House of Commons Hansard #80 of the 39th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was provisions.
Stephen Harper Conservative Calgary Southwest, AB
Mr. Speaker, with the support, or at least the complicity of the Liberal Party, this government has managed to do a number of things for the benefit of Canadians, whether we are talking about the budget, whether we are talking about the criminal justice agenda, whether we are talking about moving our environment plan forward, defence, or foreign affairs.
The Leader of the Opposition has lost ground. He has thrown away his ground on all his issues. Now he is just throwing mud.
Michael Ignatieff Liberal Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON
Mr. Speaker, when the RCMP showed up at Conservative Party headquarters in bulletproof vests and carted away a truckload of documents, the government tried to pass it off as—
The Speaker Liberal Peter Milliken
Order, please. Perhaps we can all calm down. I know it is Wednesday, but we do have question period here. The hon. member for Etobicoke—Lakeshore has the floor and he will want to continue with his question.
Michael Ignatieff Liberal Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON
Mr. Speaker, when the RCMP visited Conservative headquarters, the government tried to pass it off as a friendly visit. The RCMP was executing a search warrant. That is called a raid.
Then, Conservative spinners tried to call the raid “intimidation and a PR stunt”. Actually, Elections Canada was just doing its job.
What does this say about the Prime Minister's character?
Peter Van Loan ConservativeLeader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for Democratic Reform
Mr. Speaker, on the subject of bulletproof vests, I do not want to comment on the leader's attire for Liberal caucus meetings.
However, I am comfortable telling the House that the dispute we are talking about is one between the Conservative Party and Elections Canada. The position of Elections Canada in this dispute is that Conservative candidates are not permitted to campaign promoting our national leader and our party policy.
We happen to think that is an absurd position. We further think it is unfair that it is an interpretation that applies only to Conservative candidates and not to those of other parties equally. That is why we took Elections Canada to court, and that is what this is all about.
Michael Ignatieff Liberal Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON
Mr. Speaker, that answer illustrates this government's contempt for Elections Canada. This is indefensible.
This disdain for Elections Canada is on par with their contempt for our national institutions such as the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, the Military Police Complaints Commission of Canada, and now Elections Canada. This government is trying to undermine our country's independent institutions.
Why is this Prime Minister refusing to respect the independent institutions of our—
Peter Van Loan ConservativeLeader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for Democratic Reform
Mr. Speaker, I understand why the member for Etobicoke—Lakeshore raises this issue. It is a terrible thing for someone to take on Elections Canada, which is what the member for Toronto Centre just did with his lawsuit against Elections Canada.
Do members know what that member proved? He proved that Elections Canada's interpretation was wrong. He received $50,000 as a result of that, as did the member for Etobicoke Centre. I will bet they are pretty happy that Elections Canada lost that one.
Gilles Duceppe Bloc Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC
Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the Prime Minister tried to downplay the RCMP search of his party's headquarters. He even questioned the impartiality and autonomy of Elections Canada. With his arrogant replies and his attacks on this democratic institution, the Prime Minister reminds me of Jean Chrétien, the former Prime Minister of Canada, who had no scruples about attacking Justice Gomery's credibility during the sponsorship scandal. The Prime Minister is behaving in the same way, as his reform background comes to the fore.
Will the Prime Minister admit that, beneath his veneer of transparency, he is trying to control everything and even conceal the truth?
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, it was the Conservative Party that initiated legal action against Elections Canada. From time to time there are disputes between the parties or members and Elections Canada about the interpretation of the law. Those disputes are best settled in the courts.
Gilles Duceppe Bloc Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC
Mr. Speaker, to hear the Prime Minister talk, one would think the Conservatives were searching their own headquarters. Nevertheless, it has been quite a week. On Monday, in Winnipeg, the Prime Minister took aim at car thieves. On Tuesday, in Ottawa, police raided his party's headquarters.
If the Prime Minister is sincere and really has nothing to hide, why does he not release the search warrant the RCMP produced to search his party's headquarters? He has it and knows what it says. If he is so transparent and has nothing to hide, he should tell us what the warrant says. He is supposed to be the transparent prime minister.
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, it was the Conservative Party that began the legal proceedings. By nature, these proceedings will be public. I therefore expect that all the facts in this dispute will be made public. That is why we chose this way of resolving this problem.
Michel Guimond Bloc Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, QC
Mr. Speaker, to downplay their election tricks, the Conservatives have the nerve to say that all parties cheated as they did. There is nothing further from the truth. The Conservatives are the only party whose returns are being challenged by Elections Canada. As proof, only the Conservative Party offices were searched by the RCMP.
