CTV.ca | Transcript: French debate

Home

News

Canada AM

W-FIVE

Transcript: French debate - Dec. 15

Updated Fri. Dec. 16 2005 8:11 AM ET

Canadian Press

VANCOUVER -- Following is the translated transcript of the federal election debate conducted in French on Thursday, December 15, 2005. This unofficial translation was provided courtesy of the consortium that broadcast the debate.

Moderator: Welcome to this first leadership debate in this 39th federal election campaign. This evening's debate is your debate since you will be asking questions of the leaders of the four major parties.

The issues which will be dealt with this evening are your issues and represent your concerns, poverty, the economy, national unity, trust in our politicians. These are the four main themes we will be addressing this evening; governance and ethics, social policy, the economy, and Canadian unity.

You know there are some 10,000 of you who submitted your questions by e-mail, and we have chosen a representative sample. The leaders don't know what the questions will be. They will answer spontaneously in turn and will have one minute each. Then I may allow a reply or there may be a follow-up question. There will be no one-on-one exchanges between the leaders this evening. What we want are answers to your questions, and the rules of the debate have been approved by the four political parties.

Without any further ado, ladies and gentlemen, the four leaders, Paul Martin, leader of the Liberal party of Canada; Stephen Harper, leader of the Conservative party of Canada; Jack Layton, leader of the New Democratic Party, and Gilles Duceppe, leader of the Bloc Quebecois.

Gentlemen, good evening, and we all look forward to a good debate. But first, the leaders are going to speak to you. There will be an opening statement of one minute each, and as a result of the draw, it will be Mr. Duceppe who leads off. Mr. Duceppe?

Gilles Duceppe: Ladies and gentlemen, good evening. This election campaign is being held because as a result of the sponsorship scandal Paul Martin's Liberal government lost its moral authority to govern. The Liberal party of Canada transgressed all the tenets of democracy by trying to buy off the conscience of the entire population of Quebec using taxpayers' money, our money. The Liberals are still trying to mislead people by trying to make them believe that this election is as good as a referendum. Of course, the Bloc Quebecois is in favour of sovereignty, everyone knows that, but this election is a federal election and the sponsorship scandal is something that can't be got around. Justice Gomery came to the conclusion that the Liberal party dishonoured itself, that the laws were broken, and that a system of kickbacks was set up. Justice Gomery didn't have a mandate to punish Liberals on Jan. 23. It's up to you to vote and punish the Liberals for the sponsorship scandal. Thank you.

Moderator: Mr. Duceppe, and now to Mr. Martin.

Paul Martin: Canadians, this evening you will hear about very different visions of Canada. Mr. Duceppe will begin a process that will lead to another referendum, a process that will end the Canada that generations of Quebecers built with other Canadians, a country that is envied throughout the world. Mr. Harper would like us to go back in time. He is against the Quebec model of day care, Kyoto, and he would like to send our soldiers to Iraq. Mr. Layton does not realize that the fiscal capacity of the nation is limited. I believe in a united Canada, strong with two official languages, culturally diverse where Quebec plays a leading role. I believe in a Canada where economic stability means a strong economy. Canada is a world leader, and I believe in a Canada that will succeed. Thank you.

Moderator: Thank you, Mr. Martin, and now Mr. Harper.

Stephen Harper: Thank you, and good evening. Canada needs a new government to restore political accountability in Ottawa and to deal with the real priorities of workers and their families. A new government that will really clean things up in Ottawa, cut taxes starting with the GST, deliver on health care, help families directly, help students, help workers and small business, help our seniors, and build a stronger Quebec in a unified Canada. After 12 years of scandal, inaction, and the same old controversies, there's only one party, the Conservative party, that can replace the Liberal government. Over the course of tonight's debate, I would ask you to keep one question in mind: which party can bring real change, bring integrity to government in Ottawa, and address your real priorities? Thank you.

Moderator: Thank you, Mr. Harper. Mr. Layton.

Jack Layton: The NDP Is there for you to make real progress, and we have proven this over the last months. But we want to do even more now, more for education and training, more to take on the new economy, more to protect and improve our health-care system, and put a stop to privatization. We will provide the care our seniors need, and we will reduce the cost of drugs. We need to clean up politics and hold politicians accountable for their actions and their scandals. The NDP Is proposing a new way of doing politics, to put an end to the old debate between the Bloc and the Liberals or the irrelevant debate between the Conservatives and the Liberals. We need to think and act differently with the NDP. Thank you.

