Re: Foreign policy statement IS a cover for scandal
[ Follow-Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Public Message Forum ]
Posted by Hansard on 09:24:44 2022/04/20
In Reply to: Re: Foreign policy statement vague; judge Liberals by their actions posted by Keith Sachs
If ever we needed proof that the International Policy Statement released yesterday by the Liberals six months after it was promised was for no other reason than to distract Canadians from the revelations of the Gomery inquiry. Here we have the Hon. Anne McLellan trying to rationalize the absence of Paul Martin in the House yesterday saying, "The Prime Minister is now meeting with some of the globe's most important and influential ambassadors to ensure that they understand the role we want".
It's six months late, it's released just as more damning revelations about Liberal corruption emerge, and it provides cover for Paul Martin not to be in the House to answer questions.
I hope Canadians will not be tricked by such obvious corruption and subterfuge.
Hansard April 19.2022
http://www.parl.gc.ca/38/1/parlbus/chambus/house/debates/085_2022-04-19/ques085-E.htm
ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
[Oral Questions]
* * *
[English]
Government Contracts
Hon. Stephen Harper (Leader of the Opposition, CPC): Mr. Speaker,
yesterday's sworn testimony at the public accounts committee makes it clear
that the Prime Minister funnelled tax dollars to Earnscliffe and his
campaign manager David Herle. A top secret document dated 1995 says that at
least $615,000 in improper contracts had already flowed. A memo outlines
that the competition was flawed, the payment excessive, the work probably
not needed.
As David Herle prepares yet another campaign of dirt and slander, should
the taxpayers of Canada not know that it is money going from finance to
Earnscliffe that gave birth to it all?
Hon. Anne McLellan (Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Public Safety
and Emergency Preparedness, Lib.): Mr. Speaker--
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
The Speaker: Order. I am sure the hon. Deputy Prime Minister appreciates
the enthusiastic support, but we have to be able to hear the answer.
The Deputy Prime Minister has the floor.
Hon. Anne McLellan: Mr. Speaker, first, I hear all those hon. gentlemen
and women across the way calling out, "Where is the Prime Minister?" Let me
tell everyone where the Prime Minister is.
This morning we had a most successful launch of this government's
international policy statement which in fact speaks to the direction in
which this government wants to take our country as it relates to our role in
the rest of the world. The Prime Minister is now meeting with some of the
globe's most important and influential ambassadors to ensure that they
understand the role we want--
¸ (1420)
The Speaker: The hon. Leader of the Opposition.
Hon. Stephen Harper (Leader of the Opposition, CPC): Mr. Speaker, there
is not a person in Canada who does not understand that these announcements
are about a government that has done nothing for 12 years and is now trying
to run away from a rocky record of corruption.
Why does the government not just admit, as public servant Allan Cutler
testified, that the Prime Minister abused the process to get contracts to
his friends at Earnscliffe, to his campaign manager David Herle? Why does he
not just admit that he got public money to his political associates?
Hon. Ralph Goodale (Minister of Finance, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, we have the
views on this subject of the Auditor General of Canada. I would quote from
her report in 2022:
Our review of a sample of standing offers found that the competitive
process had been followed in pre-qualifying suppliers. Requests for
proposals were issued, and the selection process resulted in standing offer
agreements with the successful bidders.
We note that the vast majority of these suppliers were not the same as
those providing sponsorship or advertising services.
The opposition should pay attention to the relevant parts of the
testimony.
Hon. Stephen Harper (Leader of the Opposition, CPC): Mr. Speaker, I fail
to see how breaking the rules on ordinary contracting makes any difference
that it was not sponsorship.
The Prime Minister said last week in the House, "I have never interfered
in any contract", yet Warren Kinsella testified under oath that the Prime
Minister phoned him at home to push for a contract to Earnscliffe.
With the Prime Minister caught in the biggest scandal in history, in the
web of his own deception, should he not be here to answer questions on the
floor of the House?
