House of Commons Hansard #41 of the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was csec.
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, my contention is that the commissioner of the Communications Security Establishment, the Hon. Jean-Pierre Plouffe, former judge of the Superior Court of Quebec, continues to examine all of CSEC's activities and has said that they are clearly within Canadian law, as we would expect them to be.
Justin Trudeau Liberal Papineau, QC
Mr. Speaker, Conservatives continue to attack Elections Canada, an agency respected as a model in democracies around the world. What is the government's response to repeated findings of Conservative wrongdoing? It wants to strip Elections Canada of its investigative powers, attacking its independence.
Why?
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, it is quite the opposite. There is a Commissioner of Elections, whose job it is to investigate violations of the law. What we are doing is making sure that office has full independence and is effectively housed in the director of public prosecutions. That should help the independence and the effectiveness of law enforcement.
Justin Trudeau Liberal Papineau, QC
Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives continue to attack Elections Canada.
Elections Canada was asking for one change in particular: to be able to ask a judge to order a witness to appear during investigations.
Instead, this bill strips Elections Canada of its powers and attacks its independence. Why?
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, there is a commissioner at Elections Canada who is responsible for investigations. The amendments that we have proposed will make that office more independent. It has all of the powers it requires to conduct investigations.
Justin Trudeau Liberal Papineau, QC
Mr. Speaker, Elections Canada repeatedly sought the ability to ask judges to compel testimony in cases of election fraud. As we know, the Conservative government did not even consult with Elections Canada on its bill, so this reasonable and effective reform to strengthen our system was left out.
Why?
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, of course the premise of that question is completely false. We have reviewed all of Elections Canada's reports and understand that the present minister met with Elections Canada as far back as last August.
As I have said repeatedly, the Commissioner of Elections is responsible for investigations. What we are doing is making sure that office has full independence and is vested with all of the powers necessary of all other investigators to conduct any investigations on the breaking of the law.
Thomas Mulcair NDPLeader of the Opposition
Mr. Speaker, today the first charges have been laid in the Senate expenses scandal. A key witness in the case against Liberal senator Mac Harb is refusing to co-operate with the RCMP. She is a diplomat from Brunei.
Has the Prime Minister asked the government of Brunei to compel their official to co-operate with Canadian police?
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, as members know, the RCMP has today laid charges against two senators, one of whom has already been sanctioned by the Senate. The other left before sanctions. This is what we would expect. The RCMP has the full authority to conduct these investigations and to hold anybody who does not respect the rule of the law responsible. That is what is being done. Of course, it will get full co-operation from the government.
Thomas Mulcair NDPLeader of the Opposition
Mr. Speaker, the question was whether or not the Prime Minister has asked Brunei to compel its official to co-operate, and for the second time he is refusing to actually do anything.
When the Prime Minister appointed Patrick Brazeau to the Senate, he was the head of an organization based here in Ottawa.
Did the Prime Minister really believe that Patrick Brazeau lived 135 km away?
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, the RCMP has laid charges against two senators, one former and one current. We still expect parliamentarians to follow the rules; otherwise, they will suffer the consequences. We commend the RCMP for the work it has done.
Thomas Mulcair NDPLeader of the Opposition
For years, Patrick Brazeau lived in Gatineau. Mike Duffy lived in Ottawa. Carolyn Stewart Olsen lived in Ottawa. Pamela Wallin lived in Toronto. None of those senators, all of whom were appointed by the Prime Minister, lived in the communities they were supposed to be representing in the Senate.
Why, then, did the Prime Minister appoint them?
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, once again, as members know, the RCMP has laid charges against the two senators who it believes have broken the law. As we have said, we expect all parliamentarians to respect the rules and respect the law, and if they do not, there will be consequences. There have already been sanctions by the Senate. We obviously salute and acknowledge the work of the RCMP on these particular cases.
