Debates of May 27th, 2013

Ethics

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, the court action was a partisan attempt by a group of people who lost the election, to overturn the democratically given results.

The judge in question said that there is no evidence that the Conservative Party or Conservative Party candidates were directly involved in the campaign to mislead voters.

[Craig Scott, NDP, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the fact is the judge said that the applicants and the Council of Canadians acted in the public interest. He said the Conservatives made transparent attempts to derail the case.

If the government was serious about all this, it would by now have given Elections Canada tools to catch the criminals. Instead, Conservatives have refused all along to strengthen the investigative capacity of Elections Canada. When will it stop the delay and the shielding tactics and introduce a bill for Elections Canada to be able to find who used that Conservative database to commit fraud?

[Tim Uppal, Conservative, Minister of State (Democratic Reform)]

Mr. Speaker, let us talk about what we actually do know. In fact, the judge dismissed this case because there was no evidence. What else do we know? We know the NDP accepted hundreds of thousands dollars in illegal union donations.

Regarding Elections Canada, there was an independent audit, which highlighted widespread errors on the part of Elections Canada in the operations during the last election. As I have indicated before, we will bring forward amendments to the law in the not too distant future.

Canada Revenue Agency

[Jeff Watson, Conservative, Essex, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the NDP claims to be against tax evasion, yet two NDP MPs owe tens of thousands of dollars in back taxes, including the NDP's own former critic for National Revenue, who had this to say about people like himself who do not pay their fair share, “We are talking about revenue that Canada is losing through fraudulent means. I cannot see why we would not address these problems.”

Since the NDP will not take action against its own tax evaders, could the minister update the House on the tough measures we are taking to crack down on tax evasion?

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, when some cheat the system, law-abiding Canadians are forced to pay more. That is why since taking office this government has taken 75 tough new measures to crack down on tax cheats. That has allowed for over 1,200 convictions of these tax cheats, allowing us to collect over $100 million in fines from them. On this side of the House, we are cracking down on tax cheats so that law-abiding, hard-working Canadians can pay less.

Government Appointments

[Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet, NDP, Hochelaga, QC]

Mr. Speaker, over half of the people who have been appointed to the Social Security Tribunal are defeated Conservative candidates and party cronies.

Today, the Conservatives refused to debate the issue of patronage appointments in committee. I thought that the backbench members cared about freedom of expression, but now I see that they care about freedom of expression for themselves, and not for others.

The tribunal will not be fair, credible, impartial and independent if the Conservatives stack it with cronies who help boost their campaign coffers.

Will they put an end to these appointments?

[Kellie Leitch, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development and to the Minister of Labour]

Mr. Speaker, our government has made appointments based on merit.

Positions for the Social Security Tribunal were widely advertised. The members who were appointed went through a rigorous, competency-based selection process in which they had to meet the specific experience and competency criteria required for their jobs.

[Chris Charlton, NDP, Hamilton Mountain, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I have said it before and I will say it again: “Who you know in the PMO is not merit”.

Despite clear rules that board chairs are not supposed to engage in political activities, it is reported that at least $37,000 was donated to the Conservative Party from members of the soon-to-be defunct EI board of referees. Instead of punishing their appointees for breaking the rules, the Conservatives rewarded some of them with yet another plum patronage appointment to the Social Security Tribunal.

When will the government do the right thing, instruct the Conservative Party to pay back the illegal donations and stop the gravy train?

[Kellie Leitch, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development and to the Minister of Labour]

Mr. Speaker, as I just said, our government makes appointments based on merit. Positions for the Social Security Tribunal were advertised broadly. Members appointed went through a rigorous, competency-based selection process where they had to meet specific experience and competency criteria that they require for their jobs.

Citizenship and Immigration

[Jinny Sims, NDP, Newton—North Delta, BC]

Mr. Speaker, defending patronage and appointing Conservative insiders is always wrong.

The Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism went to California to unveil a billboard for more skilled workers to come to Canada. The unemployment rate for new immigrants with university degrees is more than double the rate for the general population. Why did the minister go all the way to California and waste tens of thousands of dollars on a self-promoting photo op instead of helping highly skilled workers already here to find jobs?

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Minister of Citizenship]

Mr. Speaker, now we see the bizarreness of NDP immigration policy.

On the one hand, the New Democrats tell us that we should massively increase immigration levels; they say from 250,000 to at least 340,000 a year. We say no, that we should maintain current immigration levels but do a better job of selecting people who have the skills to succeed in our economy, like brilliant young entrepreneurs who have attracted Canadian investment. We would rather that they come to Canada, start their businesses here and create jobs in Canada rather than in the United States or overseas because we think immigration should be about creating wealth, jobs and prosperity for Canadians.

[Sadia Groguhé, NDP, Saint-Lambert, QC]

Mr. Speaker, our party certainly does not say one thing and then do another.

I can understand that, after he saw the heritage minister's new website, the Minister of Immigration felt the need to do a little self-promotion himself.

However, it is not appropriate to spend $16,000 of taxpayer money on a trip to California to unveil a billboard encouraging skilled workers to come work in Canada. Meanwhile, the unemployment rate among skilled new immigrants is double that of the rest of the population.

How can the minister justify this expense?

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Minister of Citizenship]

Mr. Speaker, the NDP's position is very bizarre.

They want to double the number of immigrants we allow into Canada, yet they are against our efforts to reform the system and attract the people who would be best prepared to succeed in our economy.

Our promotional efforts in California were very successful. We received tens of thousands of dollars in free publicity from the American media, and there are very competent entrepreneurs who can come to Canada to create businesses, jobs and economic opportunities for Canadians.

