Thomas Mulcair

[National Defence, May 27th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, for the past two weeks, the members opposite have treated us to a song and dance as they try to sidestep the issues. I will make my question clear, so clear that even the Minister of Public Safety might understand it.

My question was not about the conclusions, which he just talked about. My question was about whether it was the FBI, not CSIS, that informed the RCMP. Was it or was it not?

Will he try to tell the truth for once?

[National Defence, May 27th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, we will try to get—

[National Defence, May 27th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, we see that the Conservatives are preparing for their role in opposition, which is a good thing because that is where we are sending them in 2015. Until then, they are the government, unfortunately, and they have to answer the questions, so here is another one.

This weekend we learned that for months CSIS, Canada's top intelligence agency, watched convicted spy Jeffrey Delisle pass classified information to another power without ever informing the RCMP. The Mounties only learned about it from the FBI. That was a devastating leak, yet one key department did not even know what the other was doing.

Why did CSIS fail to inform the RCMP about Jeffrey Delisle?

[Ethics, May 27th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, there we go with the Conservative playbook. Plan A is to hide out in South America. Plan B is to blame the opposition. Why do they not try Plan C, which is to start telling Canadians the truth?

For the Conservatives it is business as usual. Does the Prime Minister think it is business as usual for a senator to defraud taxpayers? Is it business as usual to give a $90,000 payout?

Dodging questions about political payouts was shameful when Paul Martin did it. Why does the Prime Minister think it is just business as usual today?

[Ethics, May 27th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives have been in power for nearly eight years and they have done nothing.

I will read a quote, which states:

The Prime Minister should have known that. He cannot get away with saying, “Don’t blame me. I was only the piano player. I had no idea what was going on upstairs”.

Who said that? It was the Prime Minister to Paul Martin during the sponsorship scandal.

The current Prime Minister's own chief of staff gave a $90,000 payoff to silence a sitting Conservative senator and the Prime Minister claims that he did not even know about it.

When will the Prime Minister take responsibility, show accountability and finally start answering questions?

[Ethics, May 27th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, last week, the Prime Minister ran away to Peru to avoid answering questions about the Senate scandal. It has been two weeks since we found out that the Prime Minister's former chief of staff gave Mike Duffy $90,000 in hush money. Will the Prime Minister finally answer some questions today?

The PMO would have us believe that everything is business as usual. Sunshine and lollipops, in fact. Does the Prime Minister really believe that a secret $90,000 payout from his chief of staff to a senator is business as usual?

[Ethics, May 22nd, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday afternoon the Minister of Foreign Affairs said that we were referring to some form of legal document that he was not aware of and that his understanding was that no such document exists.

There is a trust document. There is a cheque. Will the Conservatives let the public see the trust document and the cheque?

[Ethics, May 22nd, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, are the Conservatives really trying to convince Canadians that a committee controlled by Conservative senators is an independent body?

[Ethics, May 22nd, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday afternoon, 11 times, the Minister of Foreign Affairs said that the Duffy affair was going to be investigated by independent authorities, independent bodies, independent officers. When my colleague, the House Leader of the Official Opposition asked him what those were, he could not give an answer.

Twice during the afternoon the Prime Minister's Office said that they were the Senate Ethics Officer. Later it corrected that to say it is the Senate committee, the same one that whitewashed Mike Duffy the first time, that is carrying out the investigation.

Does the minister not realize that is about as credible as Paul Martin asking Jean Chrétien to investigate the sponsorship scandal?

[Ethics, May 21st, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, Mike Duffy agreed to “stay silent on the orders of the PMO”. In exchange, the Prime Minister's Office agreed to cover the cost of the senator's fraudulent expenses.

Why were taxpayer-funded lawyers used to negotiate this secret backroom deal between the Prime Minister's chief of staff and Senator Duffy? Was taxpayers' money used to bankroll Senate-gate, yes or no?