the substance of the donation allegation and the request for an investigation.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, if this person contributed to the re-election of the Minister of Public Works and Government Services, he must have done it very recently. I have only been in the position four weeks and there has not been an election since then as far as I know.
Toews demande si le ministre demandera à la vérificatrice générale d'enquêter sur l'existence d'un favoritisme envers Groupaction et Groupe Everest, citant le fait que le fils de l'ex-ministre Gagliano était directeur du marketing d'une entreprise travaillant pour ces deux firmes.
References the specific role of ex-minister Gagliano's son as director of marketing for a company working for Groupaction and Groupe Everest and asks whether the auditor general will investigate favouritism toward those two firms, though the question is cut off.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, the member knows that it was a donation to his campaign. Last year we learned that the son of ex-minister Gagliano was the director of marketing for a company that was working for Groupaction and Groupe Everest, the two biggest recipients of federal sponsorship contracts. The government's handpicked ethics lapdog accepted that this was simply coincidence. This matter needs to be re-opened. Will the minister ask the auditor general to investigate whether any favouritism was shown to Groupaction and Groupe Everest--
Boudria expose le mandat en cinq points confié à la vérificatrice générale, notamment l'examen des exigences contractuelles, la comparaison des livrables, l'examen du processus d'approbation des paiements, toute autre procédure de vérification nécessaire et la formulation de conclusions et recommandations.
Boudria provides the five-point mandate given to the auditor general in detail, which is substantively responsive, though it does not directly confirm whether the scope covers favouritism toward Groupaction and Groupe Everest specifically.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, that question is a little more serious than the previous two, not that it could be much worse. The mandate of the auditor general, in addition to the general mandate that she has, is: one, to review the requirements of contracts given to Groupaction relative to the reports produced; two, analyze and compare the deliverables and determine if the deliverables met contract requirements; three, review payment approval process; four, conduct any other audit procedures necessary; and five, provide key findings and recommendations. That is pretty complete.
Pallister demande pourquoi le premier ministre ne réalise pas qu'il est une insulte pour les Canadiens de nommer à l'étranger quelqu'un qui n'a pas respecté les valeurs canadiennes à la maison, présentant l'ambassade de Gagliano comme une récompense pour le même comportement de favoritisme qui lui est reproché.
Framed almost entirely as partisan rhetoric comparing Gagliano to a prince of patronage and the Prime Minister to a king, with no specific evidence cited; the ask is unanswerable as posed.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, Alfonso Gagliano might be the prince of patronage but the king is the Prime Minister. It is ironic that the behaviour that we find so reprehensible from Mr. Gagliano, that of placing the Liberal Party ahead of the interests of Canadians, is the same behaviour we see from this Prime Minister. It is even more ironic that in order to help his minister escape charges of patronage, the Prime Minister would use patronage to send him to Copenhagen. Why will the Prime Minister not realize that it is an insult to Canadians to appoint someone to represent their values abroad who has not lived by his or her values at home?
Manley affirme que les décisions fondées sur une campagne de diffamation sans fondement ne représentent pas les valeurs canadiennes et soutient qu'aucune preuve d'acte répréhensible de la part de M. Gagliano n'a été présentée.
Manley deflects by characterizing the allegations as a groundless smear campaign without addressing the specific patronage appointment, providing no factual engagement.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, it does not represent Canadian values to make decisions based on a groundless smear campaign. Quite frankly, the hon. member has not given us any evidence that at all implicates wrongdoing on behalf of Mr. Gagliano who served in the House with great respect.
Pallister affirme qu'en 1993 la GRC a conseillé au premier ministre de ne pas nommer Gagliano au cabinet en raison de son dossier douteux, et demande si le premier ministre suspendra immédiatement sa nomination à titre d'ambassadeur étant donné qu'une enquête pourrait nécessiter son rappel.
Cites the 1993 RCMP advice to the Prime Minister against appointing Gagliano and makes a specific ask about suspending the ambassadorial appointment pending investigation, grounded in a factual claim.
Texte source
Yes, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Gagliano's record stands by itself. In 1993 the RCMP advised the Prime Minister against appointing Mr. Gagliano to cabinet based on his shady record. The PM ignored that advice and the questionable behaviour continued. Only in the mind of this Prime Minister should such a record be rewarded. Given that an investigation may well necessitate the recall of Mr. Gagliano, will the Prime Minister immediately suspend his unjustifiable ambassadorial appointment?
Manley invite Pallister à sortir de la Chambre des communes pour formuler ses allégations sans la protection du privilège parlementaire, les qualifiant de sans fondement, inutiles et dépourvues de preuves.
Manley does not address the RCMP advice claim or the request to suspend the appointment, instead challenging Pallister to make his allegations outside the House without parliamentary privilege — a pure attack with no substantive answer.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, what I would like to see is the hon. member to stop cowering under the protection of parliamentary privilege, to step outside the House of Commons and to make the kind of allegation that he makes in here; groundless, pointless and without any evidence to back him up.
Duceppe demande si le gouvernement laissera la vérificatrice générale libre de déterminer elle-même la portée de son mandat plutôt que de limiter son enquête à Groupaction, notant que le ministre a demandé un audit limité aux contrats de Groupaction tandis que le premier ministre veut qu'elle détermine seulement s'il y a un ou deux rapports.
Duceppe identifies a specific tension between the minister's stated scope for the audit and the auditor general's independence, asking a pointed question about whether the government will let her determine the scope of her own mandate.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, the government is sending clear signals to the auditor general that she limit her investigation to Groupaction. In fact, the minister of public works asked that the audit be limited to the contracts awarded to Groupaction, while the Prime Minister wants the auditor general to content herself with determining whether there are one or two reports. Instead of telling the auditor general what to do and undermining her independence, could the government leave her free to decide on the scope of her mandate so that she can get to the bottom of all public works' dubious contract awarding practices?
Boudria renvoie Duceppe à l'article 11 de la Loi sur le vérificateur général, qui stipule clairement que la vérificatrice peut enquêter sur toute question.
Boudria cites section 11 of the Auditor General Act to claim she already has broad authority, but does not address the specific allegation that the government was signalling she should limit herself to Groupaction.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, I am sorry to inform the member that he should first read section 11 of the Auditor General Act, which clearly states that the auditor may inquire into any matter. The member opposite should know this, and perhaps already does, or so I should hope.
Duceppe demande pourquoi le ministre a pris la peine de limiter le mandat à Groupaction si la vérificatrice générale a déjà pleine autorité, alléguant que c'était pour éviter d'impliquer Lafleur Communications et Groupe Everest, qui ont donné 77 000 $ au Parti libéral après avoir obtenu 56 millions de dollars en contrats.
