House of Commons Hansard #259 of the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was witnesses.
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
Mr. Speaker, also in October 2005, the Prime Minister said, “Why does the Prime Minister not just say no to David Dingwall's demand for more money?”
My question is very simple. Why will the Prime Minister not just say “no” to any money being paid out to his former chief of staff?
James Moore ConservativeMinister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages
Mr. Speaker, again, Mr. Wright will receive only what the law requires and nothing more.
However, equally, if the NDP members want to be so strident about accountability of people in public life, it would be great if they would find out from their leader, and if their leader would come clean with Canadians, who he is covering up for in Montreal, why did it take him so long to admit that he was offered a bribe and why will he not come clean with Canadian taxpayers after 17 years? He has a responsibility to come clean with what he knew about corruption in the city of Montreal.
Ralph Goodale Liberal Wascana, SK
Mr. Speaker, in a news conference from Peru, the Prime Minister made it clear that when Nigel Wright cut the $90,000 deal for Mike Duffy, he was acting in his official capacity as chief of staff. That is exactly what the Prime Minister said. Therefore, all documentation, paper or electronic, is the property of the Government of Canada and not Mr. Wright.
There is the February 20 email, for example, outlining Duffy's expectations. There is Mr. Wright's transfer of funds and more. Canadians are entitled to see all of this. It is going on three weeks now. Will the government produce that paper trail?
James Moore ConservativeMinister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages
Mr. Speaker, it was very clear that when Nigel Wright resigned, he took sole responsibility for this matter. That is exactly as it should be, because that is, frankly, exactly what happened.
Speaking of the question of responsibility that the member for Wascana raises, where is the responsibility and accountability in the Liberal Party for one of their Liberal senators, Senator Merchant, who is hiding $1.7 million, that we know of, in an offshore account, avoiding paying taxes in our country.
If the Liberals believe, as they say, in accountability, responsibility and standing up for taxpayers, why will they not come clean on this $1.7 million that are being hidden from Canadian taxpayers?
Ralph Goodale Liberal Wascana, SK
Mr. Speaker, Duffy's reputation has been destroyed, but not his bank account. He remains $90,000 better off. Duffy took taxpayers for that amount, but he did not pay it back. Nigel Wright paid it.
Duffy keeps the $90,000, while the Receiver General gets $90,000 from an illicit deal that was so wrong it cost Mr. Wright his job.
Will the government repudiate the dirty money and instead garnishee Duffy's wages and seize his assets so he pays for his wrongdoing, not some deal maker in the PMO?
James Moore ConservativeMinister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages
Mr. Speaker, as the member knows, this matter has been put forward to the RCMP and it will examine all these matters and appropriate action will be taken.
Speaking again of appropriate action, the member for Wascana used the word “repudiate”. Will the Liberals repudiate a Liberal senator who is hiding $1.7 million in an offshore account?
When Liberal senators take millions of dollars and hide them in an offshore account, it means that middle-class Canadians, who the new Liberal leader pretends to stand for, need to have a higher tax burden to make up for Liberal senators who are hiding their tax liabilities in offshore accounts.
When will the Liberals come clean on their senators hiding millions of dollars offshore?
Stéphane Dion Liberal Saint-Laurent—Cartierville, QC
Mr. Speaker, the minister stubbornly refuses to answer any questions. I have a question for him that can be answered with a simple yes or no.
Yes, Nigel Wright's payment to Mike Duffy was illegal. No, it was not illegal. Which is it?
James Moore ConservativeMinister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages
Mr. Speaker, the RCMP is looking into the answer to that question. This is precisely why we have an ethics commissioner and why the RCMP was called in to investigate this matter. The Liberal and Conservative parties examined this matter in the Senate.
What about Senator Merchant and her husband, who are hiding $1.7 million in an offshore account? Is that illegal, yes or no?
I have a simple question for the Liberals. Hiding $1.7 million from taxpayers, is it illegal, yes or no?
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
Mr. Speaker, Canadians are now learning how Mike Duffy used taxpayer money to work on the Conservative election campaign of 2011, but he was not the only one.
Of the 15 senators who spent the most money during that election period, five were Conservatives and 10 were Liberals. These are extraordinary amounts of money we are talking about.
Does the government consider it appropriate for senators to use taxpayer money to work for the Conservative and Liberal Parties during elections?
James Moore ConservativeMinister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages
Mr. Speaker, Senate expenses should be used for Senate duties.
As we have put forward very clearly in our submissions to Elections Canada, the Conservative campaign was financed by Conservative funds, straight up and that is very clear in the returns that we put forward to Elections Canada.
That is what taxpayers expect. That is what the law requires. We have obeyed the elections laws in our country.
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
Mr. Speaker, I do not know if my hon. colleague has been checking out the audit in the Senate, but we will continue on.
When the news of Nigel Wright's $90,000 cheque was made public, the Prime Minister sent the member for Nepean—Carleton out to explain the Conservative government's position. He said that the cheque was issued “Because we didn’t believe taxpayers should have to pay the cost and Mr. Duffy was not in a position to pay them himself”.
Again, who is the “we” that was involved in the decision and how did they know Mike Duffy was claiming that he was unable to pay back the taxpayer?
James Moore ConservativeMinister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister answered that question specifically yesterday in the House of Commons. In his statement when he resigned as chief of staff, Nigel Wright took sole responsibility for this matter, which is as it should be, because that reflects the facts of the matter.