Hon. Ralph Goodale (Minister of Finance, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, in
reference to that testimony yesterday, I would note that in today's Toronto
Star the former policy adviser to the Prime Minister, Eddie Goldenberg,
completely denied a number of the allegations that were made by Mr.
Kinsella.
I would also note that in reference to the credibility of Mr. Kinsella,
this House has already been warned to be careful in that matter. There is a
reference to the "poisoned partisans like Warren Kinsella", and that advice
comes from the deputy leader of the Conservative Party.
Hon. Stephen Harper (Leader of the Opposition, CPC): Mr. Speaker, I have
a very simple question. When each group of Liberals calls the other group of
Liberals a bunch of crooks and liars, does it really matter which one we
believe?
Hon. Ralph Goodale (Minister of Finance, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, in matters
like this, yes indeed, the truth does matter a lot. I would refer the hon.
gentleman to the Auditor General's report from the year 2022, or the
external audit that was conducted by Ernst & Young in 1996. Let me quote
that one. Ernst & Young said:
Our audit of the research contracting process determined that APORS was
in compliance with prescribed policies and procedures.... We found no
instances where non-compliance might have led to situations of personal gain
or benefit.
The truth does matter.
Mr. Peter MacKay (Central Nova, CPC): Mr. Speaker, it is hard to audit
envelopes of cash.
Yesterday at the public accounts committee it was revealed by a longtime
Liberal strategist that there was concern within the Liberal government as
far back as 1995 that government contracts were being used to
cross-subsidize the Prime Minister's leadership campaign activity.
Under sworn testimony Warren Kinsella said, "I and perhaps others would
consider it inappropriate that you cross-subsidize that political activity
using the public treasury. That's inappropriate".
Will the Prime Minister now admit that he was both informed and involved
in an ad scam-like kickback scheme to use taxpayers' money to fund his
leadership campaign?
The Speaker: Order. I have some reservations about questions concerning
the financing of party leadership campaigns. I see the minister is rising. I
urge all hon. members to be cautious with their questions. The hon. Minister
of Finance.
¸ (1425)
Hon. Ralph Goodale (Minister of Finance, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the Prime
Minister will make no such concession as the deputy leader of the
Conservative Party has asked for. Today the member is relying heavily upon
the views and the comments of Mr. Kinsella. I would simply ask him why then,
not very long ago, did he call that individual "a poisoned partisan"?
[Translation]
Mr. Gilles Duceppe (Laurier-Sainte-Marie, BQ): Mr. Speaker, in November
1994, Warren Kinsella wrote Terrie O'Leary about a contract awarded
Earnscliffe, and I quote:
Terrie, all of this spells trouble and you know it. The competition was
flawed, the payment is excessive, the work is probably not needed, and the
research community can be fully expected to blow the whistle on the
political connections here.
Given this statement, will the Prime Minister finally recognize that his
entourage intervened to get the contract awarded to Earnscliffe, the firm
employing key players in his leadership campaign?
[English]
Hon. Ralph Goodale (Minister of Finance, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the very
period referred to by the hon. gentleman was subject to an independent
external audit conducted by Ernst & Young which covered the period from
1994-96. It was reported in 1997 and it says:
Our audit of the research contracting process determined that [the
agency at the Department of Public Works] was in compliance with prescribed
policies and procedures.... We found no instances where non-compliance might
have led to situations of personal gain or benefit.
That is the independent audit.
[Translation]
Mr. Gilles Duceppe (Laurier-Sainte-Marie, BQ): Mr. Speaker, Warren
Kinsella was testifying under oath, with evidence. Not only must there be no
conflict of interest, there must appear to be no conflict of interest. So we
have the executive assistant of the former finance minister, now Prime
Minister, who happens to be the wife of someone working at Earnscliffe, and
the contract is awarded to Earnscliffe.
Is this not a conflict of interest? I would like to see what sort of
birthday card he sends to the spouse and to the woman who was his assistant?