Duceppe names specific firms — Lafleur Communications and Groupe Everest — and cites a concrete figure ($77,000 in donations after obtaining $56 million in contracts), pressing on why the minister limited the mandate if he knows the auditor general already has broad powers.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, he has certainly read the auditor general's mandate. Why, then, is he taking the trouble to limit her mandate to Groupaction? Is that not the same thing? The reason is that he wanted to avoid involving Lafleur Communications, avoid involving Groupe Everest, which gave $77,000 to the Liberal Party after obtaining $56 million in contracts. Could it not take in all the dubious practices of this minister, of his predecessor, of this shady government?
Boudria réitère le mandat en cinq points et souligne qu'il s'ajoute aux pouvoirs de la vérificatrice générale en vertu de l'article 11, et ne les remplace pas.
Boudria repeats the five-point mandate and clarifies the phrase 'in addition to' rather than 'instead of' her existing authority, partially addressing the scope question but not responding to the specific figures or firms named.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, the questions are getting worse instead of better. The member opposite should know that the auditor general's mandate is, as I said earlier, “to review the requirements of contracts, analyze and compare the deliverables, review the approval process, conduct any other audit procedures necessary, and provide key findings and recommendations, in addition to her authority under section 11”, not “instead of”.
Lebel demande comment le ministre peut expliquer que personne dans son ministère n'ait remarqué la similitude entre les deux rapports alors que l'opposition a percé la supercherie en trois heures, compte tenu du fait que le ministre avait les rapports depuis longtemps.
Lebel asks a specific and pointed question about why no one in the department noticed the similarity between the 1998 and 1999 reports when the opposition did so in three hours, grounding it in the known timeline of the affair.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, the most disturbing and surprising thing about this entire affair is that the opposition took one morning to realize the similarity between the 1998 and 1999 reports, whereas the minister had his hands on them for a long time. How can the minister explain that no one in his department, not the departmental staff, nor himself, realized the similarity of the two reports, when it took the opposition three hours to see through the subterfuge?
Boudria précise que le ministère n'a toujours pas le rapport original, qu'il n'a reçu la version fournie par la société que la semaine précédente, et qu'il a personnellement demandé à la vérificatrice générale d'enquêter.
Boudria provides a relevant factual clarification — that the department did not have the original report and only received the company-provided version the previous week — which partially addresses the question, though it does not explain the broader oversight failure.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member claims we had the report ahead of time. In fact, as we speak, we still do not have the original of the report. If we had it, the hon. member would not even be asking a question today. This is not the report we had initially. We got it—at least the one provided by the company—last week. We are dissatisfied with it, and I have personally asked the auditor general to investigate this.
Lebel demande comment le ministre peut expliquer que personne n'ait réalisé pendant trois ans que les trois exemplaires du rapport de 550 000 $ avaient été perdus, et si le mandat de la vérificatrice générale comprend la clarification de ces circonstances.
Lebel cites the $550,000 cost of the report and asks a specific question about whether the auditor general's mandate includes clarifying how three copies were lost over three years, though the opening attribution is factually incorrect.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, the minister has just said that he was very satisfied with the report and that it is paid for, moreover. How can the minister explain that, for three years, no one realized that the three copies of the report, a report that cost us $550,000, had been lost? Can the minister confirm that the mandate given to the auditor general is also to clarify the circumstances under which the three copies of the report were lost?
Boudria renvoie Lebel au point quatre du mandat déjà énoncé — « mener toute autre procédure de vérification nécessaire » — en précisant que l'expression « toute autre » est inclusive.
Boudria deflects by noting the question was presumably prepared in advance and pointing to point four of the mandate ('conduct any other audit procedures necessary'), which is a tangential rather than direct answer to the specific question about lost copies.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, I know that the question may have been prepared in advance, but I would refer the hon. member to section 4 of what I have already read: “conduct any other audit procedures necessary”. “Any other” is an inclusive expression.
Blaikie demande si le gouvernement serait prêt à reconsidérer la nomination de Gagliano comme ambassadeur au Danemark si le rapport de la vérificatrice générale révèle des activités répréhensibles dans le ministère sous sa direction.
Blaikie asks a precise conditional question — will the government reconsider Gagliano's appointment if the auditor general's report turns up untoward activities — clearly framed and answerable with a yes or no.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Deputy Prime Minister. I would like to ask the Deputy Prime Minister, without prejudice to the culpability of Mr. Gagliano in any of this, whether or not the government could say at this point that if the auditor general's report does turn up untoward activities in the department under Mr. Gagliano's watch, that the government would then be prepared to reconsider his appointment as ambassador to Denmark.
Manley indique que la question a été renvoyée à la vérificatrice générale et qu'il faut la laisser faire son travail, sans prendre aucun engagement quant à la révision de la nomination.
Manley acknowledges the point is important but avoids making any commitment, saying only that they should let the auditor general do her work, which is tangential to the specific conditional commitment requested.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member makes an important point, the matter has been referred to the auditor general and we should let her do her work.
Blaikie demande au vice-premier ministre de s'engager à ce que le gouvernement agisse si la vérificatrice générale découvre quelque chose d'irrégulier sous la direction de l'ancien ministre, et demande également si le gouvernement examine d'autres ministères pour s'assurer que des conflits d'intérêts similaires avec des candidats à la direction ne se produisent pas.
Blaikie presses for a specific commitment about acting on the auditor general's findings and raises a second distinct question about whether other departments are being reviewed following the Calgary lawyer resignation, making it a compound but substantive ask.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, it seems to me it would be important for the Deputy Prime Minister to say that if the auditor general does do her work and she does turn up something untoward on the watch of the former minister, that the government would then act accordingly. It would be important for Canadians to have that commitment, so I ask him for that commitment. I also ask him, with respect to the Calgary lawyer who has now resigned as Liberal fundraiser, and given that this apparent conflict of interest turned up accidentally or unintentionally, whether the Deputy Prime Minister and the government are having a review of other departments to make sure this kind of activity is not happening with other leadership candidates.
Manley souligne que le ministre s'est engagé à déposer les résultats de la vérificatrice générale à la Chambre des communes, ce qui donnera aux députés et au public la possibilité d'examiner ses conclusions et de demander des mesures supplémentaires, mais ne prend aucun engagement précis d'agir.
Manley references the minister's commitment to table the auditor general's results in the House, which partially addresses the accountability question, but does not address the specific request for a commitment to act or the review of other departments.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, I am not sure that there are any leadership candidates. Clearly the effort the minister has asked the auditor general to undertake is a serious one. He has undertaken to make the results of her investigation public by tabling them in the House of Commons. That will provide not only members of the House but the public the opportunity to review her findings and consider whether they believe that the government should be urged to take any additional action.
Clark demande si l'enquête de la vérificatrice générale sera une enquête légale et si elle sera autorisée à déterminer si une fraude a été commise, demandant une réponse par oui ou non.
