Thank you.
I'm on debate, and what I'm debating is the substance of the motion before us. If the complaint and the request for discussion is for a discussion as to whether or not expenses have been made that are within what is permitted under the Canada Elections Act, that's fair. I suspect it would be beyond the scope of this committee, but that's a decision where I shared your opinion, Mr. Chairman, and the majority of the committee members did not.
My concern, of course, is that there is not one but two court proceedings under way on this very subject, where Elections Canada, on the one hand, is asserting that some expenses were made that were beyond the scope of what's permitted under the Canada Elections Act, and on the other hand, the Conservative Party of Canada asserts not only that these are permissible but that indeed they are permissible and reimbursable and Elections Canada is failing in its legal obligations under the Canada Elections Act to reimburse those expenses. I refer specifically to expenses made by riding associations for advertising, which are subject to a 60% reimbursement under the terms of the Canada Elections Act. In not doing so, Elections Canada is not following a legitimate interpretation of the law.
What's important to remember here is these are different interpretations of the Canada Elections Act that have not yet been decided by the courts. Just as the Conservative Party of Canada is not alleging, and would not allege, that Elections Canada is acting illegitimately in so doing, it is also the case that Elections Canada is not asserting that the Conservative Party acted illegitimately. It's certainly not the language that people out there in TV land are supposed to interpret this as meaning, which is illegally or unlawfully. These are legitimate alternative points of view, which are being dealt with through one of our legal tribunals--the courts--to rule on what in fact is the correct interpretation of the Canada Elections Act.
The Liberals are, frankly, short on scandals...no, they're long on scandals, but they're short on finding scandals that somebody else is involved in and are hoping they can turn this committee into a gong show, having failed to make the House of Commons into a gong show, at which their allegations will be picked up and treated seriously by the media. I think that's unfortunate.
In order to prevent that from occurring, Mr. Chairman, I propose that the motion be amended in the following manner. In the second last line of the English version, following the word “for”, the following words be added: “that are alleged not to be in conformity with the expense limits under the Canada Elections Act”.
I should stop here, Mr. Chairman. I should have said after the word “expenses”, that these words would be added in the last line, and that in the second-last line, the word “illegitimate” be removed. So it would now read:
...Elections Canada has refused to reimburse the Conservative candidates for election campaign expenses that are alleged not to be in conformity with the expense limits under the Canada Elections Act.
I can continue with debate later on, but that is the substantial change I'm suggesting.