Mark Holland

[RCMP Commissioner, December 11th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, we will keep asking questions until we get answers.

We now know that the Minister of Public Safety, the Minister of Justice and the Minister of Foreign Affairs urged the Prime Minister to remove the RCMP commissioner in the fall, this long before the matter became a crisis. The Prime Minister ignored their advice, ignored all evidence and protected the commissioner.

Since the public safety minister has refused to answer this question seven times and since the Minister of Foreign Affairs will only admit to statements caught by Hansard, will the justice minister answer? Will the Minister of Justice now admit that he pushed for the removal of the RCMP commissioner prior to last Monday, yes or no?

[RCMP Commissioner, December 8th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, while we were pushing to get Maher Arar out of prison, pushing the RCMP for answers, and calling the Arar inquiry, the Minister of Public Safety and the Prime Minister were labelling Mr. Arar a terrorist, and still to this day have yet to apologize.

We now know the deputy to the Minister of Public Safety got the letter. The parliamentary secretary got the letter. The commissioner spoke to him about the letter, and in early November the minister knew it all.

Did the minister sit on this information and do nothing or was he muzzled? Is the Prime Minister the reason the commissioner was protected?

[RCMP Commissioner, December 8th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I would ask that the parliamentary secretary take this question seriously: why? Why did the government wait until outrage gripped the nation before it acted?

Despite contradiction after contradiction, a letter foretelling it all, ministerial meetings with the commissioner and urgings from his own cabinet, the Prime Minister did nothing. Worse than nothing, the Prime Minister gave the commissioner his unqualified, unreserved support through it all.

Why? Why did the Prime Minister do nothing when he knew everything?

[RCMP Commissioner, December 7th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, the only source on this issue is Sandra Buckler, who is part of the Prime Minister's spin machine. That is the only response that has been given.

This is a very easy question. Either the minister challenged the Prime Minister's unyielding desire to protect the commissioner or he did not. This minister has never responded. I want an answer from the minister right now, right here, on the public record. Did the minister push the Prime Minister to release or fire the RCMP commissioner at any time prior to last Monday, yes or no? Why is he afraid to answer?

[RCMP Commissioner, December 7th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, the commissioner should have been fired on September 28 and the Prime Minister knows it.

Today in committee the public safety minister refused to answer a very simple question I asked him four times. The question was this. Did the minister urge the Prime Minister to have the RCMP commissioner released or fired this fall? There was no response from the minister.

Canadian Press reports that the public safety minister, the foreign affairs minister and the justice minister each privately called for the commissioner to be let go some time this fall. Will the public safety minister now answer the question? Did he push the Prime Minister to release the commissioner this fall, yes or no?

[Points of Order, December 6th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I would seek to table, in both official languages, a letter that was received by the chair of the public safety and national security committee from the Commissioner of the RCMP dated November 2, along with additional notes that explain what occurred yesterday, that the testimony yesterday was stated previously and that those contradictions were known by the government on November 2.

[RCMP Commissioner, December 6th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I will table this letter. The letter will show that the government did know.

On September 28, I asked for the commissioner's resignation. I asked questions about the contradictions. The government members did not.

The Prime Minister said in question period yesterday, and repeated it today, “the government is surprised and concerned by the change of testimony” that occurred yesterday. It was an act. The letter of November 2 made it clear the commissioner had changed his testimony and the Prime Minister had known for a month.

All the mock surprise in the world cannot hide the fact that for one month the Prime Minister and the minister knew it all, yet they did nothing.

[RCMP Commissioner, December 6th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has not accepted responsibility. On November 2, more than a month before Commissioner Zaccardelli testified again before committee, a letter was written to the government. In this letter from the commissioner, he outlines in clear detail the shocking reversal he was going to make public a month later. That is one month, not hours.

One month ago the government knew everything but did nothing until forced, nothing but continued statements of unconditional support for the commissioner it was bound to protect. Why did the government do nothing when it knew everything one month ago?

[Maher Arar Inquiry, December 5th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, it was this party, when we were in government, that started the Arar inquiry. It was this party that said that we had to get to the bottom of it. It is that party on the opposite side that is obfuscating, stonewalling and refusing to take action with respect to Mr. Zaccardelli.

Today in committee the commissioner confirmed that he had to get permission from the minister before he could testify, that the commissioner needed the minister's approval before he could “give evidence or speak”. However, on September 28 the minister denied any such involvement and any such interference.

Now we learn the minister was a gatekeeper. He chose what information could and could not be released. Why?

[Maher Arar Inquiry, December 5th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, on September 28, in response to a question I posed in committee, the Minister of Public Safety was crystal clear. He said that he, his caucus and the Prime Minister stood unconditionally behind Commissioner Zaccardelli. There was not a single hesitation, not a single caveat.

Even after all the contradictions mounted up and despite Justice O'Connor's damning report, the Prime Minister and the minister just sat on their hands. While we demanded answers, they did nothing. Why? What was their motive? Why were they so bound and determined to protect the commissioner against all evidence?