Clark asks a sharp, binary yes-or-no question about whether the auditor general's mandate will include determining if fraud has been committed, making it highly specific and directly answerable.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, I have another question for the minister of public works regarding the mandate given to the auditor general in the Groupaction reports affair. Will this be a legal investigation and will he allow her to determine if fraud has been committed, if fraud there is? Yes or no?
Boudria affirme que la vérificatrice générale du Canada a pleine autorité pour exercer son mandat en vertu de tous les articles de la Loi sur le vérificateur général, en plus du mandat en cinq points que le gouvernement lui a demandé d'entreprendre.
Boudria refers to the Auditor General Act and her full authority under it but does not directly say yes or no on whether the investigation covers fraud determination, leaving the specific ask unanswered.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, the powers of the Auditor General of Canada are based on the Auditor General Act. She has full authority to exercise her mandate based on all of the sections of the act. In addition to that authority, we have also asked her to review the five points that I listed in response to several previous questions.
Clark demande au vice-premier ministre si la vérificatrice générale aura pleinement accès à M. Gagliano pour un entretien complet afin de déterminer la nature de toute implication politique ou ministérielle dans la décision de payer 575 000 $ supplémentaires pour ce qu'il décrit comme une photocopie d'une étude que le gouvernement possédait déjà.
Clark asks specifically whether Gagliano will be fully accessible to the auditor general for interview and whether anything will prevent her from doing so, grounding it in the concrete issue of political or ministerial involvement in paying $575,000 for what he describes as a photocopy of an already-held study.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Deputy Prime Minister. Will the auditor general have full access to the former minister of public works, Mr. Gagliano, in her investigation of the Groupaction reports? Will the Deputy Prime Minister assure the House that nothing will prevent the auditor general from conducting a full interview with Mr. Gagliano to determine the nature of political or ministerial involvement in any decision to pay an extra $575,000 for a photocopy of a study of which the government already had a copy?
Boudria note le changement de cap de Clark par rapport à la veille et récite le mandat en cinq points confié à la vérificatrice générale sans aborder la question précise de l'accessibilité de Gagliano.
Boudria deflects by commenting on the change of focus from Clark's previous question and then recites the five-point mandate again without addressing whether Gagliano will be accessible to the auditor general.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, it is interesting to note the change of focus of the right hon. member from the question he asked yesterday. The House will no doubt want to hear why. The mandate given to the auditor general is quite clear. There are five points in addition to all of those that she already has. They are to review the requirements of the contract, analyze and compare the deliverables, review the payment approval process, conduct any other audit procedure necessary and provide the findings and recommendations. That is pretty inclusive and pretty clear to the rest of us.
White demande au vice-premier ministre d'assurer aux Canadiens que le ministre des Finances est le seul candidat à la direction à attribuer des contrats de favoritisme financés par les contribuables canadiens à son équipe de collecte de fonds, citant Jim Palmer de Calgary comme exemple précis.
Names Jim Palmer of Calgary specifically, identifies that he was simultaneously on contract with the minister's department and raising money for the Liberal Party and the finance minister's leadership campaign, and asks whether the finance minister is the only leadership contender doing this — a reasonably specific ask, though framed with rhetorical flourish.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, I want to pursue the issue of one of the finance minister's bagmen, Mr. Jim Palmer of Calgary. He was on contract with the minister's department at the same time as he was raising money for the Liberal Party and the minister's leadership campaign. Mr. Palmer said every leadership candidate is raising money, but I wonder if every leadership fundraiser is on contract with the government. Will the Deputy Prime Minister assure Canadians that the finance minister is the only leadership contender who is giving patronage pork that is Canadian taxpayers' dollars to his fundraising team?
Manley affirme que la question soulevée a été renvoyée au conseiller en éthique, que des mesures correctives ont été prises et que l'affaire devrait en rester là, sans confirmer si d'autres candidats à la direction ont agi de même.
Manley notes the matter has been referred to the ethics counsellor and that corrective action has been taken, but does not address the specific ask about whether other leadership contenders are similarly giving contracts to their fundraising teams.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, really I am not sure to whom the hon. member may be referring as leadership candidates. There are leadership candidates of course on the other side of the House and there is some confusion about who exactly is supporting whom. The matter the hon. member has raised has been referred to the ethics counsellor. Corrective action has been taken and the matter should rest there.
White demande au vice-premier ministre de confirmer qu'aucun autre ministre n'a accordé de contrats ou de nominations à son équipe de direction, citant des rumeurs selon lesquelles les ministères de l'industrie, du patrimoine, des finances et le vice-premier ministre auraient tous des équipes de collecte de fonds en place.
White names the $75,000 contract, identifies specific ministries rumoured to have fundraising teams (industry, heritage, finance, and the Deputy Prime Minister), and asks a direct question about whether any other minister has given contracts or appointments to their leadership teams.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, this guy's $75,000 contract for giving advice sure takes on a new meaning here does it not? The ministries of industry, heritage, finance and the Deputy Prime Minister are all rumoured to have fundraising teams in place. Even the government's ethics lapdog saw the obvious conflict and asked Mr. Palmer to sever his ties with the Department of Finance. Will the Deputy Prime Minister confirm that no other minister has given contracts or appointments to any of their leadership teams?
Manley commente l'importance de maintenir un niveau élevé de probité et note que quiconque aspire à une fonction supérieure devra respecter des normes très élevées, sans confirmer ni démentir l'allégation précise concernant d'autres ministres.
Manley restates general principles about probity and high standards expected of those seeking higher office without confirming or denying whether other ministers have given contracts or appointments to their leadership teams.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, I believe that the comments the ethics counsellor made were quite clear. The importance of maintaining a high degree of probity is one which would be apparent to anyone in public life quite frankly, but anyone seeking higher office likewise is going to be expected to live to a very high standard. The event in question itself illustrates the importance of that principle.
Duceppe a demandé pourquoi le ministre a payé 575 000 $ pour un rapport qu'il n'avait jamais eu entre les mains, de son propre aveu.
Duceppe pins the minister to a specific logical contradiction — paying $575,000 for a report he never held — making it a sharp, single, answerable accountability question.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, earlier, in reply to a question asked by the hon. member for Chambly, the public works minister said that he could not compare Groupaction's two reports, since he never had the other report in his hands, he only had one. He is signalling to me that this is true. I have a simple question for him. If he never had that report, why did he pay $575,000 for it? Could he explain this to me? He does not need the auditor general to do so.
Boudria a dit que le rapport n'était pas là quand il a pris la direction du ministère il y a un mois, c'est pourquoi il ne l'a pas déposé, répétant qu'il refuse de déposer des rapports qu'il n'a pas.