41st General Election

[Scott Andrews, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

Mr. Speaker, the government should be outraged after last week's Federal Court ruling on the 2011 voter suppression scandal. The ruling showed three things: one, widespread election fraud occurred; two, the data that was used to make voter suppression phone calls came from the Conservative database; and three, an elaborate effort was made to conceal the identity of the people accessing the database.

Why does the government not come clean about which Conservatives committed this fraud using their own database?

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, what it actually showed was that this ultra-partisan court action was thrown out because there was a lack of evidence to overturn the democratically given results from the last election.

That member over there should perhaps answer what his leader failed to do so. His leader said he wants to keep the Senate just the way it is, because he reasons that the Senate gives advantage to one province over all of the others.

I wonder if that member is prepared to stand up, defend and explain those divisive and hurtful comments his leader was highlighting today.

[Joyce Murray, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

That was a classic non-answer, Mr. Speaker.

A judge found that the Conservative database had been used to contact people who were not Conservative supporters in order to prevent them from voting. This means one of two things: either the Conservatives deliberately used that database or the database was hacked, which means that the personal information of millions of Canadians was allowed to get into the hands of criminals.

Either way, laws were broken and the government must take action. Why does it refuse to act?

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to quote the judge.

He stated that there was no evidence that the Conservative Party or any of its candidates were directly involved in any campaign to mislead voters.

That is a quote directly from the judgment. The case was thrown out.

The previous member failed to answer the question. Perhaps this one will. Why is her leader becoming the number one cheerleader for the existing status quo in the Senate, and why is he trying to divide Canadians against each other to do it?

Ethics

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, again, it is the Rob Ford school of crisis management over there.

The reality is it is not business as usual in Toronto's city hall, and it is certainly not business as usual in Canada's Parliament. This scandal reaches into the heart of the Prime Minister's inner circle. Yet he is still refusing to answer the most basic questions.

This is a question about leadership. This is a question about judgment, so let us try again. Did anyone at the Prime Minister's office speak with any senator about whitewashing the Duffy scandal report?

[James Moore, Conservative, Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages]

Mr. Speaker, again, Nigel Wright said that he acted alone, and the Prime Minister has been very clear about the need for all parliamentarians to show leadership on the issue of Senate reform and to come together and support the serious reforms we have put on the table, including Senate term limits and Senate elections.

That is what we want to do. That is the direction we want to go. If the NDP members want to be serious in their talk about reforming the Senate, they will get together with us and work to pass this legislation.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

The Ethics Commissioner has launched an inquiry. The RCMP has acted and launched its own investigation into Senategate. Even the Senate Ethics Officer, who can only act with the Senate's consent, started looking into things.

The Prime Minister should have acted when he first learned about the payments. Someone in his office may have violated the Parliament of Canada Act and/or the Criminal Code. Why did he not show real leadership and call in the police to investigate when he first heard about it?

[James Moore, Conservative, Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages]

Again, Mr. Speaker, he has shown real leadership, both on the specifics of this matter and on the broad issue of Senate reform itself.

I will not take lessons from New Democrats when it comes to showing leadership and defending taxpayers, when members of their own party refuse to pay taxes and are still sitting in their caucus.

A little bit of temperateness in their rhetoric about this would be good, because again, the hypocrisy of New Democrats pretending to stand up for taxpayers while ripping them off at the same time is a bit much.

Natural Resources

[Rodney Weston, Conservative, Saint John, NB]

Mr. Speaker, our government's priority is creating jobs and economic growth. We know that natural resources is a key sector of the Canadian economy, helping to employ 1.6 million people and accounting for almost 20% of Canada's economy. One project is particularly important to my constituency: the construction of a west-east pipeline. This project will allow for Canadian oil to be processed at eastern Canadian refineries, creating jobs and economic growth in our communities.

Could the Minister of Natural Resources please update the House on the progress of this project?

[Joe Oliver, Conservative, Minister of Natural Resources]

Mr. Speaker, I want to say that our government strongly supports, in principle, a west-east pipeline that will create jobs, job security and growth in eastern Canada and across the entire country.

In contrast, the Liberal leader is playing both sides for partisan purposes and is fostering unfounded public concern based on his shaky grasp of science. As he would know if he put in a little time doing his homework, the National Energy Board will do an independent environmental review, which he should await, rather than prejudging the conclusion. He should do his homework.

Ethics

[Ralph Goodale, Liberal, Wascana, SK]

Mr. Speaker, vexing questions about where Mike Duffy lives first arose before Christmas. A forensic audit has been ongoing since February. The results, though doctored, became public on May 9. A $90,000 secret deal by the Prime Minister's chief of staff was revealed on May 14. He was forced from office on May 19.

The issues here are the ethical and legal failures the Prime Minister allowed within his inner circle. From beginning to end, he has been silent in the House. Why will he not look Canadians in the eye and answer?

[James Moore, Conservative, Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages]

Again, Mr. Speaker, he has and he will continue to, and the Ethics Commissioner is, indeed, looking into this matter, but perhaps the Ethics Commissioner should also look into the matter the Liberals seem to want to also move away from, which is the very matter of three Liberal members of Parliament ripping off taxpayers to the tune of $175,000 in falsely claimed expenses.

This is what the Liberals did. They had spouses and family members buy condos in Ottawa and then paid them rent. It breaks the law we have in the House when it comes to expenses. Three Liberal members of Parliament did it. They have not paid back the money. When are they going to do that?