Evidence of meeting #46 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 witnesses.
A recording is available from Parliament.
11:20 a.m.
Conservative
Mike Wallace Conservative Burlington, ON
No. Okay.
I just wanted to clarify who was here, and I'll pass my time on to Mr. Del Mastro.
11:20 a.m.
Conservative
Dean Del Mastro Conservative Peterborough, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Goudie, I hadn't intended to go this way, but Mr. Hubbard's questions were really intriguing, so I do want to go this way. First of all, the issue of the 60% back is something we've heard raised a number of times, and of course all parties, as we've indicated, have transferred funds back and forth—every single one of them. They've all claimed the 60% back, something that I personally—and this may not be a party position—don't know that we need in our society. We do handsomely refund taxes to people who make donations.
11:20 a.m.
An hon. member
Why is this...?
11:20 a.m.
Conservative
11:25 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
Could you please stop the clock.
I want to clarify that the 60% rebate is not on transfers, but on expenses.
Mr. Del Mastro, I hope you will correct the record, please—
11:25 a.m.
Liberal
11:25 a.m.
Liberal
11:25 a.m.
Conservative
Dean Del Mastro Conservative Peterborough, ON
Okay, right. So as for the 60% return that comes back based on expenses, personally I would like to see it eliminated since we so handsomely reward people who donate to parties already; 75% of what they give is given back to them. Personally, I'm not sure we need that.
We talked a little bit, and Mr. Caldwell spoke about, how he did have informed consent. He was aware of it going on, and so forth, and took the word of the party that this was in fact legitimate, and what we're really talking about is a difference of interpretation. That was indeed covered off by Mr. Mayrand.
Now, from the Liberal sponsorship scandal, there is still over $43 million missing, or about $43 million, that went into campaigns. Now, in each one of those campaigns, 60% of that money was refunded, theoretically. So if you go over the next three elections, there's a total of about $91 million that's now been benefited from the $43 million that's been missing.
11:25 a.m.
An hon. member
On a point of order--
11:25 a.m.
Conservative
Dean Del Mastro Conservative Peterborough, ON
Do you think Elections Canada should have looked into that matter? Do you think they should have looked into Liberal ridings that may have received money that was stolen from taxpayers?
11:25 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
Order.
Mr. Del Mastro, I apologize, sir. I stopped the clock so as not to use your time, but there was a point of order immediately from Mr. Proulx, I believe, when that word “sponsorship” came up.
11:25 a.m.
Liberal
Marcel Proulx Liberal Hull—Aylmer, QC
Well, it's a question of relevance to this particular hearing, Mr. Chair. Talking about whatever else could have happened somewhere else in the world or somewhere else in Canada is not relevant to this particular sitting.
11:25 a.m.
Some hon. members
[Inaudible--Editor]
August 11th, 2008 / 11:25 a.m.
Conservative
11:25 a.m.
Conservative
11:25 a.m.
Some hon. members
Oh, oh!