Boudria explains he did not have the report when he took over the department one month ago, but does not address why payment was made for a report apparently not received, deflecting to the tabling issue instead.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member may remember his own question from last week—otherwise he can read it in theHouse of Commons Debates—when he asked if I had the report. No, the report was not there. It was not there when I took over the department one month ago. This is why I did not table it. I did not table the report, because I did not have it. The right hon. leader of the Conservative Party asked me why I was not tabling a report that I did not have. I told him that I refused to table reports that I do not have. I am saying the same thing to the leader of the Bloc Quebecois.
Duceppe a demandé pourquoi le prédécesseur a payé pour un rapport Groupaction jamais reçu, et pourquoi ce prédécesseur a ensuite été nommé au Danemark.
Duceppe sharpens the accountability ask — why was payment made for something never received — and adds a pointed secondary question about why the predecessor was appointed to Denmark, grounding both in the public record.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, I understand why the minister is refusing to table a report he does not have. This is easy to understand. What I do not understand is that he is paying for reports that he did not received. I would like the minister to explain this to me. Earlier, he said “It is not me, it is my predecessor”. Could I know why his predecessor was appointed to Denmark? Will his predecessor pay for things that he never received in Denmark? I want to know why he paid for the report, if he did not get it.
Hear, hear.
Boudria a dit que des affidavits avaient été signés en vertu de la Loi sur la gestion des finances publiques par un haut fonctionnaire attestant que le rapport avait été commandé, préparé et reçu.
Boudria references signed affidavits under the Financial Administration Act as the basis for payment, which partially addresses the 'why pay' question, but does not address the Denmark appointment or the apparent gap between the affidavit and the missing report.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, some members opposite applaud for no reason. The hon. member is well aware that affidavits were signed under the Financial Administration Act by a senior official, to the effect that the report had been ordered, that it was prepared and that it was received. I said that too, the other day. If the hon. member does not remember, he can, as with his question, read it in the House of Commons Debates .
Duncan a demandé si le ministre insisterait pour que la souveraineté canadienne ne soit pas bradée, compte tenu de l'exigence américaine que la politique forestière canadienne soit approuvée par des comités du Congrès américain.
Duncan identifies a specific U.S. demand — Canadian forestry policy approved by U.S. congressional committees — and asks a clear yes/no sovereignty question, though it is somewhat rhetorical in framing.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Canadian softwood lumber negotiators left the table when it became apparent that the U.S. was not prepared to make a moderated counter-offer. One U.S. demand is that Canadian forestry policy be approved by U.S. congressional committees. Will the minister insist that Canadian sovereignty will not be sold out?
Manley a donné l'assurance sans équivoque que la souveraineté canadienne ne sera pas cédée aux fonctionnaires américains ni à leurs représentants politiques.
Manley gives a direct and unambiguous commitment that Canadian sovereignty will not be yielded to U.S. officials or their political representatives, addressing the core ask, though without operational detail.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, I suspect there are some interests in the United States that like the way the women's Olympic hockey game was refereed. I can assure the hon. member that is not the principle upon which important trade issues will be resolved. Canadian sovereignty will not be yielded to U.S. officials or their political representatives.
Duncan a demandé pourquoi le ministre n'avait pas demandé à la Corporation commerciale canadienne, à Exportation et développement Canada ou à l'assurance-emploi d'élaborer un plan d'urgence au cas où aucune entente sur le bois d'œuvre ne serait conclue.
Duncan makes a specific claim that the minister has not asked the Canadian Commercial Corporation, Export Development Canada or EI to develop a contingency plan, and asks a direct 'why not' question grounded in weeks of prior requests.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, despite not wanting to, the U.S. department of commerce may very well be forced to announce its determinations this week if no deal is cut. We have been asking the minister for weeks to prepare a contingency plan to backstop Canadian forestry workers and lumber exporters. The minister has not asked the Canadian Commercial Corporation, Export Development Canada or EI to develop a contingency plan in the event a deal is not made. Why not?
O'Brien a dit que le ministre du Commerce international est à Washington pour évaluer personnellement l'état des négociations et que le consensus demeure très solide pour conclure un bon accord à long terme.
O'Brien says the Minister for International Trade is in Washington meeting with the team Canada negotiators and pursuing a long-term deal, entirely ignoring the specific question about contingency planning through the Canadian Commercial Corporation, Export Development Canada or EI.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, the Minister for International Trade is in Washington to take stock personally of the negotiations. He has met with the team Canada negotiators. The consensus remains very strong. They are sparing no effort to agree on a good long term deal and that will mean guaranteed market access for Canadian softwood lumber to the United States.
Gauthier a demandé comment il se fait que pendant deux ans, personne au ministère des Travaux publics n'ait remarqué que ce qu'ils avaient reçu était une copie de l'autre rapport Groupaction.
Gauthier asks a precise operational question — how did no one in the department notice for two years that what they received was a copy of the other report — grounded in the minister's own just-stated affidavit claim.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, the minister of public works just told us that there was a signed affidavit to the effect that the report had been ordered, prepared and received. Given that all of this occurred, the question from my colleague, the hon. member for Chambly, has still not been answered? How is it that for two years, not one person from the department of public works noticed that what they had received was a copy of the other report? That is what we would like to know.
Boudria a dit que Gauthier faisait une allégation et que la vérificatrice générale est sur place pour déterminer si le rapport de 1998 et celui de 1999 sont essentiellement identiques, notant que le rapport généré par ordinateur était pour ainsi dire le même que l'autre.
Boudria clarifies that whether the 1998 and 1999 reports are substantially the same is precisely what the auditor general is investigating, and that the report generated for him from a computer was for all intents and purposes the same as the other one, which partially engages the question without fully explaining the two-year oversight failure.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, the member opposite is making an allegation, not stating a fact. This is not known. This, incidentally, is why the auditor general is on site to see if the 1998 report and the 1999 report are substantially the same. The report that was generated for me last week from a computer was for all intents and purposes the same as the other one. This we do know. The member himself made the allegation. This prompted me to ask the auditor general to investigate. It remains to be seen if this is the right report and if the company has another one. The auditor general will tell us.
Gauthier a demandé si le ministre avait vraiment besoin de la vérificatrice générale pour confirmer que le deuxième rapport est identique à 98 % au premier, affirmant que la vérificatrice générale est nécessaire pour connaître la vérité sur ce qui se passe dans son ministère.
Gauthier makes a pointed observation about the minister having tabled what turned out to be 98% the same report and demanding an apology, but the underlying question — does he need the auditor general for something so obvious — is more rhetorical than a clear answerable ask.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, you will understand my amazement, and even more so that of the poor folks who are listening to us, who paid half a million dollars for a report, at being told such a thing. The second report, the one that was tabled by the minister of public works as being the missing report—following which he asked the Bloc Quebecois to apologize for having denounced such a situation—once we put it right under his nose, he said “Yes, in the end, 98% of it is the same”. Does he need the auditor general to find out if the second report is the same? No. We need the auditor general to find out the truth about what is going on in his department.