Thomas Mulcair NDPLeader of the Opposition
Mr. Speaker, at least until we can abolish it, senators have to live in the places they are supposed to represent. Pamela Wallin did not live in Saskatchewan. Patrick Brazeau certainly did not live in Ottawa—
The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer
Order, please. The hon. Leader of the Opposition has the floor.
The hon. Leader of the Opposition.
Thomas Mulcair NDP Outremont, QC
Mr. Speaker, senators have to live in the places they are supposed to represent. Duffy lived in Ottawa, not Prince Edward Island. Wallin lived in Toronto, not Saskatchewan. And of course, Stewart Olsen lived in Ottawa, not New Brunswick.
Does the Prime Minister understand that the Senate scandal began when he started naming senators from places where they did not even live?
Stephen Harper ConservativePrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, as I have said repeatedly before, it is very common for members of both Houses of Parliament to maintain more than one residence, one in their riding and one in the national capital region. That is very common.
That is not what is at issue here. What is at issue is that there are clear rules to be followed in terms of the public trust and the use of public money and the claiming of expenses. When those rules are not followed, we have tough measures in place to deal with that. The RCMP has acted, and we congratulate them for acting.
Craig Scott NDP Toronto—Danforth, ON
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Minister of State for Democratic Reform claimed that he had consulted the Chief Electoral Officer. The problem is, Elections Canada said he did not. Today, the minister smeared Elections Canada saying, “[They] should not be wearing a team jersey”.
Does the minister really think that misleading the House one day and smearing Elections Canada the next is a really good way to start discussions on amending our elections law?
Pierre Poilievre ConservativeMinister of State (Democratic Reform)
Mr. Speaker, certainly the wrong way to start discussions is to do what the member did, which was to walk out and announce his opposition to a bill that he admitted he had not even read.
As for consultations, I did meet with the Chief Electoral Officer, on August 22, for about an hour. I listened carefully to all of his thoughts until he had nothing more to add. I told him if he thought of anything that he could call to me at any time. I have since read his reports, studied his testimony before committee, and implemented 38 of his recommendations in the fair elections act. This act would improve elections in this country and make sure our democracy rests in the hands of the people.
Craig Scott NDP Toronto—Danforth, ON
Mr. Speaker, it is clear to all that the minister actually is off to a really rough start.
My bill on fighting electoral fraud proposed fines of up to $500,000. The Chief Electoral Officer proposed up to $250,000. The government's bill limits fines to just $50,000, ten times less than the NDP proposal. Why has the government failed to provide tough punishments for people who commit serious election fraud?
Pierre Poilievre ConservativeMinister of State (Democratic Reform)
Mr. Speaker, I do not know why the member is trumpeting his plan to impose just monetary fines. In fact, the fair elections act would impose prison time for election fraud, which goes much further.
We will ensure that the election watchdog, the commissioner, has sharper teeth, a longer reach, and a freer hand. Sharper teeth means tougher penalties, including jail time. A longer reach means many new offences to crack down on big money and election fraud. A freer hand means total independence, so that the commissioner can make his own decisions about investigations, manage his own staff, and have a fixed seven-year term so he will never have to worry about being fired without cause.
Nycole Turmel NDP Hull—Aylmer, QC
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of State for Democratic Reform plans on preventing people from voting if they do not have government ID or a fixed address. Could the minister tell us whether that requirement could violate the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms?
Pierre Poilievre ConservativeMinister of State (Democratic Reform)
Mr. Speaker, when someone lies about their identity or residence in order to vote illegally, they are stealing or cancelling out another person's vote. That is an attack on honest Canadians who are trying to have a legitimate influence within our voting system.
Some identification methods have a significant rate of error, and we will eliminate these methods in order to protect the integrity of the vote.
Nycole Turmel NDP Hull—Aylmer, QC
Mr. Speaker, the updated version of the Canada Elections Act prohibits Elections Canada from advertising in order to increase voter turnout, for example.
How can the minister justify the fact that his government is prohibiting this agency from publicizing the right to vote, and meanwhile, this same Conservative government thinks it is okay to advertise a job training program that does not even exist?