Call centers and personal data

Tech Central-Kyoto

slanting the news

The Gulag comparison

"Ms. Khan's political agenda is obvious: While Amnesty's annual write-up of North Korea is 972 words, its Israel-bashing report is 2,600 words, with barely a mention of Palestinian terrorism or the brainwashing of children to hate Jews and Americans and strive to be suicide bombers. The anti-U.S. screed is 3,312 words, longer than the reports on China and Saudi Arabia.



Democrats are trying to politicize both Gitmo and Iraq. Hence the Durbin remark.

It almost requires a character from George Orwell's "1984" to compare Gitmo to the Gulag or to Auschwitz. Drawing moral equivalence between the Stalinist USSR -- the worst totalitarian dictatorship of the 20th century -- and today's U.S. is both boorish and sickening.

By ignoring the real threat to human rights -- including those of women in the Islamic world, and the children and women raped and enslaved in Darfur -- Amnesty and Ms. Khan are playing into the hands of terrorists hell-bent on destroying the West.

Islamists may manipulate some anti-American elements in the human-rights community -- people they consider, to borrow Lenin's phrase, "useful idiots." But in the long term, they have no use for Senator Durbin, Irene Khan, Amnesty International or their misguided agendas."

The RCMP are understaffed and underfunded but the government found $4.5 billion for the NDP Napkin Budget

The government claims it put $10 billion into security but the facts on the ground speak otherwise.

whatsonwhen

Border insecurity-Canadians were kept in the dark as usual

Nearly four years after 9/11, and despite endless talk about the need for greater security at all entry points in both countries, our land border crossings are still frighteningly vulnerable to terrorists and other criminals.

A strike against one of them would do unthinkable harm, both to individuals and our respective economies. ..

As with other glaring security loopholes this commitee has exposed at Canadian entry points, most Canadians will be shocked to discover how vulnerable we still are -- and how blase our government continues to be.

The problem, as committee chair Sen. Colin Kenny told the Sun, is that "most Canadians don't know about these problems -- but the terrorists and criminals definitely do."

Toronto Sun editorial on ethics

For those that didn't know, Returning Officers are a patronage appointment

Barbara Lerner

"I don't buy the "soft America" argument. I agree that the administration is at fault, but for an entirely different reason: because Cowboy George morphed into Cautious George. Cowboy George was a bold leader, unafraid to take the tough offensive actions we must take to win this war. He led us in the first two years after 9/11, and Americans rallied behind him in numbers so overwhelming they made "soft America" all but invisible. But after our conquest of the Iraqi military in 2003, Cautious George replaced Cowboy George. Cautious George is forcing us to fight with one hand tied behind our back by pretending we are fighting against one country only. In fact, we are fighting a regional war in Iraq, and have been since day one. It's past time for America to acknowledge that fact and act on it. Time to make all the Middle Eastern despots who are pouring money, men, and arms into the battle in Iraq stop."

Oriana Fallaci

"Oriana Fallaci faces jail. In her mid-70s, stricken with a cancer that, for the moment, permits only the consumption of liquids--so yes, we drank champagne in the course of a three-hour interview--one of the most renowned journalists of the modern era has been indicted by a judge in her native Italy under provisions of the Italian Penal Code which proscribe the "vilipendio," or "vilification," of "any religion admitted by the state."

In her case, the religion deemed vilified is Islam, and the vilification was perpetrated, apparently, in a book she wrote last year--and which has sold many more than a million copies all over Europe--called "The Force of Reason." Its astringent thesis is that the Old Continent is on the verge of becoming a dominion of Islam, and that the people of the West have surrendered themselves fecklessly to the "sons of Allah." So in a nutshell, Oriana Fallaci faces up to two years' imprisonment for her beliefs--which is one reason why she has chosen to stay put in New York. Let us give thanks for the First Amendment."

Ending the Saudi double game

"In September 2004, the State Department added Saudi Arabia to its list of the most religiously intolerant nations in the world. But this didn’t stop the Spring 2005 crackdown on Christians in the Kingdom; nor did it lead to more calls for accountability from Washington. In April 2005, Saudi Defense Minister Prince Sultan Bin Abdul Aziz described U.S.-Saudi relations as “excellent.” He praised “the good relations and the will of cooperation between the two countries to serve Saudi interest first of all.”



Indeed, both countries seem intent on serving Saudi interests first of all. That’s the problem. But the Saudi Arabia Accountability Act of 2005 could change all that. It calls upon the Saudis to take genuine anti-terror steps, including to cooperate openly and fully with American anti-terror efforts; to close all “charities, schools, or other organizations or institutions” both inside and outside the Kingdom that aid in terrorism anywhere around the world, “including by means of providing support for the families of individuals who have committed acts of terrorism.” And it calls for sanctions to punish noncompliance. Such measures are the only way that Saudi Arabia could today become a genuine ally of the United States. Senator Specter and the other senators who sponsored this bill are to be commended — and every American should hope that their efforts bear fruit."