Boudria a félicité Gauthier de l'avoir cité mot pour mot à partir de son communiqué de presse et a confirmé que la vérificatrice générale dispose du mandat nécessaire pour établir la vérité.
Boudria's response is largely self-congratulatory, quoting his own press release and commending Gauthier for quoting him verbatim, without substantively addressing the implied absurdity of needing the auditor general to confirm two nearly identical reports.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, I commend the hon. member for having read my press release yesterday, because that is indeed exactly what I said, “We need the auditor general to find out the truth”. That is what I said. He is quoting me verbatim. I commend him. Never has the truth been spoken more eloquently. With respect to the auditor general's report, she has the mandate she needs to do her work. She will prepare her report, and then we will find out the truth, to quote myself from my press release of yesterday.
Skelton a demandé pourquoi la ministre n'avait pas modifié la loi après avoir reçu en avril 2001 une note secrète avertissant que les règles existantes d'assurance-emploi pourraient entraîner des trop-payés disproportionnellement élevés par rapport au montant des gains non déclarés.
Skelton cites a specific April 2001 secret memo, quotes it directly regarding disproportionately large overpayments compared to the amount of undeclared earnings, and asks a clear accountability question about why the minister did not change the act.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, in April 2001 the Minister of Human Resources Development received a memo marked secret. It referred to the government's unjust EI law. I quote: In some cases, the existing rules may result in disproportionately large overpayments compared to the amount of undeclared earnings.... This is clearly a disproportionate response-- The minister knew all about the problems. Why did she not change the act that caused them?
Stewart a cité le propre communiqué de presse de Skelton du 12 mars affirmant que le principe du trop-payé est bon et que les Canadiens qui reçoivent des prestations auxquelles ils n'ont pas droit doivent les rembourser.
Stewart does not address the secret memo or the failure to change the act, instead pivoting to quote Skelton's own press release of March 12 to suggest agreement on the principle of overpayment recovery, which entirely avoids the question.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, perhaps I could give the hon. member the same answer I gave her colleague yesterday on this question. Perhaps rather what I will do is quote her own press release of March 12 where she said: The principle of overpayment is a good one. If Canadians receive government benefits to which they are not entitled, they should pay them back. This is one of the rare occasions when I would agree with the hon. member. In fact, this is all we have ever done.
Skelton a cité un rapport de surveillance de fin 2000 décrivant une situation cauchemardesque où il est impossible de rendre une décision raisonnable et légale, sous-entendant que la ministre a laissé ce cauchemar se poursuivre.
Skelton quotes a specific monitoring report from late 2000 describing a nightmarish situation where it is impossible to come up with a reasonable and legal decision, directly implicating the minister in allowing the nightmare to continue.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, I agree with my press release. If people take--
Oh, oh.
Mr. Speaker, the money was unlawfully taken from EI people. A monitoring report from late 2000, a year and a half ago, states: The monitoring has shown that the legislative and regulatory provisions have created a nightmarish situation where it is...impossible to come up with a reasonable and legal decision. The minister allowed the nightmare--
Stewart a expliqué qu'avant ou après le changement réglementaire, le montant du trop-payé aurait été le même, que seuls les gains non déclarés sont récupérés, et que le gouvernement a apporté des changements administratifs pour recouvrer les trop-payés de manière plus juste.
Stewart provides a substantive explanation — that pre or post regulatory change the amount of the overpayment would have been the same and that only undeclared earnings are recovered — and notes the government made administrative changes, partially engaging the question though not addressing the 'nightmarish situation' quote directly.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, let me explain again to the hon. member that pre or post regulatory change, the amount of the overpayment would have been the same. In these circumstances it is only the undeclared earnings that are recovered from an employment insurance benefits recipient. I would also point out to the hon. member that it is this government that made the administrative changes to better and more fairly collect on these overpayments. I would also reconfirm my commitment to the hon. member that if there are individual cases that she would like me to review, I would be happy to do that.
McKay a demandé au solliciteur général s'il userait de sa compétence pour contraindre la GRC à se conformer à une directive du commissaire à la protection de la vie privée concernant les caméras de surveillance à Kelowna.
This is a government-backbench exchange where McKay sets up the minister with a policy framing question about RCMP surveillance cameras and privacy, a classic softball with a built-in directive ask.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, the Privacy Commissioner, an officer of parliament, appeared before the justice committee last month. He described the surveillance cameras in Kelowna as having a police officer sitting on people's shoulders as they go about their ordinary business. He was very upset with the RCMP's reaction to his intervention on this important privacy issue. Privacy is a fundamental right. The recommendations of the Privacy Commissioner cannot be summarily dismissed by the national police force. Mr. Solicitor General, you have the jurisdiction to compel the RCMP to comply with a directive from an officer of parliament. Will you do so?
MacAulay a confirmé qu'il a rencontré personnellement le commissaire à la protection de la vie privée sur ce dossier, qu'il a reçu une lettre de ce dernier vendredi dernier qu'il est en train d'examiner, et a noté que la GRC a donné suite à un certain nombre de recommandations.
MacAulay provides genuinely informative detail — confirming he met the Privacy Commissioner personally, received a letter last Friday, is reviewing it, and noting the RCMP has acted on a number of recommendations — going beyond boilerplate.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the question of my hon. colleague from Scarborough East. I am aware of the Privacy Commissioner's concern. In fact I met him personally on the issue. I received a letter from him last Friday and I am reviewing it and will respond to it. I can assure the member also that the RCMP has reviewed the report and has acted on a number of the recommendations. It is always a government's problem of finding the right balance between a privacy issue and the proper protection for Canadians. That is what we are doing.
Robinson a demandé quand le gouvernement lèverait les sanctions économiques contre l'Irak, qu'il a qualifiées de sanctions génocidaires ayant tué plus de 500 000 enfants innocents.
Robinson's question is heavily rhetorical, invoking Margaret Atwood, David Suzuki, Anton Kuerti and Archbishop Desmond Tutu and characterizing sanctions as genocidal, with a vague ask about when the government will act.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Deputy Prime Minister. Today, hundreds of people from around the world, including Canadians like Margaret Atwood, David Suzuki and Anton Kuerti, got together to call for the immediate lifting of the economic sanctions against Iraq and to denounce the so-called smart sanctions. When is this government going to listen to the increasingly insistent voices of people from around the world who, like Archbishop Desmond Tutu, are calling for the lifting of the genocidal sanctions which, so far, have killed over 500,000 innocent children? When is the government going to act?
Manley a dit qu'il est très facile pour l'Irak de faire lever les sanctions — il suffit que Saddam Hussein autorise les inspections de l'ONU.
Manley addresses the sanctions question directly by stating the condition for lifting them — allowing UN inspections — which is substantively relevant but does not engage the humanitarian framing or the specific voices Robinson cited.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, it is very easy for Iraq to get the sanctions lifted. All that is needed is for Saddam Hussein to allow inspections. We are all concerned about the creation of weapons of mass destruction. All that is needed is for UN inspectors to be allowed to enter Iraq and to conduct inspections.
