House of Commons Hansard #7 of the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was businesses.
Thomas Mulcair NDPLeader of the Opposition
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister told Canadians in the House on June 5 that no one else in his entourage knew and yesterday he said just the opposite.
On Tuesday, Mike Duffy said:
I was called at home in Cavendish by Ray Novak, senior [aid] to the Prime Minister. He had with him Senator LeBreton....Senator LeBreton was emphatic: The deal was off.
How could Mr. Novak threaten to cancel a deal that the Prime Minister told the House Mr. Novak knew nothing about? How is that possible?
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, the leader of the NDP insists on taking Mr. Duffy's view that he is somehow a victim in this matter.
Mr. Duffy's expense claims were inappropriate. He knew that. He knew the expectation was that he would pay them back. He did not do that and as a consequence he is no longer a member of the Conservative caucus. That was the—
Thomas Mulcair NDPLeader of the Opposition
Mr. Speaker, it is not about Mike Duffy. It is about the Prime Minister, and the victims are Canadians.
Last May, the Prime Minister's Office published details of the Conservative caucus meeting on February 13. The Prime Minister's own spokesperson said, “The Prime Minister did not mention Duffy or any other senator by name".
Yesterday, the Prime Minister claimed that he did single out Mike Duffy by name. Both of those things cannot be true. Which one is true, which one is false? He is changing versions again.
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, once again, the matter of the expenses of two senators, including Mr. Duffy, was raised in caucus. In response, I was extremely clear. I said, “You cannot claim expenses you did not incur”. That message was also delivered personally to Mr. Duffy at the end of the meeting.
Thomas Mulcair NDPLeader of the Opposition
Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the Prime Minister started out by saying that he told Mike Duffy that his expenses were inappropriate. That was his first version of the facts. Then, he said that Mr. Duffy's expenses were technically within the rules.
Why are there, once again, two versions of the facts? Which one is true? Were Mike Duffy's expenses against the rules or technically within the rules? The two cannot both be true. Which of the two versions is true?
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, once again, I have been very clear on this subject.
The issue here is not whether one can argue whether or not one can bend the rules and interpret the rules in such a way as to do something that is clearly inappropriate.
It is clearly inappropriate to try and collect travel expenses when one is living at a residence he or she has had for many, many years. That is clearly inappropriate. It should not be permitted. It cannot be permitted. In the Conservative caucus, it will not be permitted.
Thomas Mulcair NDPLeader of the Opposition
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Prime Minister said that he did not threaten to expel Mike Duffy from the Senate at “that particular time”.
When did the Prime Minister threaten to expel Mike Duffy from the Senate?
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, I have made it very clear. We have made it crystal clear. I think every Conservative member understands it. We expect people to act in ways that respect rules and show integrity. If they do not do that, they cannot expect the support of their colleagues, they cannot expect the support of their leader and they cannot expect to stay in the Conservative caucus.
Dominic LeBlanc Liberal Beauséjour, NB
Mr. Speaker, when Ray Novak was the Prime Minister's principal secretary, he was directly involved in covering up the Conservatives' scandal and helped hide the Prime Minister's involvement. The Prime Minister rewarded him for his potentially criminal involvement in this scandal by appointing him chief of staff.
Why does the Prime Minister think it is acceptable to reward potentially criminal behaviour?
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, these allegations are untrue and are unfounded. The reality is that the Senate is in the process of determining consequences for senators who acted inappropriately. The Liberal Party and Liberal senators are the ones who are trying to prevent this from happening.
It is unacceptable. Senators are finally expressing a desire to deal with this and Liberal senators should get out of the way and support dealing with it.
Dominic LeBlanc Liberal Beauséjour, NB
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister should call Senator Segal.
This has to do with how the Prime Minister encourages and promotes corrupt behaviour in his own office. Ray Novak participated in what appears to be extortion and covering up the Conservative bribe, trying to sweep the whole scandal under the rug. What prime minister would punish the chief of staff by promoting him?
We had Bruce Carson, Nigel Wright and now Ray Novak. Why does the Prime Minister choose to surround himself with people with such appalling ethical standards?
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, Mr. Wright has been clear. The decision to repay Mr. Duffy with his own money was his and his alone. He informed very few people.
The allegations contained in that question are completely false and designed to do one thing and that is to deflect attention from the fact that it is the Liberal senators and the Liberal Party that refuse any reform in the Senate and refuse any attempt to discipline any senators who have behaved inappropriately.
