Hansard excerpts-Question period-Nov.4,2005

Sponsorship Program

Mr. Peter MacKay (Central Nova, CPC): Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Minister of Justice said, “The government has made the determination that this is what the party owes”. He feels that the Liberal government and the Liberal Party can agree that $1 million is an appropriate amount of repayment for what Liberals stole from Canadians.

Is the professor of justice now so far up the ivory tower and so far removed from basic tenets of law that he actually thinks the guilty party gets to determine its own sentence and decide what amount of restitution is repaid? When will the Liberal government sue the Liberal Party of Canada and recover the full amount of money that it stole from Canadian taxpayers?

Hon. Scott Brison (Minister of Public Works and Government Services, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, once again the Liberal Party of Canada has paid back any money received inappropriately to the Canadian taxpayer.

In fact the calculations were based on analysis of Justice Gomery's facts in his report. Justice Gomery reviewed 28 million pages of documents, heard from 172 witnesses and in fact did a thorough analysis of the facts. We based our analysis on his facts and every penny has been repaid.

Mr. Peter MacKay (Central Nova, CPC): Mr. Speaker, I guess we should just take his word for it.

[Translation]

The culture of favouritism of this Liberal government has been demonstrated once again. The Minister of Justice has decided to set the amount his party has to pay back to the taxpayers.

In our justice system, sentences are not set by the guilty party. Justice Gomery has said that the Liberal Party was responsible.

When will proceedings be initiated against the Liberal Party to recover all the money stolen from Canadians?

Hon. Jean Lapierre (Minister of Transport, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the Liberal Party of Canada—not the Minister of Justice—in conjunction with its lawyers and accountants, has gone over each page of this report. Every amount deemed to have been deposited incorrectly in the coffers of the Liberal Party has been paid back cent for cent, for a total of $1.143 million. The content of the report was the basis used by our accountants and lawyers to determine the amount.

Á (1120)

[English]

Mr. Peter MacKay (Central Nova, CPC): Mr. Speaker, more nonsense from a founder of the Bloc.

The Liberal Party was found guilty by Judge Gomery of the worst theft of public money in modern Canadian history. Of the 28 lawsuits that the government has launched to recover the dirty ad scam money, there still is not a single one filed against the Liberal Party. It has made a down payment of $1.14 million, a paltry portion of the money that it stole, and less than the ad scammer Paul Coffin paid.

With $40 million still missing, why has a lawsuit not been launched by the government against the Liberal Party of Canada to recover the entire amount it stole from taxpayers?

Hon. Scott Brison (Minister of Public Works and Government Services, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, before a government or any other entity would launch a civil action against another entity, it would typically calculate, based on its analysis of the facts, the amount that would be appropriate to collect. If in fact the other entity offered voluntarily to pay that amount, there would be no need for a legal case.

I know the hon. member is a lawyer and perhaps he is trying to stir up all kinds of business for lawyers, but the fact is if two individuals can settle their differences and have full payment of what is appropriate, why do we need to bring lawyers and court cases into it?

* * *
Liberal Party of Canada

Hon. Rob Nicholson (Niagara Falls, CPC): Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister says he wants to ban 10 individuals from being members of the Liberal Party for life, yet many are wondering why the Prime Minister has selected these particular individuals and not others.

If the PM thinks it was wrong to handle illegal donations in the form of envelopes of cash, was it not also wrong for Liberal organizers and candidates to accept that cash and use it? When are they going to lose their memberships?

When will the Prime Minister stand and apologize to all the honest candidates who ran in the last election, who stuck to the rules but did not have a chance against a corrupt political machine? When are they going to get their--

The Speaker: I have grave reservations about the admissibility of that question. It appears to deal exclusively with membership in a political party which, as the hon. member for Niagara Falls is well aware, does not involve the administrative responsibilities of the government. Perhaps he could move on to the next question and tie it in to the administrative responsibilities of the government, which question period concerns.

* * *
Sponsorship Program

Hon. Rob Nicholson (Niagara Falls, CPC): Mr. Speaker, we will get the answer to that eventually.

For many years the Prime Minister was in the private sector. I think it is a fair question to ask what he would do if he had a chief financial officer whose company was found guilty of kickbacks, submitting false receipts, fraud, having out of control employees and absolutely no accountability. I bet he would ask for the resignation of the CFO.

I have a suggestion for the Prime Minister. Why does he not take a close look in the mirror and see who that CFO is and I bet he will want to do the right thing and pack it in, will he not?