Martin a demandé au ministre d'assurer les dirigeants des Premières Nations du Manitoba que les négociations sur les ententes-cadres auxquelles le gouvernement s'est engagé depuis 1994 se poursuivront jusqu'à leur conclusion, et que rien dans l'IPPA ne diminuera ni n'entravera l'obligation de mener ces négociations à terme.
Martin asks a specific double commitment — maintain framework agreement negotiations until concluded and ensure nothing in the FNGA will diminish or inhibit those negotiations — grounded in a commitment the government has held since 1994 in Manitoba.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, first nations leaders are boycotting the consultations on the first nations governance initiative because they suspect this is really nothing more than the 1969 white paper revisited, just another way to diminish or even extinguish inherent treaty rights. This feeling is especially true in my home province of Manitoba. Will the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development assure Manitoba first nations leadership that he will maintain the framework agreement negotiations that his government has committed to since 1994 until all such self-government negotiations are concluded in that province and that nothing in the FNGA will diminish or inhibit his obligation to conclude those negotiations?
Nault a évoqué plus de 450 consultations à travers le pays, dont plus de 200 dans des communautés des Premières Nations, et a décrit l'initiative de gouvernance comme traitant de la reddition de comptes et des outils modernes de gouvernance, sans aborder les engagements spécifiques concernant l'entente-cadre ou la non-diminution.
Nault dismisses the premise by citing over 450 consultations including over 200 in first nations communities, but does not address either specific commitment Martin requested regarding framework agreement negotiations or non-diminishment of inherent treaty rights.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, it is obvious that the member has not been at his desk and at work. We have had over 450 consultations across the country and over 200 of them were in first nations communities, working side by side with first nations chiefs and their communities. I wonder which particular community he is suggesting is not participating and/or not engaged in governance. It is a very important initiative dealing with accountability and dealing with modern tools of governance. The debate is now starting. There will be another consultation phase when the bill is introduced. I hope all leaders will participate.
Hearn a demandé si le ministre avait demandé à ses fonctionnaires de s'occuper de l'arrestation du navire russe Olga, qui aurait eu dans sa cale 70 à 80 tonnes de morues adultes reproductrices soumises à un moratoire.
Hearn cites a specific recent incident — the arrest of the Russian vessel Olga under Icelandic control with 70 to 80 tonnes of mature breeding cod under moratorium — and asks a direct question about whether the minister has asked officials to deal with it.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans has just returned from Newfoundland, where members witnessed the devastation caused by foreign overfishing. Yesterday a Russian vessel, the Olga , under Icelandic control, was arrested for polluting Canadian waters. The boat, according to confirmed reports, has 70 to 80 tonnes of mature breeding cod in its hold. This species is under moratorium. Has the minister asked his officials to deal with this blatant abuse of regulations?
Thibault a dit que le dossier est en cours d'enquête, ce qui rend injuste la divulgation de détails, et a assuré au député que le gouvernement prend très au sérieux la surpêche et la récolte non réglementée sur le nez et la queue des Grands Bancs.
Thibault acknowledges the question as pertinent and confirms the matter is under investigation, but declines to give details on that basis and pivots to general policy statements about taking overfishing seriously, without confirming whether he has specifically asked his officials to deal with this blatant abuse.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for this very pertinent question. As this matter is currently under investigation, it would be unfair to give out details, but I can tell the member that this government, like the member himself, takes matters of overfishing and unregulated harvesting on the nose and the tail of the Banks very seriously. We will work with the provinces concerned, with the industry and with the international community to bring all fisheries under proper, good jurisdiction and management.
Hearn a demandé si le ministre veillerait à ce que le navire-jumeau Otto, qui a mystérieusement changé de cap vers l'Islande, soit abordé et inspecté avant que la cargaison ne disparaisse.
Hearn identifies a specific second vessel, the Otto, that has suspiciously changed direction toward Iceland, and asks a timely and operationally concrete question about boarding and checking it before the catch disappears.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, we have heard the words under advisement and under investigation. It is time we took it on the chin. A sister ship, the Otto , which was also headed for Newfoundland, has now suspiciously changed direction and is headed for Iceland. Will the minister see that this vessel is boarded and checked, because if he does not do it soon we know what is going to happen to the catch?
Thibault a assuré au député que le MPO et tous les ministères gouvernementaux feront de leur mieux pour s'assurer que les règlements et les lois sont respectés, et que les navires ne respectant pas les règlements de l'OPANO et les règlements canadiens seront refoulés.
Thibault gives only a general assurance that the government and DFO will do their utmost to ensure regulations and laws are followed and that vessels not following NAFO and Canadian regulations are happy to be turned away, without addressing the specific Otto or the urgency of the situation.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, once again I can assure the member that the government and officials of DFO and all government departments will do the best we can, our utmost, to ensure that regulations and laws are followed. If those countries and vessels do not want to follow the regulations of NAFO and the Canadian regulations, then we are happy to have them turned away.
Mills a demandé si le gouvernement retarderait sa décision de ratification du Protocole de Kyoto jusqu'à ce que le mécanisme de crédit pour les exportations d'énergie propre soit en place, citant le scientifique en chef du Groupe d'experts intergouvernemental sur l'évolution du climat de l'ONU comme ayant dit que le Canada n'obtiendrait pas de crédit pour ses exportations d'énergie propre vers les États-Unis.
Mills cites a specific source — the chief scientist on the UN's intergovernmental panel on climate change — and raises a concrete contradiction between that scientist's position on clean energy credits and the government's position, then asks whether ratification will be delayed until the credit scheme is in place.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, the chief scientist on the UN's intergovernmental panel on climate change has been quoted as saying that Canada would not get credit for exporting clean energy to the U.S. since the Americans have rejected Kyoto, yet the government tells us exactly the opposite. How can we believe anything the government says about Kyoto when it makes such stupid assumptions? Will the government delay its ratification decision until after the credit scheme is in place?
Anderson a dit que le gouvernement a reconnu de façon constante qu'il lui faudra beaucoup d'efforts pour convaincre les autres nations d'accepter les exportations d'énergie propre, a cité la réunion de Calgary comme ayant été très fructueuse et a mentionné une prochaine réunion à Whistler en mai dans le même but.