[English]
Hon. Ralph Goodale (Minister of Finance, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the hon.
gentleman obviously has a very subservient view of women in this world which
I think is unsavoury. I would point out that the sworn testimony that he
refers to has in fact, not within 24 hours, been contradicted. Indeed, there
is a public audit conducted independently by Ernst & Young of the very
period that the hon. gentleman is talking about that determines that the
proper procedures were covered.
[Translation]
Mr. Benoît Sauvageau (Repentigny, BQ): Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister
was aware of the interventions made to ensure Earnscliffe got the contracts
for the Department of Finance, because he intervened himself to add
pressure.
What does the Prime Minister have to say about Mr. Kinsella's statement
under oath that the former finance minister had even called him at home to
complain?
[English]
Hon. Ralph Goodale (Minister of Finance, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, there is
absolutely no evidence of such a mythical phone call.
As many of the media outlets are reporting this morning, despite the
raucous atmosphere around the committee yesterday, there was absolutely
nothing new in substance that was presented. All of these matters have been
previously covered over and over again. The documentation is the same, and
indeed it supports the case that the staff of the former minister of finance
was arguing for more contracting competition, not less.
[Translation]
Mr. Benoît Sauvageau (Repentigny, BQ): Mr. Speaker, indeed, the
documents submitted in evidence to the Standing Committee on Public Accounts
show beyond any doubt that the finance department intervened at least four
times-and this has been confirmed-to promote Ekos, Earnscliffe and Everest.
How could the Prime Minister say here in this House on April 14 that he
knew nothing and had never intervened in this regard, when documents show,
on the contrary, that the Prime Minister was running his own little parallel
sponsorship scandal?
¸ (1430)
[English]
Hon. Ralph Goodale (Minister of Finance, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the
documentation does not in fact demonstrate what the hon. gentleman is
alleging. The documentation demonstrates that the office of the former
minister of finance was arguing for more competition, not less competition,
and indeed, the contractual arrangements complained about were inherited
from the previous Conservative Mulroney government.
* * Sponsorship Program
Mr. James Moore (Port Moody-Westwood-Port Coquitlam, CPC): Mr. Speaker,
Claude Boulay, who worked on the Prime Minister's leadership campaign, to
whom the Prime Minister writes very glowing and very personal letters,
received $67 million in sponsorship cash when the Prime Minister was the
finance minister.
The Prime Minister's campaigns and the Liberal Party were financed by
Boulay and Boulay was financed by dirty money from the sponsorship inquiry.
Why will the Prime Minister not tell the whole truth about his
relationship with Claude Boulay? Is it a guilty conscience?
Hon. Anne McLellan (Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Public Safety
and Emergency Preparedness, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has been
absolutely clear and completely truthful about his relationship with Claude
Boulay. He has said over and over again in this House and I have said that
the Prime Minister never lunched with Claude Boulay in relation to the
direction of any contract to anyone.
I do not understand what the opposition does not get about the fact that
the Prime Minister has been absolutely forthcoming about his relationship
with Mr. Boulay.
In fact, the hon. member can read his testimony before the Gomery
inquiry.
[Translation]
Mr. James Moore (Port Moody-Westwood-Port Coquitlam, CPC): Mr. Speaker,
on April 14, the Prime Minister denied having dined with Claude Boulay, but
Alain Renaud has stated that the Prime Minister did dine with him. Now we
learn that, when the PM was finance minister, Mr. Boulay received over $67
million in sponsorships.
Why is the Prime Minister denying his relationship with Mr. Boulay? Is
it because this would directly implicate him in the sponsorship program?
[English]
Hon. Anne McLellan (Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Public Safety
and Emergency Preparedness, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is not
hiding anything here. He has been absolutely clear about his relationship
with Mr. Boulay.
The Prime Minister testified before Gomery. The member should read that
testimony. The Prime Minister said in this House that he did not have lunch
with Mr. Boulay, or anyone else as far as that goes, in relation to
directing any contract to anyone. How much clearer can the Prime Minister
be?