Hon. Scott Brison (Minister of Public Works and Government Services, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, all last winter opposition members were attacking the Prime Minister and accusing him of being directly involved and responsible for malfeasance. The fact is Justice Gomery, in his report, has said absolutely that the Prime Minister is exonerated from blame in this affair.

They do not support Justice Gomery. They do not believe in his report because it does not fit into their narrow partisan goals. Canadians, who deserve the truth and want the answers, believe in Justice Gomery but they do not believe in the Conservative rhetoric on this issue.

[Translation]

Mr. Gilles Duceppe (Laurier—Sainte-Marie, BQ): Mr. Speaker, in the aftermath of the Gomery report, the Prime Minister announced a number of measures. He has, however, refused to disclose the identities of the Liberal candidates who received dirty money from Marc-Yvan Côté. Yet those candidates profited from the kickback system denounced by Justice Gomery. It is even possible that some of those candidates are sitting in this House or are working within the government.

Why does the Prime Minister refuse to disclose their identity? Why is he covering up for people who profited from the dirty money,when he has banned from the party the people who distributed that money ?

Á (1125)

Hon. Jean Lapierre (Minister of Transport, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the leader of the Bloc Québécois is starting up again on an attempted character assassination operation affecting certain people who might be sitting here or other public figures.

If the leader of the Bloc Québécois has accusations to make concerning anyone whatsoever, let him rise and name names.

Mr. Gilles Duceppe (Laurier—Sainte-Marie, BQ): Mr. Speaker, we are asking for names. It was they who expelled people, including Marc-Yvan Côté. During the 1997 election campaign, Marc-Yvan Côté was responsible for 21 ridings in eastern Quebec. Eighteen of them received funds and some ten got cash from Marc-Yvan Côté.

By not revealing the names of the candidates, does the Prime Minister realize he is fuelling the suspicions currently swirling around all the Liberal candidates in the 1997 election?

Hon. Jean Lapierre (Minister of Transport, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, if there is one person doing his level best to fuel suspicion, to try to damage reputations, it is once again the leader of the Bloc Québécois, who has no proof of what he is contending. If he wants to accuse somebody, he should have the courage to make the accusations in the House and outside it. Otherwise, he should be quiet.

Mr. Michel Gauthier (Roberval—Lac-Saint-Jean, BQ): Mr. Speaker, this is not hard to understand. The Gomery report states that Marc-Yvan Côté oversaw 21 ridings and distributed money to 18.

This is our question for the government. So far the government has been against naming names. Why will it not release the names of the people at the end of the line who received money from Marc-Yvan Côté, who was suspended for doing so? Those who took the money must be just as guilty as he who handed it out.

Hon. Jean Lapierre (Minister of Transport, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the Bloc Québécois House leader is on another fishing expedition in an attempt to tarnish reputations. The reality is that the government does not have to comment on anything that is not in the Gomery report. We trust in Justice Gomery's findings and he blamed certain individuals.

I do not have any additional information and I have no names to disclose. If the Bloc Québécois has such information, then it should make it known and name names rather than try to tarnish the reputations of all—

Mr. Michel Gauthier (Roberval—Lac-Saint-Jean, BQ): Mr. Speaker, something is not right here. The Gomery report we are quoting states that the money was handed out to 18 Liberals. These Liberals might be anywhere, they were not identified. They might be here or in ministers' offices. We do not know.

What we are asking the government is this. It said it wants to clean things up. Cleaning up does not mean sweeping things under the rug.

Name names so that we know who is involved.

Hon. Jean Lapierre (Minister of Transport, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, this is a real witch hunt. The Bloc Québécois House leader is once again flinging accusations at all the hon. members on this side of the House without any evidence, without any names, and without any specific charges. This is nothing more than a smear campaign.

Sponsorship Program

Mr. Tom Lukiwski (Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, CPC): Mr. Speaker, Justice Gomery's report indicates that there was widespread corruption and criminal activity within the Liberal Party of Canada. Simply put, the Liberals owe the Canadian taxpayer over $40 million and it is the government's responsibility to recover that money.

Will the Prime Minister commit today to launch a lawsuit against the Liberal Party of Canada to recover the millions of dollars that were stolen from Canadian taxpayers?

Hon. Scott Brison (Minister of Public Works and Government Services, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I have already answered that question and the Liberal Party has responded as well.