Anderson corrects Mills by confirming the government has consistently said it has an uphill battle to persuade other nations to accept clean energy exports, cites the Calgary meeting and the upcoming Whistler meeting, and acknowledges work remains to be done, partially addressing the contradiction but not the ratification delay question.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is mistaken. We have said consistently that we have an uphill battle to persuade other nations to accept the concept of clean energy exports. That is why we had the meeting in Calgary some months ago, which, I might add, was very successful and where the international committee was surprised at how good the case is for clean energy exports, and it is why we will have another meeting in Whistler in May for exactly the same purpose. However, he is certainly correct that we have work to do to persuade the international community that clean energy exports are an important part of meeting the goal of--
Mills a demandé où le gouvernement emmène le Canada et s'il prévoit imposer encore plus de traités sur les gaz à effet de serre au-delà de Kyoto, citant l'avertissement du scientifique en chef selon lequel Kyoto aura peu d'impact à moins d'être suivi de nombreux autres traités similaires.
Mills raises the chief scientist's point that Kyoto will have little impact unless followed by many more such treaties and asks where the government is taking Canada, but the question about wreaking havoc on the entire Canadian economy is highly rhetorical and the ask is compound and vague.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, the U.S. is not part of Kyoto. How can we get credit for somebody that is not part of it? The same chief scientist told us that Kyoto will have little impact on greenhouse gas levels unless it is followed by many more such treaties. Such a prospect is rather frightening. My question for the Minister of the Environment is this: Where is the government taking us? Is it planning to wreak havoc on the entire Canadian economy by imposing even more greenhouse gas treaties once we get beyond Kyoto?
Anderson a confirmé que la première période de Kyoto de 2008 à 2012 n'est que la première période et que pour lutter efficacement contre les changements climatiques, il faudra des actions ultérieures et des périodes supplémentaires de mesures pour réduire les émissions de gaz à effet de serre.
Anderson confirms that subsequent actions and subsequent periods will be needed beyond the first Kyoto period from 2008 to 2012, which directly engages the premise about more treaties being needed, though without addressing the economic impact concern.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, I am disappointed that the hon. member, who has in fact gone to one of the conferences of parties, one of the international meetings on climate change, missed the point that in fact the first Kyoto period, from 2008 to 2012 is just that, the first Kyoto period. Of course for us to deal effectively with climate change, as the distinguished scientist who was speaking yesterday made perfectly clear, it will have to be followed by subsequent actions and subsequent periods where we also take measures to combat greenhouse gas emissions.
Le vice-premier ministre peut-il assurer que la seule solution acceptable est un retour complet au libre-échange, et non une simple réduction des droits compensatoires présentée comme une victoire?
Cites specific figure of 37% countervailing duties and references ongoing negotiations, with a clear ask about whether a reduction in duties would be presented as a victory versus full free trade, though framed partly rhetorically.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, there are only a few loose ends to wrap up for the Prime Minister to conclude a softwood lumber agreement. The Minister for International Trade is in Washington, and a Canadian representative has said that the minister would certainly not come to witness a failure. Despite this optimism, there is talk of countervailing duties of 37% and there are still no guarantees of access to the U.S. market. Will the Deputy Prime Minister assure us that there is no question of presenting as a victory a possible reduction in countervailing duties and that the only acceptable solution is a full return to free trade?
Le secrétaire parlementaire a confirmé que le libre-échange est l'objectif à long terme et a exprimé l'espoir d'une conclusion réussie des négociations.
Acknowledges free trade as the long-term goal but deflects the core question about not presenting a partial reduction as victory, offering only general optimism about negotiations.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, of course it is so. When the softwood lumber agreement ran out a year ago we then had free trade in softwood lumber, and if the United States had not taken its very punitive and petty action against Canada we would have softwood lumber free trade right now and the member would not even be posing his question. Of course that is the long term goal, but I do not think there is any point in speculating. The minister is there, he is personally in charge of the negotiations and we are very hopeful that we will have a successful conclusion.
Le vice-premier ministre ne pense-t-il pas qu'il est temps d'introduire un plan d'aide à l'industrie du bois d'œuvre et à ses travailleurs?
Asks a reasonably specific question about whether the government will introduce an assistance plan for the softwood lumber industry and workers, though it is partly framed as a rhetorical challenge to the deputy prime minister.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, the parliamentary secretary is not setting our minds at rest. He is still talking about long term objectives. Does the Deputy Prime Minister not think that it is time to introduce a plan to provide assistance to the softwood lumber industry and its workers in order to show that the Canadian government is serious about wanting to go back to free trade?
Le secrétaire parlementaire a mentionné la rencontre du ministre avec le secrétaire au Commerce Evans et a exprimé l'espoir d'une entente réussie, utilisant une analogie avec la médaille d'or de hockey.
The answer ignores the question about an assistance plan entirely, pivoting to a sports metaphor about the women's hockey gold medal and reiterating that the minister is personally in charge of negotiations.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, the Minister for International Trade met this morning with Secretary of Commerce Evans in Washington. He is personally in charge of the negotiations. We are very hopeful that there will be a successful deal. As the Deputy Prime Minister noted, even with the biased referee in the women's hockey we won the gold medal, and if necessary we will win the gold medal again in softwood lumber at the WTO.
Pourquoi le ministère des Affaires étrangères a-t-il sollicité des renseignements auprès d'Ari Ben-Menashe et d'Alex Legault, malgré les avertissements de son propre délégué commercial?
Names specific individuals (Ari Ben-Menashe and Alex Legault), cites the trade commissioner's warning, and asks a pointed question about why Foreign Affairs solicited intelligence from known fraud artists despite that advice.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, Montrealers Ari Ben-Menashe and Alex Legault are the two men involved in the questionable treason charges against Zimbabwe's Morgan Tsvangirai. These two men have a long history of international fraud. Our Department of Foreign Affairs was warned not to deal with them, but despite that the department has solicited regular debriefings from these two individuals. My question is simple. Why did the Department of Foreign Affairs, against the advice of our own trade commissioner, solicit intelligence information from known fraud artists Ari Ben-Menashe and Alex Legault?
Denis Paradis a seulement indiqué qu'il prendrait note des questions et y répondrait dans les prochains jours.
The secretary of state provided no information whatsoever, simply stating he would take note of the questions and answer in the coming days.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, I will take note of the questions and I would be happy to answer in the coming days.
Le gouvernement extradra-t-il Ari Ben-Menashe et Alex Legault vers les États-Unis pour des accusations de fraude, ou les protégera-t-il au Canada?
Adds factual context about fraud charges in the United States and asks a specific question about extradition, though the rhetorical framing ('coddle them') reduces precision.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, perhaps I could edify the hon. member. These two individuals are wanted on fraud charges all over the world. Our own trade commissioner warned the Department of Foreign Affairs not to deal with these individuals. They are wanted on fraud charges, for example, in the United States for bilking millions of dollars out of innocent people. Will the hon. member extradite these people to the United States for the fraud charges that they are up against or will he coddle them within our own country?
Denis Paradis a indiqué qu'il ferait des demandes au ministère des Affaires étrangères et reviendrait vers le député dans les prochains jours.
The secretary of state again committed only to inquiring of the Department of Foreign Affairs and getting back to the member, providing no substantive response.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, I will inquire of the Department of Foreign Affairs and get back to the member on this in the next few days.
