Hansard Apr. 14, 05: "There is a difference between the fortunes of the Liberal Party and the fortunes of Canadian federalism."

"There is a difference between the fortunes of the Liberal Party and the fortunes of Canadian federalism. I am happy to be on the side of federalists."

Hansard: April 14, 2005 -- This begins just above (1525) and runs to (1605) -- Supply Opposition Motion--Sponsorship Program -- The beginning of this was posted last week. All emphasis is mine.

(1530)

[. . . . ] The sad truth of the matter is that not only does the Liberal Party not want to return the money, it cannot return the money. In fact, it received millions in dirty money. There is no way that it would consider repaying it or putting it into a special account, as the transport minister has proposed, or putting it into a trust account, as the motion today requires.

Quite simply, the Liberals require all of the money that they can get their mitts on to fight the next election. Their promises to return the illegal funds right now are hollow. In truth, the Liberals would rather campaign with dirty money than have a campaign with less money. It is a most pathetic situation in which the Prime Minister finds himself.

[. . . .] In his April 11 press release, “Liberal Party of Canada Collaboration with the Gomery commission”, Mr. Michael Eizenga, president of the Liberal Party of Canada, states:

Every single dollar received [by virtue of any illegal or improper transaction] will be returned...It is imperative that we hear from Justice Gomery in order to reconcile the amounts using testimony he has heard.

Nonetheless, in the Prime Minister's open letter to Liberals that can be found on the Liberal Party website, the Prime Minister does not see any possibility of returning the dirty money. He writes:

The Liberal government has filed...a lawsuit against 19 defendants, including several communications companies and their directors, to recover $41 million...With Justice Gomery's conclusions in hand, I will act swiftly and surely to ensure those who did wrong face the full consequence of their actions.

In the same letter the Prime Minister writes:

Canadians are looking for someone to step forward and to be accountable for cleaning up this mess and as prime minister and Liberal leader, I accept that responsibility.

[. . . .] I almost had to laugh this morning when I was walking into the office and I grabbed the National Post. On the front page was a story written by Mark Kennedy which stated, “Liberals to make national unity a key election issue”. In 1995, when the Liberal government created the sponsorship program, there were 54 Bloc Québécois MPs in the House. Today, 10 years later, there are 54 Bloc Québécois MPs in the House and they are set to win more seats.

[. . . .] (1535) [. . . . ]

Opposition motion—Sponsorship Program

[. . . .] Mr. Yves Lessard (Chambly—Borduas, BQ): Mr. Speaker, I will ask a question of my colleague who spoke last about the claim of the Liberal
member who is linking political options to the issue at hand.

Despite deep disagreements between the Bloc members and the Conservative members concerning our sovereignist political option and their federalist one, when the time comes to consider public interest, common interest and the fact that the government is using public funds for other purposes—whether with employment insurance or the sponsorship issue that we are talking about today—opposition parties must ensure that the fiscal house is in order and that the money that was misappropriated is put into a trust fund. Could my colleague state what his thinking is concerning this duty?

(1540)

[English]


Mr. James Moore (Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, CPC): Mr. Speaker, in a country as wealthy as ours, when the government is already overtaxing Canadians to the degree that it is and businesses and families are struggling to survive and succeed in the way that they should be financially, and want to move forward and have more choices and freedoms in how they choose to live their lives, this Parliament should do all its due diligence to treat every taxpayer dollar with an incredible amount of respect. It should not be treated and abused in the way that the Liberal Party has abused taxpayer dollars.

When we look at the reality of filthy emergency rooms across this country, infrastructure that is not being built, our armed forces not being up to the standards that they should be and all kinds of other issues that need to be properly addressed with taxpayer resources, it will not happen as long as we have a Liberal Party that does not think about the country first but thinks about itself first.

The Liberals are so arrogant and utterly out of touch with Canadians that they think the best interests of the Liberal Party are in the best interests of the country. What they will find out in the next campaign is that what is in the best interest of the country is to throw the Liberal Party out on its ear.

[Translation]

Mr. Pierre Poilievre (Nepean—Carleton, CPC):[. . . . ] That the House call on the government to immediately establish a trust account into which the Liberal Party of Canada can deposit all funds received from companies and individuals tied to the sponsorship scandal and identified in testimony before the Gomery commission.

It is essential that this House supports this motion, because it deals with the integrity of our democracy. The Liberal Party has won two elections after stealing and using the money that was stolen from taxpayers.

Even the legitimacy of these victories is now questioned, because the Liberal Party decided to steal the money from my constituents, from all constituents and citizens of this country. This money was stolen.

[. . . .] The Minister of Public Works claimed there had been an audit. We now learn there was no audit at all. There was merely a review conducted by two firms which now reveal that they were blocked access to key information. They were blocked access to the Liberal riding associations in the province of Quebec to which the money was initially funnelled through Liberal ad scamsters. That is the first contradiction that we have seen.

The second contradiction we should point out is that the Prime Minister originally said he did not meet Claude Boulay, one of the chief ad scamsters. Now he is admitting that there had been certain social occasions at which they had met. Two testimonies under oath by two separate individuals revealed that they actually had lunch to discuss federal government contracts.

[. . . . ] We are not talking about a small amount of money. We are talking about $2 million or more. That is an enormous sum of money in a political campaign.

[. . . . ] When we form the government, we will put an end to that scandalous reign. We will put it out of its misery and Canadians will be given the opportunity to really open the books of the Liberal Party and all of these scandalous programs. We will do a full forensic autopsy on all of the scandal that occurred under the Liberal Party.

[. . . . ] It is not only the Liberal ad scam. It is Technology Partnerships Canada where $2 billion was lent out and only 5% was recovered. It is the $1 billion mismanaged by HRDC, according to the Auditor General. It is the gun registry with $2 billion in overspending. That is the overall financial record.

[. . . . ] Mr. Tom Lukiwski (Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, CPC): [. . . . ] I am offended that the members opposite are trying to accuse the Conservatives and the Bloc of causing the potential separation of Quebec, when in fact it is just the opposite.

What is happening is that because of the scandal, the Liberal Party of Canada is causing the separatists to gain momentum in Quebec, which will ultimately in my view cause the separation of Quebec.

[. . . . ] Mr. Pierre Poilievre: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is correct. The Liberals are reverting to the same argument that Jean Chrétien made to defend the massive theft of Canadian tax dollars. Jean Chrétien stood and said, “Yes, a few million went missing, but we saved the country”. Now the Liberals are saying that anyone who criticizes their party for having stolen our money is undermining national unity.

There is a difference between the fortunes of the Liberal Party and the fortunes of Canadian federalism. I am happy to be on the side of federalists.