Senate rejects Greenhouse gas limits

Question Period- Hansard excerpts- June 22/2005

Citizenship and Immigration

Mr. Peter MacKay (Central Nova, CPC): Mr. Speaker, the Ethics Commissioner's shady grey report on the former minister of immigration is black and white about one thing: issuing of temporary resident permits by the former minister during the election campaign was a clear violation of the conflict of interest code.

The commissioner writes that “the permits themselves seemed available...to the relatives and associates of those who were assisting the re-election campaign”.

Manipulating the process is the Liberal way. Why has this ethically challenged government allowed our immigration system to be abused in such a crass and partisan political way?

Hon. Joseph Volpe (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I reject outright that there was any partisan political intervention. I gave an indication yesterday that over 1.1 million decisions are made every year. At this time of year, there are many more requests.

The minister responds to the constituent's requirements in the context of 1.1 million decisions made by the department. If the member opposite is telling us that 76 interventions by a minister in the context of 1.1 million is an undesirable action, then he has a--

The Speaker: The hon. member for Central Nova.

Mr. Peter MacKay (Central Nova, CPC): Mr. Speaker, let us look at the facts. Prior to the election, the former minister vowed she would never use temporary resident permits for election purposes. Au contraire: it comes to light that during the campaign 128 permits were granted by the minister, 74 of 76 were supported by Liberal MPs, 43 were authorized in the last week of the federal campaign alone, and four of those permits were issued to friends of the minister's campaign worker.

Why, I ask again, did the government so blatantly abuse the ministerial permit process for partisan purposes during the last campaign? Why?

Hon. Joseph Volpe (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I guess those of us who actually serve our constituents are going to be accused of doing things for partisan purposes.

The fact of the matter is, and the member would know, that there are many parts around the country that are looking for an enhanced immigration service. This is part of an entire system where we are looking at the large range of people who we are going to take into the country and looking at both the quantum and the quality of immigrants who are coming in. Ministers who do their--

The Speaker: The hon. member for Central Nova.

* * *
Ethics

Mr. Peter MacKay (Central Nova, CPC): Mr. Speaker, Andrew Stark, a University of Toronto professor and noted expert on conflict of interest, said it was puzzling that the Ethics Commissioner was not investigating the Prime Minister's chief of staff for his involvement in MP vote buying for rewards.

Mr. Stark noted that the commissioner has just completed a report that investigated both the minister and her ministerial staff and that his refusal to investigate PMO chief of staff Tim Murphy is “inconsistent with what he's just done”.

Given the latest ethics report on Liberal wrongdoings, can the Prime Minister clarify whether he and his staff are subject to the conflict of interest code, and if so, why are they not being investigated? Why the special treatment? More who you know in the PMO?

¸ (1425)

Hon. Anne McLellan (Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the Ethics Commissioner is an independent officer of this Parliament. In fact, his appointment was approved by the House. There is no special treatment for anyone. The Ethics Commissioner can decide and does decide on who he investigates and on the terms of those investigations.

* * *
Citizenship and Immigration

Mrs. Diane Ablonczy (Calgary—Nose Hill, CPC): Mr. Speaker, today a senior columnist wrote that “the culture of government secrecy still rules Ottawa and warps the way our democracy works”. As an example, the government was asked about the allocation of visitor permits. The House was told the information was not available, but the Ethics Commissioner's report shows that such records do exist.

How does the Liberal culture of secrecy around visitor permits square with Liberal promises of openness and transparency?

Hon. Joseph Volpe (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I am surprised that the member can stand up and pretend to be absolutely dumbfounded by this. All she needs to do is read the parliamentary report that was tabled in the House to know exactly how many visitor visas are given every year and how many are presented at which posts. If the member wants to say that she does not read the reports provided for parliamentarians, I can understand her desire to wallow in ignorance.

Mrs. Diane Ablonczy (Calgary—Nose Hill, CPC): Mr. Speaker, the minister knows very well that he is hiding who got the permits and at whose request.

Another journalist wrote today:

During the 2004 federal election campaign, the Liberals gave out visitor's visas as though they were mints.

They did it to help their re-election prospects, by making sure Liberal ridings benefited and opposition ridings did not.

The government tells Canadians it is committed to openness and transparency, so will it today make public the number of temporary resident permits issued to each MP?

Hon. Joseph Volpe (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I suppose that some of the lawyers on the opposite side would know that temporary visitor visas are issued to applicants who want to visit. Presumably none of the members of Parliament on that side consider themselves to be visitors. We do not issue temporary visitor visas to members of Parliament. We issue them to applicants from abroad.

Ethics Commissioner

Hon. Bill Blaikie (Elmwood—Transcona, NDP): Mr. Speaker, my question is a follow-up to the question by the deputy leader of the Conservative Party with respect to the Ethics Commissioner. Mr. Shapiro appears to be able to do the impossible now, which is to make Mr. Wilson look good.

I want to ask the Deputy Prime Minister about this. She made the point that Mr. Shapiro is an officer of this House. Would she therefore be prepared to say on behalf of the government that it would respect a recommendation by this House that Mr. Shapiro be removed for incompetence?