Moderator: Thank you, gentlemen. And now we will move in to our first theme this evening, governance and ethics. And I would ask you to listen to a question from someone from Laval. Mr. Duceppe, again, you will respond first to this individual, Mr. Lamar.

Question: Good evening. I'm Gerald Lamar and I live in Laval, Que., so my question is to the opposition parties. It's the opposition parties that decided to bring this government down, this minority government. As you all know, the cost of an election is about $300 million. Now, if you put this amount over 17 months, this means $18 million a month. So I'd ask you, therefore, why, in fact, you decided not just to follow the polls and in so doing not to respect the will of the electorate, the will of Canadians, Canadians who wanted an election in the spring?

Gilles Duceppe: Well, you see, sir, if that election - that election could have been held last spring if the Liberal party hadn't taken away opposition days from us, that is the days we can put questions in the House and determine the agenda. Same thing at the beginning of fall when we didn't have the opportunity. That said, Mr. Martin wanted to hold elections in the spring. Costs the same price at that time as this time, and at this time last year, roughly speaking, Mr. Martin was asking the population, please trust me, we'll have elections after the Gomery's report, the second Gomery report. Let's remember the first one was published on Dec.15. Now, the report was actually delayed. If it hadn't been delayed, we'd be holding elections about this time of year anyway, so there's no real difference, and really what costs a lot more than election is corruption, sir.

Moderator: Thank you, Mr. Duceppe, Mr. Martin?

Paul Martin: Clearly I wanted to have an election in the spring because the people of Canada truly deserve to have all the facts, not just the facts from the first report but also from the second where he will make recommendations so that such a thing never happens again. If I had wanted to hide something, do you think I would have appointed justice Gomery? Would I have set up the inquiry? Would I have given him such a broad mandate and such unlimited resources? No. I wanted the answers to come out, and I think the people of Canada deserve to have the answers from the second report as well. So we have an election now, we have to discuss about the future of our country. How are we going to attain prosperity? How are we going to protect our social programs? How are we going to have an independent policy when it comes to foreign policy? These are the real issues of this election.

Moderator: Mr. Layton.

Jack Layton: Let me be clear, this was Mr. Martin's decision to have an election. The opposition parties proposed waiting until January to drop the writ. This was a regional - reasonable approach, a compromise. We found that we had three leaders who were prepared to make this compromise. However, Mr. Martin was not. This, again, reflects this arrogance that we see within the Liberal party, and the NDP, we tried to make this Parliament work better from the outset. We tried to improve things with, for example, changing the budget. We asked Mr. Martin to eliminate the major tax cuts that he had approved to invest in families and in people and youth, to improve things for Canadians everywhere. Thank you.

Moderator: Mr. Harper.

Stephen Harper: Thank you. I have to say to Mr. Lamarre that the fact is that the Liberals spent over a billion dollars every day once the election call was made, and so the election is actually going to save us money. That's a fact. So seriously, though, after the spring, after a number of witnesses testified before the Gomery commission, it's impossible for the Conservative party to support a government that lacks the moral authority because of the Liberal party's corruption. It's out of the question. This isn't just my decision or Mr. Duceppe's or Mr. Layton's. It's also the decision of too members who were elected as Liberals. So let's give the public the opportunity to express its will and to hold this party responsible.

Moderator: I see that we're already dealing with the trust in government. We've talked about the Gomery commission. I know you all want to reply. I will allow it, but first, we'll hear another question if you don't mind from Quebec City. Mr. Martin, you will be first to respond to this question.

Question: Good evening. I am Genevieve Laplante and I am from Quebec City. I see that people are already starting to forget the Gomery inquiry since the Liberals are still leading in the polls, but is it possible that all the actors in this comic tragedy had been deaf, dumb, and blind? Could we hope for a government that will be less handicapped and that will be able to do other than just washing their hands of such behaviour?

