House of Commons Hansard #268 of the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was goods.
The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer
Order, please. The hon. Leader of the Opposition has the floor. If members wish to answer the question, they can feel free to answer, but I would like them to hold off until the leader is finished putting the question.
The hon. Leader of the Opposition.
Thomas Mulcair NDP Outremont, QC
Mr. Speaker, we know why the Conservatives find it so difficult. There are no Conservative role models of an accountable prime minister to imitate.
The parliamentary budget officer is there to provide non-partisan information to all parliamentarians. The law states that the selection process has to be independent.
We have just found out that another Conservative Party hatchetman, the chief of staff to the government House leader, has been named to the committee to choose the next PBO who will finally be acceptable to the Conservative Party. Does he really think Canadians will put up with that?
Peter Van Loan ConservativeLeader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is quite wrong. The process that has been followed is exactly the same process that was followed before. In fact, it is a process that is set out in law in the Parliament of Canada Act. It requires that the selection committee be formed and chaired by the parliamentary librarian. That is the requirement of the law.
Our government put in place the position of parliamentary budget officer and we look forward to the appointment of an objective parliamentary budget officer to provide the advice to parliamentarians on the legislation that is before us so we can make reasoned decisions on the proposals with which we are dealing.
Peggy Nash NDP Parkdale—High Park, ON
Mr. Speaker, let us continue to speak about the botched process for replacing the parliamentary budget officer.
When the chief of staff of the Conservative government's House leader is part of a hiring committee, it automatically politicizes the selection process. Kevin Page said that the process should start over. Why not start again with the help of a committee made up of truly independent members?
Peter Van Loan ConservativeLeader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, the process is the same one that was used to select the first parliamentary budget officer.
The statute actually sets out exactly what the process is. It is subsection 79.1(3) and it reads as follows:
The Governor in Council may select the Parliamentary Budget Officer from a list of three names submitted in confidence, through the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, by a committee formed and chaired by the Parliamentary Librarian.
The Parliamentary Librarian has followed the statute. It is the same process as before. We look forward to the appointment of the new Parliamentary Budget Officer.
Peggy Nash NDP Parkdale—High Park, ON
Mr. Speaker, at the request of the NDP, the parliamentary budget officer started drafting a report about the impact of budget cuts on the programs and services that Canadians rely on, but this has been stonewalled by the government. Previously, Conservatives supported this bill to strengthen the PBO. In a few minutes, the House will vote on this.
Will the Conservatives support the bill, or will they flip-flop and vote against the NDP's attempts to improve fiscal transparency?
Tony Clement ConservativePresident of the Treasury Board and Minister for the Federal Economic Development Initiative for Northern Ontario
Mr. Speaker, let me say a couple of things. First of all, this government continues to provide the interim PBO with the information she requires to do her job according to the statute.
The second thing I would say is that we on this side are not going to vote for a bill that gives the Senate more power. Here is a leader of the opposition who says that he wants to abolish the Senate, but the first thing he would do in his private member's bill is give the Senate more power.
We stand opposed.
Justin Trudeau Liberal Papineau, QC
Mr. Speaker, when the House rises, the government will have deliberately left crucial questions answered on the $90,000 cheque—
The government will have left unanswered questions on the $90,000 cheque in the—
Justin Trudeau Liberal Papineau, QC
Mr. Speaker, the unanswered questions are as follows. What was the secret agreement? Will they release the correspondence? When did the PMO tell Mike Duffy not to co-operate with the Deloitte audit and, most of all, why?
What real reason did Nigel Wright give the Prime Minister for cutting that $90,000 cheque to Mike Duffy?
James Moore ConservativeMinister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages
Mr. Speaker, of course, I agree with the first half of the first rendition of his question, where he said our government has indeed answered these questions.
What is also important to note is that when the House does rise, our government will be very proud not only of the questions we have answered, but the actions we have delivered for Canadians. Just yesterday, we passed Bill S-2 to provide aboriginal women with equal rights to non-aboriginal women in this country. That was reported equally last week. That is great news for all Canadians. It was reported last week by Statistics Canada that the Canadian economy has created over a million new jobs since the recession.
On all these questions and on all these answers, we are proud to go into summer standing up as—
Justin Trudeau Liberal Papineau, QC
Mr. Speaker, there is more spin, bluster and blunder, but not answers. No answers to those or to these.
How could the PMO put out a statement on May 14, about the deal, when on May 15, the Prime Minister still said he did not know about the cheque? Secondly, why did the PM give Nigel Wright his full confidence, instead of firing him on the spot? When will the government release a copy of the cheque? Most of all, why? The excuse of wanting to repay the taxpayers does not jive. What real reason did Nigel Wright give for writing that cheque?