It is interesting to note that the leader of the Conservative Party operated for four years as an unregistered lobbyist. He failed to register under the Lobbyists Registration Act. Furthermore, during that period of time, the National Citizens Coalition that he led, that right-wing organization that fights against health care, that fights against child care and that fights against Canadian institutions, was charged six times with violations of Canada's Elections Act. They break the rules. They do not follow them.

Mr. James Bezan (Selkirk—Interlake, CPC): Mr. Speaker, that was complete nonsense. On Page 438, Justice Gomery describes the sponsorship scandal as:

--inappropriate political interference in administrative matters...excessive concentration of power in the Prime Minister's Office, carelessness and incompetence and blatant disregard of Treasury Board policies, greed and venality. The public trust in its system of government was subverted and betrayed, and Canadians were outraged, not only because public funds were wasted and misappropriated, but also because no one was held responsible or punished for his misconduct.

The Prime Minister has been aware of this for a long time. Why have no Liberals gone to jail yet?

Hon. Scott Brison (Minister of Public Works and Government Services, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has never been charged with violating the Canada Elections Act. However, the organization that the leader of the Conservative Party led for four years, during which he failed to register under the Lobbyists Registration Act, did break the rules, was convicted once under the Canada Elections Act and, furthermore, was charged six times. He is now trying to create the impression that he believes in the rules when the organization he led broke the rules, and he knew it.

* * *
Public Works and Government Services

Mr. Pierre Poilievre (Nepean—Carleton, CPC): Mr. Speaker, here is another one. What does a well connected Liberal company run by Jean Chrétien's son-in-law do when it has a mouldy, leaky, toxically dangerous building that no one wants? The answer is: sell it to the Liberal government. Never mind that the building needs $80 million in repairs and that it would have been cheaper to buy a new one of the same size and quality. As long as Power Corp., the Prime Minister's old company, gets its money, taxpayers can clean up the mess.

Why did the Liberal government reward the Prime Minister's old company and hit taxpayers with an $80 million cleanup bill?

Á (1135)

Hon. Scott Brison (Minister of Public Works and Government Services, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the hon. member ought to realize that we, as a department in our real estate dealings, always seek the best possible value for the Canadian taxpayer. The purchase of the former Nortel building was consistent with that. In the real estate markets it was being sold far below the actual value. The investments to upgrade it to an appropriate status for public servants has been made. This deal does meet the requirements of best possible value for the Canadian taxpayer.

Mr. Pierre Poilievre (Nepean—Carleton, CPC): And the building has been empty for almost two years, Mr. Speaker.

This is not just any company, though. Power Corp. hired the current Prime Minister when he was just a young lad and handed him CSL in a sweetheart deal. The Prime Minister is deeply indebted to Power Corp. No wonder he wanted to help his old friends when they needed to drop this mouldy monstrosity.

The government could have built a brand new building for less than the cost of repairing this one. Why did the Liberals stick taxpayers with this $80 million cleanup cost all to help the Prime Minister's old friends?

The Speaker: I am very concerned about the preamble to the hon. member's question. Personal attacks, as he knows, are out of order. The hon. Minister of Public Works and Government Services may choose to respond.

Hon. Scott Brison (Minister of Public Works and Government Services, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I will respond to the tiny bit of substance that the hon. member tried to put into his pithy partisan personal attack against the Prime Minister of Canada.

Our professionals, on an ongoing basis, monitor real estate markets to identify the best possible accommodations for Canadian public servants at the best possible value for the Canadian taxpayer. This acquisition and the subsequent renovations meet that standard.

If he wants to take his question period questions off the news wire this morning from an unsubstantiated report, he can do so. Otherwise, we can give him a briefing so he really knows what happened.

Justice

Mr. Gary Goodyear (Cambridge, CPC): Mr. Speaker, in my riding of Cambridge a man was chased down in the street and hacked to death with a machete. It was a brutal and bloody slaying that shocked the region. One of those involved was just sentenced to 19 months of house arrest.

After participating in what the minister must agree is an exceptionally serious and violent murder, he was sent home to watch DVDs.

When will the Liberal government learn that a warm couch, a night of movies and popcorn, is not punishment? It is not rehabilitation. It is not justice. It is plain and simple stupidity.

Hon. Irwin Cotler (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, our reform with respect to conditional sentences was intended to send a message with respect to denunciation. All serious offences and violent offences with regard to the proportionality principle, and I cannot comment on individual cases, will not be the subject of conditional sentences