On this issue of payments and so on, it is interesting that New Democrats are so self-righteous, given that they had as their revenue critic somebody who disrespected taxpayers by not paying his taxes to the Canada Revenue Agency. For New Democrats to get up in the House and be so self-righteous about the interests of taxpayers while not paying their own taxes takes quite a bit of gall.
Françoise Boivin NDP Gatineau, QC
Mr. Speaker, here is another question the Prime Minister did not answer yesterday. Perhaps today will be our lucky day.
What changed between the time the Prime Minister said Nigel Wright had his full confidence and the moment he accepted Mr. Wright's resignation, just three days later?
James Moore ConservativeMinister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages
Mr. Speaker, as soon as the Prime Minister found out that Nigel Wright had been directly involved and had written a personal cheque for $90,000, he made all of the information public and Nigel Wright resigned because he acted alone, of his own accord. That is what the Prime Minister said in the House of Commons.
Now, what we need to hear is what the NDP leader knew about corruption in Montreal. He hid that information for 17 years. He did not go to the RCMP, and now he is trying to hide behind this ruckus. He needs to tell the public what he knew about corruption in Laval.
Françoise Boivin NDP Gatineau, QC
Mr. Speaker, they can try to spin all they like, but they could not pass a lie detector test with those answers and fabrications. Canadians are not fools; they are not stupid.
What did the Prime Minister learn during the audit of Senator Wallin's expenses that forced her to leave the Conservative caucus?
James Moore ConservativeMinister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages
Mr. Speaker, she says that we are inventing things. It is a fact that in 1994 the leader of the NDP was offered a bribe, it is a fact that in 2010 he said that it did not happen, it is a fact that in 2011 he met with police, and it is a fact that only two weeks ago he confessed that all of this happened.
To not report the crime of a bribe is totally irresponsible. The City of Montreal is trying to get to the bottom of corruption through the Charbonneau commission, and Canadians deserve to know why it is that the NDP leader was hiding corruption in the city of Montreal.
Alexandrine Latendresse NDP Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC
Mr. Speaker, it seems that getting answers to our questions is going to be very difficult. The answers we are getting are ridiculous. I cannot believe this.
I will now ask a very simple question. Did Nigel Wright issue the $90,000 cheque while employed by the Prime Minister's Office as his chief of staff? Who was the cheque made out to, Mike Duffy directly or a trust account?
James Moore ConservativeMinister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages
Mr. Speaker, it is our understanding that it was a personal cheque. That is why the RCMP is looking into the matter, and so is the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner. That is why Nigel Wright took sole responsibility for his actions. He acted alone in writing that cheque.
Craig Scott NDP Toronto—Danforth, ON
Mr. Speaker, the question was not whether he wrote it, but who was the recipient.
Let me turn to another matter. Given that these activities may have been a breach of both parliamentary ethics rules and the criminal law, specifically what documentation has been handed over to independent authorities, the Senate Ethics Officer, the House Ethics Commissioner and the RCMP?
James Moore ConservativeMinister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages
Mr. Speaker, these are independent bodies that will do their own independent examinations. They are arm's length, which is as it should be. That is what the Federal Accountability Act mandates, that is what the law for the Ethics Commissioner requires and that is how the RCMP operates, which is arm's length and independent. They will examine this matter, as they should and as taxpayers expect.
Craig Scott NDP Toronto—Danforth, ON
Mr. Speaker, why should the kinds of documents being provided to authorities be at arm's length from Canadians?
Let us move on. Yesterday, when asked about when he started talking with the PMO about the Senate expenses scandal, the Prime Minister answered, “Obviously, we all spoke of this as soon as the story was in the news”.
Could the government confirm that the conversations between the Prime Minister and folks in the PMO took place sometime late last year?
James Moore ConservativeMinister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages
Mr. Speaker, on the important matter that the member raises in the beginning of his question, the Prime Minister made it very clear that our government will put forward any information that is required to get to the bottom of this.
Canadians do expect that members of Parliament and members of the Senate treat taxpayers' money responsibly. An independent examination is being done by the Ethics Commissioner and by the RCMP. They will do their work, and of course we will co-operate and work with them as much as they request, in the exact opposite of the way that the leader of the NDP failed to come forward on corruption in Laval in the city of Montreal.
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
Mr. Speaker, Conservatives would do well to realize that when they put themselves into a deep hole, maybe they should stop digging. These guys went out and bought themselves a bigger shovel.
I have another simple, straightforward question. Let us see if the Conservatives can give a clear answer for once.
Was anyone else in the Prime Minister's Office contacted by the police regarding the Nigel Wright and Mike Duffy matter?
James Moore ConservativeMinister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages
Mr. Speaker, there has been no such contact by the RCMP, as the Prime Minister said yesterday.
With regard to shovels and digging holes deeper, at least two New Democrat members of Parliament that we know of have not paid their taxes. What is really corrupt about their behaviour in this file is that an NDP member of Parliament did not pay his taxes and was taken to court because of a $60,000 tax liability, and that same NDP member of Parliament comes to this place and tables a bill in Parliament to have income averaging for artists because he is an artist.
His first and only act in this Parliament legislatively is to try to pass a bill to absolve himself of his own tax liability. That is NDP corruption.