Hon. Tony Valeri (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, as has been said earlier, the Ethics Commissioner is an independent officer of Parliament. Dr. Shapiro's appointment was in fact confirmed by all parties in the House of Commons in May 2004. I understand that a committee of this House is also seized with the member's concerns. I understand that they will be looking to address the motion on Thursday, that being tomorrow. I am not going to prejudge the work of the committee....

Mr. Monte Solberg (Medicine Hat, CPC): Mr. Speaker, the finance minister taxes the tax. Now he is taxing our patience here. Is there anything he will not tax? I am asking about the government's practice of charging the GST on federal and provincial taxes.

How does the minister justify gouging taxpayers by over $300 million a year with his tax on tax at the gas pumps? Why the gouging?

Hon. Ralph Goodale (Minister of Finance, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman knows very well the method of taxation with respect to the GST and the objective is to keep the administration of that program as simple as possible. Making the kind of exception that he refers to would add a very large administrative expense.

What we try to do is an alternative. We want to ensure that the revenues raised are put to the most useful purpose possible. In the circumstances now, we are sharing that revenue with municipalities so that they can build their infrastructure and create a better quality of life for all Canadians...

Technology Partnerships Canada

Mr. James Rajotte (Edmonton—Leduc, CPC): Mr. Speaker, yesterday the industry minister admitted that consulting fees have been paid to some lobbyists as a reward if their clients were successful in securing a grant from Technology Partnerships Canada. Media reports state that at least $3.7 million in commissions have been paid to certain lobbyists, yet rewarding lobbyists for getting government grants is a breach of contract under TPC's own guidelines.

Will the industry minister reveal how many millions have been paid to lobbyists for securing government grants and which lobbyists have received this money?

Hon. David Emerson (Minister of Industry, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the hon. member has finally figured out that this is a matter of a breach of contract by private companies that are being supported through TPC grants. TPC grants are not bank deals. These are risk-sharing agreements to help private sector companies implement technology for the betterment of the Canadian economy.

We are investigating the matter. We will be releasing our forensic audit. We will be releasing further audit details in the fall. We will be restructuring the technology partnerships program, but we will not throw the baby out with the bathwater.

¸ (1445)

Mr. James Rajotte (Edmonton—Leduc, CPC): Mr. Speaker, TPC's own guidelines say that this is a breach of contract. Certain Liberal lobbyists seem to have a very good track record in obtaining TPC funds for their clients. For instance, Ken Mackay, a lobbyist who has donated thousands of dollars to the Liberal Party, has a phenomenal record of obtaining TPC grants for his clients when compared to other lobbyists.

If the government were serious about cleaning up TPC, it would immediately release the audit results. When will the industry minister come clean and release the results of these secret audits?

Hon. David Emerson (Minister of Industry, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, here we go again with the mud pies.

These are consultants who are hired by smaller companies typically, because they do not have the resources themselves to determine where opportunities exist for those companies with government programs. There are many ridings held by members opposite where TPC grants have been issued and there are several members opposite who have done their own lobbying.

Government Contracts

Mr. Pierre Poilievre (Nepean—Carleton, CPC): Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates adopted a motion forcing the government to impose fines in connection with the rental scandal. The Liberals broke the law by paying millions of dollars in rent for an empty building.

Is the Prime Minister going to force his Liberal buddy to pay up or is he going to sweep one more Liberal scandal under the rug?

[English]

Hon. Scott Brison (Minister of Public Works and Government Services, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, once again Alexis Nihon provided the building as per contract, on time and within budget. Beyond that, my department wrote to Alexis Nihon recently stating, “Please inform us what corrective measures you have taken to arrange your affairs in such a way that you are not in breach of section 25(10) of the lease”.

Furthermore, section 25(10) of the lease referred to section 14 of the Parliament of Canada Act. Also, section 14 has been replaced by the Senate code of ethics, which was approved by this House in 2003. Currently, the Senate ethics officer is reviewing this issue. We look forward to his response. He is the person who is qualified and entitled to respond appropriately to this issue.

Mr. Pierre Poilievre (Nepean—Carleton, CPC): Mr. Speaker, that same public works minister admitted that his Liberal friend broke the law. He admitted it twice even though he does not admit it now.

Now our Commons committee wants that law enforced and wants those fines paid. The only question that remains here is whether the government is going to cover up this scandal or whether it is going to enforce the law and ensure that Liberal lawbreaker pays his fines.

Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

The Speaker: I only heard the tail end of the hon. member's question, but I have warned him before about being very careful in speaking about members of the other place in a disrespectful way. If his question said what I thought I heard at the end, he is going to have some difficulty after question period in dealing with me, but the Minister of Public Works and Government Services can answer the question now.

¸ (1455)

Hon. Scott Brison (Minister of Public Works and Government Services, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, once again, the discussion is now before the Senate ethics officer. He is the individual who is obligated, entitled and ought to be looking at this. I would urge the committee and the hon. member to respect the role of the Senate ethics officer and to let him do his work.

The Killing fields of Zimbabwe