Mr. Speaker, last week we witnessed a 36 hour fast and a peaceful demonstration on Parliament Hill by Canadian Falun Gong practitioners attempting to bring attention to the alleged abuse of fellow practitioners in China. Could the Secretary of State for Asia-Pacific inform the House what actions his government has taken to encourage and promote greater respect for human rights in all parts of China?
Mr. Speaker, Canada has spoken out about the human rights situation, both at the UN human rights commission and in Beijing, and will continue to do so. On many occasions we have raised our concerns directly with senior Chinese officials, both in Beijing and here in Ottawa. Canada would very much like China to end the suppression of freedom of religious expression and spiritual practice and to ratify the two human rights conventions that China has already ratified at the UN.
Quand la ministre créera-t-elle un organisme de sécurité des médicaments incluant les intervenants en soins de santé et le public, compte tenu du dossier incluant la mort de Vanessa Young et le recours collectif de 100 millions de dollars lié au Prepulsid?
Cites the specific case of Vanessa Young, the $100 million class action suit, and the Prepulsid issue, and asks when the minister will create a drug safety agency that includes health care stakeholders and the public.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the health minister announced a new monitoring agency for adverse drug reactions, to be housed within Health Canada. Let us review the Liberals' track record on the area of drug safety. The government has known for years that there was a problem. While Health Canada and Janssen-Ortho haggled over the wording of a warning letter, 15 year old Vanessa Young died. Many now believe Vanessa's case is the tip of a Prepulsid iceberg in Canada. The government is currently facing a $100 million class action suit. When will the minister create a drug safety agency that includes health care stakeholders and the public?
La ministre a souligné que la surveillance post-commercialisation est une question sérieuse abordée par le Canada, la FDA et l'Union européenne, et a décrit des mesures prises, notamment la création d'une nouvelle direction et l'affectation de ressources supplémentaires.
The minister acknowledged the seriousness of post-market surveillance and mentioned new steps including a new directorate, additional resources, and new procedures, but did not address the specific ask about including health care stakeholders and the public.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, as I indicated yesterday, the whole area of post-market surveillance of drugs, the issue around adverse reactions, is a very serious and important one. Not only are we dealing with it here, but the FDA and the European Union's commission are struggling with how we encourage and receive the best information possible in relation to adverse reactions so that then we can act to protect the public. As I mentioned yesterday, we are taking steps within the Department of Health Canada, including the creation of a new directorate and many other new procedures and the allocation of additional resources--
Compte tenu de l'engagement du premier ministre du 25 février et du programme de 225 millions de dollars confirmé par le Québec, quand le gouvernement fédéral annoncera-t-il son investissement dans la route 185 avant la date limite du 31 mars?
Cites a specific February 25 exchange with the Prime Minister, a $225 million Quebec program, a page in the Journal de Québec, and a March 31 deadline, asking when the federal government will announce its investment in highway 185.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, on February 25, the Prime Minister responded as follows to my question on the upgrading of highway 185: “If the government of Quebec feels that the stretch between Rivière-du-Loup and the New Brunswick border is a priority, I will be very pleased to agree”. Quebec has indeed confirmed a $225 million program and the work is under way. Today, the region has taken out an entire page in the Journal de Québec to voice its desperate appeal. If the Deputy Prime Minister waits until after March 31, his leeway will disappear and, thanks to his inaction, highway 185 will continue to be as much a killer strip as ever. When does he plan to announce the federal government's investment?
Le ministre a dit avoir déjà répondu à la question la veille et que le gouvernement est prêt à discuter de toute amélioration routière partout au pays, y compris au Québec.
The minister gave a one-sentence non-answer referring to a previous day's response and offering only a generic willingness to discuss highway improvements anywhere in Canada.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, I already answered that yesterday. We are prepared to discuss any highway improvements anywhere in the country, Quebec included.
Si le rapport final sur la réglementation de l'utilisation des terres au lac Louise a été produit par son ministère et non par Olsen and Olsen, pourquoi a-t-elle versé 56 000 dollars à cette entreprise pour un travail qui n'a jamais été effectué?
References a specific $56,000 contract with Olsen and Olsen and a contradictory departmental account of whether a final report exists, with a pointed ask about why money was paid for work not done, though the rhetorical flourishes reduce precision.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, let us see today if the heritage minister can tell us if there is a final report regarding land use regulations at Lake Louise? She paid $56,000 to Olsen and Olsen to produce one. Her department first said that the company only produced a “draft document”. Now the department says that there is a final document, poof. Maybe the minister can just jump up out of her seat today, perhaps jump over it, and tell us what the actual truth is. The question is, if the final report was actually produced by her department and not by Olsen and Olsen, why did she hand out such huge gobs of cash for something that was never done?
La ministre a invité la députée à répéter sa déclaration à l'extérieur de la Chambre afin que la compagnie Olsen puisse prendre les mesures appropriées, sans fournir de réponse substantielle.
The minister did not address the question at all, instead inviting the member to repeat her statement outside the House so the Olsen company could take appropriate action.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, I would invite the member to make that statement outside the House where the Olsen company can take the appropriate action.
Le secrétaire d'État aux Sciences, à la Recherche et au Développement peut-il expliquer la raison d'être de l'utilisation d'une échelle mobile dans la répartition du programme de 200 millions de dollars pour les coûts indirects?
A government-backbench softball setup that references specific programs (CFI, research chairs, $200 million indirect funds program) but asks merely for a rationale for a sliding scale, providing the minister an opportunity to promote government policy.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, the federal government has increased its spending on R and D--
Oh, oh.
Mr. Speaker, the federal government has increased its spending on R and D in recent years to the CFI, the research chairs program and with increases in the research granting councils. However, these increases have forced Canadian universities to bear the indirect costs associated with that research, resulting in the $200 million indirect funds program announced last fall. Could the Secretary of State for Science, Research and Development provide the rationale for the use of a sliding scale in the allocation of these funds?
Le secrétaire d'État a expliqué que l'échelle mobile tient compte des circonstances et préoccupations particulières des grandes et des petites universités, et a mentionné le processus de consultation sur l'innovation en cours.
The secretary of state explained that the sliding scale was designed to address the special circumstances of both large and small universities, and mentioned the ongoing innovation consultation process, providing some real information.
Texte source
Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for Fredericton for his excellent question and his excellent work on behalf of Canadian universities. Through the allocation of $200 million for indirect costs of research and the use of the sliding scale, it is clear that the government appreciates the special circumstances and concerns of large universities as well as small universities. The government is presently undergoing the innovation consultation process and we encourage Canadians to participate.
Cette entrée ne contient qu'une acclamation de procédure (« Bravo! ») sans question ni réponse substantielle consignée.
- Some hon. members
Texte source
Hear, hear.