Evidence of meeting #40 for Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics in the 39th Parliament, 2nd session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was point.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Conservative
Russ Hiebert Conservative South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC
This is important, because in your ruling you said that other parties could be political parties or individuals.
Liberal
Conservative
Russ Hiebert Conservative South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC
A political party can't be a public office holder, yet you said that was one of the categories.
Conservative
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON
Are you agreeing that a party cannot be a public office holder? Are you agreeing to that?
Conservative
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
Order, please. That's the third time.
Do you want one more?
Listen. I want to try to give you the explanation, because you're very skilled at putting words in people's mouths.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
I will indicate to you that when we say “investigating the actions of the Conservative Party”, the Conservative Party is not a public office holder.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
We understand that, but we are dealing with the ethical practices of the persons named by Elections Canada. Okay?
Conservative
Russ Hiebert Conservative South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC
That's not what it says. It says:
...investigate the actions of the Conservative Party of Canada during the 2006 election.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
And it says:
...to determine if these actions meet the ethical standards expected of public office holders.
It is with regard to the candidates.
An hon. member
It doesn't say “investigate the candidates”; it says “investigate...the Conservative Party of Canada”.