Debates of June 17th, 2010

The Speaker Peter Milliken

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

Gordon O'Connor Carleton—Mississippi Mills, ON

Mr. Speaker, if you seek it, you will find agreement to apply the votes from the previous motion to the current motion.

The Speaker Peter Milliken

Is it agreed?

The Speaker Peter Milliken

I declare the motion carried.

The Speaker Peter Milliken

Does the hon. government House leader have the unanimous consent of the House to propose this motion?

The Speaker Peter Milliken

The House has heard the terms of the motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

The Speaker Peter Milliken

I declare the motion carried and I join the House leader in wishing all hon. members the very best for a pleasant summer.

A motion to adjourn the House under Standing Order 38 deemed to have been moved.

Marcel Proulx Hull—Aylmer, QC

Madam Speaker, the Conservatives were elected in 2006 on a platform of accountability and transparency. However, once the election was over, the Conservatives' true colours shone through: they traded in transparency and respect for deceit and intimidation.

On April 22, I asked the Conservative government why it has systematically attacked senior officials who were trying to do their job.

As usual, the Conservatives resorted to smart remarks instead of the truth. A number of watchdogs have been victims of intimidation or have been dismissed because they dared to do their job. I have some examples.

Jean-Pierre Kingsley, the former Chief Electoral Officer of Canada. The Liberals had asked the Conservatives to come clean once and for all on election financing and to shed light on some serious allegations. The Conservative Party had allegedly broken the law by exceeding the legal limit allowed during the last election campaign by more than $1 million. There was also a dispute on the issue of political contributions received during the 2005 national convention.

As a result of these disputes with Elections Canada, Jean-Pierre Kingsley tendered his resignation after 17 years of good service. I blame the Conservative government for the resignation and the loss of this senior official who was highly respected by all, here and abroad.

Bernard Shapiro, Ethics Commissioner. The Conservatives appointed a new ethics commissioner after Mr. Shapiro held an inquiry into whether the Prime Minister employed improper means to persuade the former member for Vancouver Kingsway and Liberal minister of international trade, David Emerson, to switch parties.

Yet the Conservatives did not object to his appointment. Mr. Shapiro had a brilliant background. He was the rector and vice-chancellor of McGill University, a professor of public policy at the University of Toronto, and a deputy minister in four Ontario government ministries.

Linda Keen, chair of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission. The Liberals called for an independent review of Ms. Keen's dismissal because the Prime Minister completely ignored the law when he fired her. But that criticism was motivated primarily by petty politics.

It seems that the only interests protected by that decision were the Prime Minister's political interests. He found a scapegoat. He even silenced Ms. Keen in the middle of the night, just hours before she was to appear before the House of Commons committee. The Conservatives shut Ms. Keen up instead of letting her tell the truth. What will the Conservatives do next? We are starting to see a real trend here.

Robert Marleau, Information Commissioner. After serving the House of Commons for 31 years, Robert Marleau was appointed Information Commissioner in January 2007. In June 2009, he resigned for personal reasons.

Robert Marleau had the nerve to criticize the Conservative government's lack of transparency. In his annual report, he stated that Canada had “to regain its status as a leader in the area of access to information”.

Instead of changing its corporate culture, this government relied even more heavily on secrecy to prevent access to information.

The Conservatives have created a climate of fear and intimidation throughout the public service.

Pierre Poilievre Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister and to the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs

Madam Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his question, but I noticed that he forgot to mention the importance of our economy now that we are in a period of global uncertainty. The Prime Minister introduced an economic action plan that has created at least 300,000 jobs. We are making it easier for Canadians to save more money. We are investing in projects that create jobs in communities across Canada. Our government has the lowest deficit in the G7, in terms of our economy and our population.

These are the real issues that our constituents care about, and I invite the hon. member to also show an interest in them, to stop making personal attacks, because personal attacks like the one this member just made have never created jobs and have never created hope for Canadians. The member should be working with us to help advance our economic action plan in order to encourage hope, jobs and prosperity.

Marcel Proulx Hull—Aylmer, QC

Madam Speaker, the member is mistaken. I did not make personal accusations. The Conservatives were the ones who got rid of those senior officials. I will continue.

What about Paul Kennedy, head of the Commission for Public Complaints Against the RCMP? After four years of loyal service, the Prime Minister announced last November that he would not be renewing his contract. Why? Because in his report, Mr. Kennedy concluded that in many cases, the complaints procedures were faulty, lacking both consistency and transparency.

Who did the Conservatives appoint to take his place? A Conservative donor with no experience in criminal law or policing.

What about Peter Tinsley, chair of the Military Police Complaints Commission? The government refused to extend his mandate when the commission was right in the middle of an inquiry into the transfer of Afghan detainees who may have been tortured by local authorities. Why? Because he was critical of the potential for abuse.

The Conservatives muzzled top officials at several independent government agencies. Why?