Dominic LeBlanc Liberal Beauséjour, NB
Mr. Speaker, here is another name for the list: Chris Woodcock. Mr. Woodcock was the Prime Minister's go-to guy when he needed problems mopped up, sort of like a cleaner. He was sent the details outlining the deal and the bribe to silence Mike Duffy, but instead of going to the police he prepared a plan to cover it up. What was his punishment? He received a promotion to the job of chief of staff for the Minister of Natural Resources.
Was this promotion a reward for his role in this cover-up, or was it to distance him from the Prime Minister's own ethical lapses?
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Once again, Mr. Speaker, those allegations are completely false.
Mr. Wright himself has said he took the decision with his own funds. Mr. Wright, to his credit, recognized that decision was totally wrong and he has resigned.
Some people in the Liberal Party should recognize the same thing and take the appropriate action.
Thomas Mulcair NDPLeader of the Opposition
Mr. Speaker, after firing Nigel Wright the Prime Minister told Canadians in the House that absolutely no one else—not a few, no one else—knew about the deal between Duffy and Wright. Now he admits that top Conservatives actually did know about the scheme but they kept him in the dark knowingly and they allowed him to make false statements to Parliament. If that is true, why did he not fire any of them?
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Once again, Mr. Speaker, I addressed that matter months ago.
Mr. Wright made this decision. He has been very clear. He informed very few people. It was his own decision and his own initiative. Any insinuation or any suggestion that I knew or would have known is incorrect. As soon as I knew, I made this information available to the public and took the appropriate action.
Thomas Mulcair NDPLeader of the Opposition
Mr. Speaker, I refer the Prime Minister to Hansard of June 5. There was no “very few” in there. It was “nobody”.
We all know that at the beginning of this story, Mike Duffy categorically refused to reimburse his expenses. He said that he had done nothing wrong. All of a sudden he changed his mind and announced that he would reimburse the money.
When Nigel Wright told the Prime Minister that, did the Prime Minister wonder why Duffy all of a sudden wanted to pay back the money? Did he at least ask?
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, Mr. Duffy is the one who informed Canadians that he had reimbursed his expenses.
It was Mr. Duffy himself who announced on national television that he had repaid these expenses. He announced that he had taken out a loan against his personal assets to repay these expenses.
That was obviously not correct. It was completely false, and for that reason, when that was proven to be false and showed up to be false, he was expelled from the Conservative caucus.
Thomas Mulcair NDPLeader of the Opposition
Mr. Speaker, what has been proven to be false and turned out to be false is that no one else knew about it, when 13 people knew about it. He has not fired anybody.
Did Nigel Wright, Ray Novak or Carolyn Stewart Olsen threaten to expel Mike Duffy if he did not accept their $90,000 agreement?
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Again, Mr. Speaker, he alleges that many people knew about this. That is simply not correct.
It was Mr. Wright's decision, using his own resources and by his own admission, documented, he told very few people.
The fact of the matter is that it is the virtually universal view in this party that if a person cannot follow rules, cannot respect the standards of integrity in their behaviour, people do not want them to be a member of the caucus of the Conservative Party.
Thomas Mulcair NDPLeader of the Opposition
Mr. Speaker, Senator Carolyn Stewart Olsen is implicated in the exact same scandal as Mr. Brazeau, Mr. Duffy and Ms. Wallin, yet she is not facing the exact same consequences as Mr. Brazeau, Mr. Duffy and Ms. Wallin.
Why? Is it because she is a close friend of the Prime Minister?
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, there is no proof to support that allegation.
The hon. member is now just starting to throw mud without any facts whatsoever. The senator herself has said that is not correct.
I am not aware on what basis he is saying that, but when I look at the NDP I remember the old saying, “the more we throw mud, the more we lose ground”.
Thomas Mulcair NDPLeader of the Opposition
Mr. Speaker, Pamela Wallin and Mike Duffy were travelling on the taxpayers' dime for Conservative fundraising events. The Prime Minister was present at these events. Who did the Prime Minister think was paying the expenses?
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Once again, Mr. Speaker, we know that parliamentarians of all parties travel on parliamentary and party business. We know this. What is relevant is whether they respect the rules that are in place and the spirit of those rules.
When they do not respect the rules or the spirit of the rules, we expect corrective action to be taken. If we do not have corrective action, we expect there to be consequences.