The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer
Order, please. There is still far too much noise while members are putting forward their questions and ministers are answering. Members have to come to order.
The hon. Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages.
James Moore ConservativeMinister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages
Mr. Speaker, first of all, the real question is can I have the last 30 seconds of my life back?
The leader of the Liberal Party puts forward a number of questions. Indeed, those questions have been answered by the Prime Minister directly and by me. We have our own questions for the leader of the Liberal Party.
Does he still believe, for example, that Canadians who do not speak both of Canada's official languages are lazy? Does the Liberal Party leader still believe that the Senate should not be reformed because it benefits the province of Quebec? Does the leader of the Liberal Party still believe that it is okay for Liberal Senator Mac Harb to owe $50,000 in payments that he took from taxpayers and be welcomed back as a Liberal member of their caucus?
Justin Trudeau Liberal Papineau, QC
Mr. Speaker, yet again, we are not getting an answer. The real question remains: why? No one is buying the pitiful excuse from the chief of staff that he wrote a $90,000 cheque to a parliamentarian to supposedly save taxpayers money. There were other ways of doing that.
What real reason did Nigel Wright give the Prime Minister for writing Mike Duffy a cheque for $90,000?
James Moore ConservativeMinister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages
Mr. Speaker, we have already answered that question very clearly.
There are other very simple questions that we as parliamentarians want answers to.
The House leader of the NDP has put forward a motion.
We are very curious for the leader of the Liberal Party to answer his own questions on his expenses on the taxpayer's dime. Did taxpayers foot the bill for the cost of him travelling to his speaking events and his private speaking business while he was a member of Parliament? Did he bill taxpayers for the cost of his speaking tours while having the worst voting attendance record of any leader in the House?
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
Mr. Speaker, I want to apologize for comments I made yesterday comparing certain Liberal and Conservative senators to Caligula's horse. To be fair, the horse was a resident of Rome.
Yesterday, Bruce Carson showed up. He said he was surprised that the Prime Minister did not know about the cheque. This convicted fraudster swears this payoff would never have happened on his watch. It is pretty bad when even the jailbirds are not buying the story.
Why will the Conservatives not just come clean and show us the cheque?
James Moore ConservativeMinister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages
Mr. Speaker, I have been clear on this, as has the Prime Minister. We do not have access to a personal cheque of Nigel Wright. That is just a simple fact of the matter.
If the member opposite wants to talk about showing us the cheque, could those NDP members of Parliament who are not paying their taxes show taxpayers their cheques?
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
Mr. Speaker, the member has to have a lot of practice for 2015 when he will be asking questions all the time, if he keeps his seat.
The Conservatives cannot get their stories straight. The parliamentary secretary claimed that the secret Conservative Party fund was carefully scrutinized by Elections Canada. This is what he said, “There are absolutely rules.... Elections Canada has very meticulous, very detailed rules.” That is not true. Former Elections Canada head Jean-Pierre Kingsley said there are no rules of any kind.
Why are the Conservatives refusing to turn over the information about what that fund does?
Pierre Poilievre ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport
Mr. Speaker, there is a Conservative Party of Canada fund. It pays for all Conservative Party of Canada expenses. It is filed with Elections Canada every single year and it is also audited annually.
Chris Charlton NDP Hamilton Mountain, ON
Mr. Speaker, the Senate subcommittee that is reviewing expenses has known for a year and a half about problems with Pamela Wallin's travel claims, yet the Conservatives and Liberals ganged up to keep it a secret. Only now is Senator Wallin being fully audited.
If the Senate first learned about these suspicious claims at the end of 2011, when did the Prime Minister or anyone in his office first learn about problems with Senator Wallin's expenses?
James Moore ConservativeMinister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages
Mr. Speaker, the NDP and we in the Conservative Party agree that there should have been an independent audit of the Senate and that is, in fact, what is happening. The Auditor General is looking into this matter as is the Ethics Commissioner.
On all of these questions of expenses, our government and the senators on the government side in the Senate have put forward 11 measures to ensure that taxpayers' money is protected.
On the questions of Senator Wallin and Senator Duffy, these questions will be answered by an independent process that the opposition called for and that we agreed with and led on.
Chris Charlton NDP Hamilton Mountain, ON
Mr. Speaker, senators knew for a year and a half but no one thought to tell the boss. Seriously?
Senator Tkachuk knew there was an issue with Pamela Wallin's expenses at the end of 2011, but Senator Stewart Olsen knew there was an issue in the fall of 2012. But it took until the spring of 2013 for an audit to finally be conducted.
Senior Conservative senators knew about these problems. Why did they cover them up? Why did they not say anything?