Paul Martin: Miss Laplante, I assure you that no one is washing their hands of this. That is why I set up the Gomery commission. That is why I asked an independent judge to take on such a broad mandate. When I received his report, I immediately gave it to the RCMP. That is why we began legal action against people and companies. That is why we began the largest form of the government structure in many years so such a thing never happens again. You're right, we have to move on to other things. That is why I want a

Stephen Harper: I have to say that the party that stole money from taxpayers should be punished by the public, but the real question is, what are we going to do in the future to avoid this type of thing? As prime minister, the first legislation I'll table in Parliament will be the federal accountability act. Among other things, we're going to eliminate gifts from corporations to federal candidates, and we're going to limit individual donations to a thousand dollars per person. I admit that these ideas are inspired by Rene Levesque's example in Quebec. We're talking about a Liberal scandal here, not a Quebec scandal. Quebecers are able to run politics properly, but it's essential to replace this government with one that's going to act properly.

Gilles Duceppe: Mrs. Laplante says it's impossible for people to see what's gone on, and actually Justice Gomery says at page 51 that the Treasury Board doesn't consider its supervisory role as important responsibilities. Mrs. Robillard was president, Mr. Martin was vice-president. They had the means to put all the questions the Bloc put to ask and to get the answer, but no, they didn't. They said everything's going fine. In 2004, he says, I'm going to clean the thing up. In the hours that followed the Gomery report, he expulsed Mr. Beliveau, Mr. Cote who distributed $300,000 of dirty money. They were expulsed, they were kicked out of the party, they reimbursed the $300,000 of dirty money, but they don't want to give us the names of the people who got the dirty money, and those people are as guilty as the ones who gave it. Mr. Martin should inform us by the 23rd of January who those people are that played with dirty money. That's his duty to answer that question.

Jack Layton: Ms. Laplante, you used an interesting word, tragedy. I think that this is a dark time for democracy in Canada. People are turning their backs on democracy. People don't want to vote. Why? Because we saw these scandalous activities from the party that's now in power. There's another thing. All kinds of promises, empty promises made during elections, and we can hear them again now, promises that are not kept after the election. And there's a lack of confidence that results, and with the NDP, we will change things. With Ed Broadbent's proposal to reform democracy that we need, we can rejuvenate democracy here in Canada with more NDP members.

Moderator: So as you can see, the issue of responsibility, et cetera, Mr. Martin, you have a right to reply, you all have 30 seconds. Mr. Martin may begin.

Paul Martin: First of all, we're talking about accountability, we're talking about promises. I entirely agree the promises that we made, the promises to have a federal-provincial conference to look at health care, to reduce wait times, we did that. The promise to set up a national child-care system, a promise that we kept. We said that we were going to work with the municipalities, and we did that. So we have kept those promises, and we will continue to build our country.

Gilles Duceppe: There's a promise that hasn't been respected that cleaning up, I mean, Mr. Martin said he would clean it up. Those who gave dirty money aren't less guilty than those who received it. And Mr. Martin has to clean out the whole thing. It has to be done. We have to know if there are organizers or candidates in the justice system, whatever, we have to know. The population, Mrs. Laplante has a right to know this. If he doesn't do it, actually, you're not cleaning out the stables. You're just hiding things.

Jack Layton: Let's talk a little about politics. Mr. Martin made promises for day care. He did this for 12 years, and it was only when he was in a minority government situation with NDP members that we were able to make progress on this issue when it comes to the environment. Mr. Martin and the Liberals made promises to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 20 per cent. They increased them by 24 per cent. These are broken promises, and these broken promises undermine the trust of Canadians in the future, which is why we need change.

Moderator: Mr. Harper.

Stephen Harper: Those aren't promises. That's not the issue. The Liberal party has to be held accountable for misconduct that occurred under its watch. This government needs to be replaced in order to be held accountable. I have candidates like Ms. Fournier and others in Quebec that want to represent Quebec in cabinet in order to really clean things up in Ottawa and that's what we need to do now. ...

Moderator: Thank you. Still on the theme of social policy, this is a question from Montreal on an important issue which was debated at great length, same-sex marriage, and Mr. Harper, you will answer first to Laurent.

Question: Good evening, I'm Laurent from Montreal. Mr. Harper if he's elected wants to resume the debates on same-sex marriage. If, one day, your son or daughter announces their homosexuality, what would be your reaction and what would you tell them?