If the Conservatives had handed over all the documents requested by Elections Canada, as they claimed, then why did the RCMP raid its offices?
Peter Van Loan ConservativeLeader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for Democratic Reform
Mr. Speaker, it is the different treatment of the parties that is the problem. Elections Canada's position is as follows: Conservative candidates are not permitted to promote the policies of our party and of our leader. We feel that is absurd. Furthermore, we believe that it is unfair that this interpretation applies only to Conservative candidates. This demonstrates that the parties are not treated equally. That is why we are taking Elections Canada to court.
Michel Guimond Bloc Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, QC
Mr. Speaker, I would like to now list the Conservatives' election tricks. They are filibustering the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, refusing to cooperate with Elections Canada, attacking its credibility, and attempting to evade the issue. This reminds us of the National Citizen Coalition attacks against the limit on election expenses.
If the Prime Minister wishes to show good faith and transparency, why does he not immediately produce the search warrant in this House?
Peter Van Loan ConservativeLeader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for Democratic Reform
Mr. Speaker, the search warrant is a matter of a legal proceeding and we will let the legal proceeding unfold where it will.
The concern for us is that there is a treatment for the Conservative Party that is different from that of all other parties, which is the absurd proposition that we cannot promote as candidates in our ridings our national leader and our party policies. That is a position that is contrary to every fundamental principle of democracy. Every fair-minded Canadian would see that as unreasonable.
Most unreasonable is the fact that the interpretation by Elections Canada only applies to the Conservative Party, which is why we have taken it to court.
Jack Layton NDP Toronto—Danforth, ON
Mr. Speaker, gas prices in Canada have hit a new high. Individuals and families are suffering, and families are even finding that the cost of food is increasing because of this problem.
What is the Conservatives' solution?
A new report from KAIROS shows that the government is providing an additional $1.5 billion in funding for the big oil companies operating in the oil sands.
Why does the Prime Minister choose his friends, the major polluters and major profiteers, over the families that are suffering because of high gas prices?
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, this government removed funding and tax incentives for this sector in the 2007 budget. I am disappointed that the NDP voted against the interests of Canadian taxpayers and consumers.
Jack Layton NDP Toronto—Danforth, ON
Mr. Speaker, I would simply suggest that the Prime Minister read his own government's briefing documents on the subject, which were revealed in a report tabled by KAIROS today, showing that this year an additional $1.5 billion will go these big polluting companies developing the oil and tar sands.
It is time the Prime Minister rose in the House and told Canadians the truth about what is going on. He has chosen his friends, the big profiteers, the big oil and gas companies, instead of helping out ordinary families that are trying to get by, buy a little gas at a fair price and get some food at a fair price. The Prime Minister should stand and tell the truth.
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, it is time the leader of the NDP told the truth, especially when, in budget 2007, this government put in measures to remove the special incentives and subsidies for the oil sands and, in fact, to replace them specifically with incentives for green technology development, and the NDP voted against the interests of the environment, voted against the interests of consumers, voted against the interests of taxpayers and voted to keep these subsidies. That is what the NDP did.
Marlene Jennings Liberal Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC
Mr. Speaker, it is not just Elections Canada saying that the Conservatives cheated in the last election. Their own candidates from across the country are saying that too.
Jean Landry, their candidate in Richmond—Arthabaska, said that his campaign was forced to process $26,000 through this scheme. Mr. Landry said, “The Conservative Party called me to tell me not to talk to Elections Canada again”.
Is that what the Prime Minister means when he says that they cooperated fully with the Elections Canada Commissioner who the Conservatives appointed?
Peter Van Loan ConservativeLeader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for Democratic Reform
Mr. Speaker, as indicated previously, we have provided all documents that Elections Canada has asked for in this regard before yesterday's extraordinary and unusual action.
In terms of our spending practices, I would like to quote Duff Conacher of Democracy Watch, who was on CTV today. He said, “The Conservatives did something in the last election that all parties have done for years. That's legal, and parties can donate as much as they want to a local candidate and often do to candidates that don't have a lot of local support and can't raise money on their own. And then what happens is those candidates use some of that money to buy materials for national headquarters, like pamphlets, signs, platforms to hand out to people. That's all--”
Marlene Jennings Liberal Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC
Mr. Speaker, former candidate Jean Landry was forced to help the Conservatives cheat in the last election. He said that there was an amount of money for the in and out scheme.
Mr. Landry also said that he was told the money was meant to be used for his advertising, but that instead it went towards national advertisements.
Are the Conservatives now going to accuse their own candidates from the 2006 campaign of creating a bogus scandal?