[Translation]
Mr. Michel Gauthier (Roberval-Lac-Saint-Jean, BQ): Mr. Speaker, in an
internal PWGSC memo dated July 24, 1995, we learn that nearly $298,000 in
contracts was awarded by dubious means to Earnscliffe, a firm with close
ties to the Prime Minister, in 1994 and 1995, by the finance department.
Why is the Prime Minister trying to make us believe that he knew
nothing, when his department did this for Earnscliffe, which had close ties
with him, was involved in his leadership campaign and was headed by the
husband of his chief of staff? Those are a lot of coincidences for one man.
[English]
Hon. Ralph Goodale (Minister of Finance, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, there is
nothing on the written record or on the public record that would indicate
anything but an appropriate competitive process was followed in this case.
As a matter of fact there have been two audit reports that have confirmed
that, one by the independent external firm of Ernst & Young and one by the
Auditor General of Canada.
[Translation]
Mr. Michel Gauthier (Roberval-Lac-Saint-Jean, BQ): Mr. Speaker, speaking
of the sponsorship scandal, a few short months ago, we were told exactly the
same sort of thing, until we learned the extent of the turpitude of this
government and the illegal activities.
Today, the Prime Minister is also in up to his neck, as are his friends,
his chief of staff, his officials, his department and a firm closely
involved with him and his leadership campaign. There are too many
coincidences, too many accusations and too much evidence. He will not get
out of this.
Can the Minister of Finance tell us why we should accept this and not be
scandalized by the Prime Minister's actions?
¸ (1440)
[English]
Hon. Ralph Goodale (Minister of Finance, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the
government has said from the very beginning that where there was wrongdoing
it must be identified, it must be condemned and it must be thoroughly
punished.
That is why we called in the Auditor General, why we called in the RCMP
in those cases that were appropriate and, most important, why the Prime
Minister, within a half an hour of receiving the Auditor General's report in
the spring of last year, called the Gomery inquiry to get to the bottom of
this issue and make sure it was thoroughly exposed.
[Translation]
Mr. Michel Guimond (Montmorency-Charlevoix-Haute-Côte-Nord, BQ): Mr.
Speaker, Alfonso Gagliano said that the current Minister of Transport had
approached him to put in a good word for his friend François Dufort of
Cossette, a company trying to land federal contracts.
Does the Minister of Transport recognize that what he did for Cossette,
despite what he says, was nothing short of lobbying?
Hon. Scott Brison (Minister of Public Works and Government Services,
Lib.): Mr. Speaker, that is not true, but we know that Groupaction employees
gave $100,000 to the Parti Québécois and that Groupaction won contracts from
the Société des alcools du Québec and Télé-Québec.
That is quite something for a party that claims to be clean.
Mr. Michel Guimond (Montmorency-Charlevoix-Haute-Côte-Nord, BQ): Mr.
Speaker, we were talking about Cossette. The Minister of Transport would
have us believe that he invoiced only for policy analysis or brainstorming,
but not for time spent arranging meetings with ministers for his friends,
and their subsequent meals.
Does the Minister of Transport think we believe that? No one believes
the Minister of Transport.
Hon. Scott Brison (Minister of Public Works and Government Services,
Lib.): Mr. Speaker, it is also interesting to note that Groupaction won a
contract from Société générale de financement, which is headed by the
husband of former PQ minister Pauline Marois.
During the last election campaign, Ms. Marois worked in support of the
Bloc. Again, quite something for a party that claims to be clean.
[English]
Mr. Jeff Watson (Essex, CPC): Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister testified
that he barely knew Groupe Everest president, Claude Boulay, and his wife.
Yet the Prime Minister's letters entered into evidence show this
relationship was in fact warm and quite personal.
Here is what he said about Boulay's wife, the queen of Liberal ticket
sellers, "I still believe that the years wash over Diane with such grace and
beauty that she remains youthful", a statement so fresh to an acquaintance
it deserves a slap.