Stephen Harper: Obviously it's a parent's duty to always love their children. I love my children, and I always will. As to the question of same-sex marriage, the Conservative party has made a commitment. Voters can now vote and a Conservative government would put forward a motion so that Parliament could freely vote on the issue of marriage. Even if members decided to change the definition and bring it back to the traditional definition, we have to respect same-sex marriages that already exist. In the days of Mr. Mulroney, there were free votes on much more controversial issues like abortion, and democracy survived.

Jack Layton: This is a question that's very important to me because for over 20 years, I've worked with lesbians and gay men to ensure that they have the same rights as all other citizens. And for a long time, they've worked towards this goal to have equality, and I'm very proud. That I had the opportunity to stand in the House of Commons and to vote in support of equal rights for everyone. And I think that the NDP was there 100 per cent to support this initiative, and we will be there again next time. We know that Mr. Harper wants this to be a free vote and this is an issue of human rights. We know that some 40 Liberals voted against equal rights in the Liberal party, but myself and the NDP will be there to support human rights for everyone unequivocally.

Paul Martin: I will defend the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and to do what Mr. Harper wants to do, there's no choice. He would have to use the notwithstanding clause, and I assure you, sir, that I will defend the Charter of Rights. I accept the charter in its entirety. One cannot choose amongst various rights. The role of the prime minister of Canada is to protect minorities, and I assure you that I will protect minorities, and having a vote in the House will not change the decisions of the courts. The notwithstanding clause would have to be used, and I will never go along with that. I will defend the charter and I will defend you.

Gilles Duceppe: well, I'd say if my children were gay and lesbian, I would love them as much as I do now. And my grandchildren, I have some, if they're gay, I'll love them just as much. In life, you have to look for happiness, and the love of some people is worth the love of other people. It's also a matter of equality and respect, and a society is never free as long as all those in it are not free also. So in my case, there's no way that we'd go back on this decision because we have people who are married now, then they couldn't be married later on. I mean, you would have a two-tier society here. You can't live in that kind of society. The matter's settled. People who have - I mean, I understand that some have problems living with it, but those people should wonder if my son, if my daughter were a gay or lesbian, would I love them less? I think the answer is evident.

Moderator: And Mr. Harper, of course, you can reply. Will you lose the notwithstanding clause?

Stephen Harper: I will never use the notwithstanding clause on that issue. The only leader who threatened to use the notwithstanding clause was Mr. Martin two years ago when he was on the other side of this issue.

Paul Martin: We're talking about integrity. That means being honest. Either Mr. Harper is going to try to change the law of the country that protects the rights and freedoms of gays and lesbians or he's not going to. If he's going to use the notwithstanding clause, he should say so, and the people will at least know what his position is.

Moderator: I now give the floor to Mr. Duceppe.

Gilles Duceppe: I'd say on that, we could settle the matter a few years ago, but the Liberals didn't want to hold an election in 2004 with that question on the slate, and that's why it wasn't settled before. We can't play around with people's rights. We have to look at people and say, okay, we're there. We represent these people. We're building a society here that has to be made for them and everybody.

Moderator: You all have 15 seconds. Mr. Layton, please.

Jack Layton: The issue of the Constitution, obviously the charter is very important, but what's important for me is when I meet people now and when I meet people who show me their symbols, their wedding rings and they have tears in their eyes, that is the reason we're working for these rights. ...

Moderator: Gentlemen, the evening is almost over but first I would like to read you a last e-mail from a citizen in Lennoxville. She says it is said the difference between a politician and a statesman is the following: the politician always has his eye on the next election. The statesman is concerned with the next generation. So she asks what is your vision of Canada 30 years from now? Mr. Layton?

Jack Layton: There is an expression used by ... David Suzuki. He asks us to think of the future. And to create a country and a world, a country here in Canada for the next generation. And we can do this. In Canada, we have the ability, the intelligence, the energy to improve things. Social justice. Instead of seeing poverty increase, which we've seen in Canadian children over the past 12 years, we can turn things around. The environment. Instead of having more pollution, we can change this. That's what we will do.

Moderator: Mr. Duceppe?

