Mr. Chairman, I am a bit surprised by the behaviour of my friend from the Bloc Quebecois, Mr. Guimond. I know he is an honest person, and, in general, a reasonable one. Today he reacted very strongly. I have never seen such bitterness in him before.
I wondered why he was on the defensive, to such an extent. I found the answer when I read an article in the August 24, 2007, issue of the Le Devoir daily newspaper. I was particularly struck by a paragraph dealing with the Bloc Quebecois and I would like to share it with everyone. In it one finds an explanation of the Bloc Quebecois' decision to vote against submitting its accounts to the scrutiny of the committee.
This scheme puts one in mind of the “in and out” technique used by the Bloc Quebecois a few years ago. This tactic also aimed to artificially inflate candidates' expenses in order to obtain a larger reimbursement. The candidates paid Bloc employees for services that are generally provided by volunteers, and those employees then returned the money to the party as donations.
My honourable colleague already mentioned that the Bloc Quebecois could not manage to run successful fundraising campaigns. Its electoral campaigns are funded with the help of subsidies from Elections Canada, which is legitimate. Through that method, the Bloc Quebecois transfers large amounts to local campaigns. We can thus see that the potential for hypocrisy in that party is great, and it does not want to defend this state of affairs before a parliamentary committee.
Therein lies the explanation for why my honourable friend Mr. Guimond reacted with such Napoleonic fervour to my attempts to open up his books. I have never seen the man explode the way he did today.