Will the Prime Minister finally admit that his Gomery testimony was not
the full truth?
Hon. Anne McLellan (Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Public Safety
and Emergency Preparedness, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, as I said yesterday, I think
we all send out such letters of congratulations on people's birthdays,
anniversaries and other special occasions.
As I also said yesterday, I think it is absolutely ridiculous that the
opposition takes this simple letter of birthday congratulations and turns it
into something that it simply is not.
The Prime Minister has been absolutely clear about the nature of his
relationship with Claude Boulay.
Mr. Jeff Watson (Essex, CPC): Mr. Speaker, if the Prime Minister wrote a
letter like that to my wife, I would have him outside this House real quick.
According to the Prime Minister's Office, the Prime Minister sent out
53,000 greetings last year. I have a very simple question. I would like to
know how many he sent out when he was finance minister and how many of those
greetings referred to wine, golf games and hot wives?
Hon. Scott Brison (Minister of Public Works and Government Services,
Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister of Canada sends out about 50,000
birthday and anniversary letters every year. The fact is that last year I
received a Christmas card from the member for Calgary-Nose Hill. In the card
it said, "Ron and I send Christmas greetings and wishes for good cheer now
and the whole year through". In fact, not only was it a very pleasant
greeting but she drew a happy face with her name on it.
I do not know why she drew that happy face because, frankly, I have not
seen a happy face on the member for Calgary-Nose Hill for a long time. Was
she hitting on me, Mr. Speaker, or trying to--
¸ (1445)
The Speaker: Now we will hear from the hon. member for Calgary
Southeast.
[Translation]
Mr. Jason Kenney (Calgary Southeast, CPC): Mr. Speaker, well before his
intimate letters of-
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
[English]
The Speaker: Maybe we should start again. I realize there is a lot of
merriment in the Chamber at the moment but the hon. member for Calgary
Southeast now has the floor and I am sure he is going to ask a serious
question.
[Translation]
Mr. Jason Kenney: Quite right, Mr. Speaker. Well before he sent his
intimate letter to Claude Boulay in 2001, the Prime Minister sent another
"Dear Claude" letter in 1994, in which he stated "The services you provide
could be of interest to the federal office of regional development for
Quebec, of which I am the minister responsible. Your letter has been
forwarded to my office in Montreal-"
Is this not proof that the Prime Minister intervened in order to make
sure his buddy Claude Boulay got some of the dirty money?
[English]
Hon. Scott Brison (Minister of Public Works and Government Services,
Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the simple answer to the hon. member's question is no.
Part of the testimony that we have heard, as indicated by Mr. Boulay,
was that he has done business with the Government of Canada going back to
1984. That was not a Liberal government; that was a Conservative government.
Mr. Boulay has dealt with the Government of Canada and has done business
with the Government of Canada for over 20 years under successive
governments.
Mr. Jason Kenney (Calgary Southeast, CPC): Yes, Mr. Speaker, and he has
known the Prime Minister for some 20 years. Why is it then that the Prime
Minister said it was a short term relationship? Why is it the Prime Minister
said that he barely knew him when the Prime Minister was recommending him
for business 11 years ago, when he was commenting on the good looks of his
wife four years ago and when he was working on the Prime Minister's
leadership 15 years ago?
Why did the Prime Minister not tell the whole truth under oath to
Canadians?
Hon. Scott Brison (Minister of Public Works and Government Services,
Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister of Canada always tells the truth and
he did tell the truth under oath.
The fact that they take one of the 50,000 anniversary and birthday
letters that the Prime Minister sends out every year and try to make an
issue out of it is absolutely shocking. It speaks to the desperation that
they have in trying to sully the reputation of the most respected and
trusted political leader in Canada. They will not succeed because Canadians
know that they can believe our Prime Minister.
* * *
Follow Ups:
Post a Followup
[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Public Message Forum ]