Gilles Duceppe: Thirty years from now, I think there will be two sovereign Canada, Quebec and Canada. Two nations that will respect one another for what they are. a Neither one superior to the other, but different. People will stop fighting about what divides them. Being equals means country to country, same as Europeans have managed to do with a hugely worse past than ours. I think that Quebecers are democratic. The same as all Canadians. And that we will be able to work together in these big units, the same as the rest of the world.

Paul Martin: We will be one country. A country that is truly from the Asia-Pacific region here in Vancouver, that stretches to the east, rich with cultural diversity, rich in terms of the oil industry, the wind energy industry in Quebec, one with true values supported by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. I think in a world of giants, China, India, China - pardon me, Canada will really be the country of the future. A model that other countries will look at because of our values, our generosity, compassion, our ability to have a multicultural country become a whole country.

Stephen Harper: Canada is a very great country. But we very far greater potential. Canada could have the best economy in the world, the best social services in the world, the best democracy in the world. But we won't be a super power but we will have the ability to protect, to defend ourselves, I want my children to see those things.

Moderator: Well, gentlemen, thank you very much. But it is not over 'til it's over. Because, of course, you are going to make closing statements as well. You have one minute each. Again the draw determined that Mr. Martin would lead off.

Paul Martin: Thank you. We Canadians have been able to get the financial situation back on a solid footing. Our success is envied throughout the world. Today we can look to the future with confidence. We can guarantee and we can improve all the things that are of greatest importance to us. Well-paying jobs. Accessible health care. Top-notch education for our young people. As the prime minister, I had to make decisions on your behalf, guarantee the health system, protect the environment, stand tough in front of the Americans on the softwood lumber issue. Mr. Duceppe wants a referendum. He wants to waste our energy while our competitors will take advantage of our division. I want our Canada to be a country that has everything to succeed.

Jack Layton: First of all, I would like to thank you for having taken the time to listen to us this evening. You heard the empty and costly promises made by the Liberals and the Conservatives. And as usual not many new ideas from the Bloc. So why put your trust in them again? The time has come to change things. We are proposing a slate of candidates who will care about the interests of families, workers, young people and seniors every day. Choosing the NDP is choosing a team of members who will work to make progress as we did during the last Parliament. We made real progress for you and for your families. And with more NDP members of Parliament we will get more results. This is what we are offering. Consider it. And in the meantime, I wish you the best of the holidays.

Moderator: Thank you, Mr. Layton. Mr. Duceppe?

Gilles Duceppe: Paul Martin's Liberal government has to be sanctioned, punished. There is the sponsorship scandal but also there are other reasons which are quite as important. We have to punish the liberals for their refusal to recognize and correct the fiscal imbalance. For their inaction in the employment insurance matter and abandoning the poorest people, abandoning major economic sectors for the regions of Quebec textiles, clothing, for the insufficient actions in the matter of softwood lumber. Too late, too little. Their culture: everything is owed to me. That is still enduring despite Justice Gomery. This culture of entitlement. For this, you have to punish them, the Liberal government. Justice Gomery didn't have that mandate to punish them. In January it is up to you to punish the Liberals for the sponsorship scandal and thank goodness in Quebec there is the Bloc Quebecois.

Moderator: Mr. Harper, last word.

Stephen Harper: Thank you. It is clear Canada needs a new government. A new government that won't just keep on serving up the same old controversies. A new Conservative government will really clean things up in Ottawa, cut taxes, starting with the GST. Deliver on healthcare. Help families directly. Help students, workers, small business and our seniors, build a stronger Quebec within a better Canada. After 12 years of scandals, inaction, corruption, and ineffectiveness, we need a real change. I encourage you to vote for the candidates of the Conservative party so that together we can have government with integrity that will go to work for you and your family. Thank you and merry Christmas.

Moderator: Gentlemen, thank you so much for having taken a few hours to speak to Canadians. Thank you. Good evening. It won't be very long, Mr. Martin, you can't quite leave yet. Ladies and gentlemen, there will be another leadership debate in English tomorrow evening at 8:00 p.m. Eastern time, the leaders will also be participating in two other debates on January 9th and 10th next after the holidays. The debate on the 10th will be moderated by a representative of TVA. Thank you, ladies and gentlemen, for being with us. I wish you happy holidays and a happy election campaign.