Election Spending  That is what it says in their statement of declaration, “Québec Solidaire Opts for Independence/Sovereignty” That member donated to the hardest line separatist party in the country while sitting in the federal Parliament of Canada proposing himself as a future cabinet minister. If one wants to be minister in the Government of Canada, one must start by first believing in Canada.

Ethics  Speaker, speaking of electoral financing, I just pointed out that a member of that party's shadow cabinet is giving money to the hardest line separatist party in Quebec. The problem that the Québec solidaire has with the PQ and the Bloc Québécois is that those parties are not separatist enough. That member is making donations to that party at the same time as he sits in the federal Parliament in a supposedly federalist party proposing himself to be a future federal cabinet minister.

Ethics  He has already given the information to Elections Canada. The member opposite made donations to an openly separatist party, Québec solidaire. Does he continue to support Québec solidaire? Is it still the provincial equivalent to the NDP?

Ethics  Speaker, I have already answered that question, but the hon. member has not answered the question posed to him. Québec solidaire is a party that says the PQ and the Bloc Québécois are not separatist enough. The hon. member gave donations totalling $3,700, including $150 which he gave while sitting in a supposedly federal Parliament. I invite the member to stand in this House and confirm if he continues to be an active financial supporter of the hardest line separatist party in Quebec.

Ethics  However, what the hon. member across has not done is explain why he gave $3,700 to Québec solidaire, a party that states in its own declaration of principles that “Québec Solidaire Opts for...Sovereignty”. It is the hardest line separatist party in Quebec. The hon. member even gave donations to this party while he sat in the federal caucus of a supposedly federal party. I am simply asking him to stand up and say that he no longer supports Québec solidaire and that he will not give it any more money.

Unions  It must be so, say the union leaders, otherwise “free-loaders” would enjoy the benefits of unions without having to pay for them. What benefits? Do federal public servants benefit when their union backs separatist parties that would destroy federal jobs? Does a Jewish worker benefit when his union spends money on an Israel boycott? I do not see the benefits, but it is not my choice. Workers should decide.

Port of Montreal  The real question he should be answering is why it is that for over nine years he gave money to the hardest line separatist party in Quebec and its predecessor party, a party that says in its declaration of principles that Québec solidaire opts for sovereignty, and he now refuses to renounce those donations and stand up for Canada.

Port of Montreal  It is no wonder that NDP members would try to distract from the issues before the House. One of them gives money to a separatist party and refuses to stand up and support Canada. Another tries to hide the fact that his party accepted $340,000 in illegal money. All of them refuse to support a bill that would bring transparency so that workers could see how their money is being spent.

Port of Montreal  Speaker, the member is the gift who just keeps on giving. In fact, he not only gave once, he gave 29 times to the separatist Québec solidaire. Canadians are very forgiving people. They can forgive someone who makes a mistake or makes the same mistake 29 times, but what they cannot understand is when someone who purports to be a future minister in the Government of Canada cannot simply rise and say he believes in Canada.

Port of Montreal  Mr. Speaker, there is nothing more beautiful than when a former separatist decides that after all, he is going to embrace Canada. That is why, after I learned that over a decade this particular member donated 29 times to the hardest line separatist party in Quebec, I gave him repeated opportunities to rise in the House of Commons and say it was all a mistake and that he now believes in Canada.

Port of Montreal  Mr. Speaker, the problem is not that he donated 29 times to the separatists, including six times this year while he was ostensibly a paid-up member of the NDP caucus. The problem is that he cannot stand up in the House of Commons, even now, and say that he rejects separation and supports Canada.

Port of Montreal  That is exactly what he has done. I simply ask, given that the member has donated 29 times to a separatist party, why can he not do what literally every member of this caucus is prepared to do, which is to stand up and say he is a federalist, that he believes in a united Canada, that he wants this country to stay together and wants it to have a bright future.

Election Expenses  There is one very fundamental question that comes up, though, about a member of the official opposition donating 29 times to the hardest line separatist party in Quebec. It is a very simple question but a very important one. Does he believe in a united Canada? Is he a federalist?

Election Expenses  He donated, not once, not twice, but 29 times. He is the gift that keeps on giving. The problem is that he keeps giving to the separatists. He could put the whole matter to rest by simply rising and saying that he is a federalist and he believes in a united Canada. Why will he not just do that?

Ethics  However, the first thing one must do before proposing to build a better Canada is to believe in a united Canada. That member has donated not once, not twice, but 29 times to the hard-line, separatist Québec solidaire. For Canadians to trust and believe in that party, they need to know that party believes in Canada. Would the member confirm if he is now a federalist?