House of Commons photo


Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word was aboriginal.

Last in Parliament September 2008, as Conservative MP for Portage—Lisgar (Manitoba)

Won his last election, in 2006, with 70% of the vote.

Statements in the House

David Dingwall November 16th, 2005

Mr. Speaker, I stand by my numbers and the minister stands by Dingwall.

The Prime Minister does not clean up, he covers up, and that is what the government is doing. Let us take André Ouellet, please. The Liberal porkmaster general felt entitled to pay himself $2 million in lavish expenses. The public was angry. The Prime Minister promised an audit and 14 months later we are still waiting.

What happened to accountability? What happened to cleaning things up? André Ouellet is the poster boy for Liberal entitlement and this is a cover-up.

Will the Prime Minister stand up and admit that he is trying to hide the facts from Canadians until after the next federal election?

David Dingwall November 16th, 2005

Mr. Speaker, when David Dingwall was thrown out by the people of Cape Breton in 1997, the Liberal patronage machine kicked right into action. Between then and now, Dingwall has received from Canadian taxpayers at least $693,000 in Liberal lobbying contracts and $700,000 for his salary as patronage leader at the Mint. Now Liberal lawyers are negotiating chingwall's severance with other Liberal lawyers.

Why do Liberals insist on defending one another and abusing Canadian taxpayers?

Question No. 210 November 15th, 2005

Did the government provide a severance package for André Ouellet when he resigned from Canada Post and, if so, what were the details and monetary figures of this package?

David Dingwall November 14th, 2005

Mr. Speaker, it is public money and it should be a public audit. The fact of the matter is that the Prime Minister seems to agree that Liberals are entitled to their entitlements, including Ouellet. He continues to reward Liberals by appointing old cronies to the Senate or ambassadorial positions.

Now he wants to reward David Dingwall with a severance package. It is unbelievable. In the wake of the sponsorship scandal, the Prime Minister pretends to punish Liberals by revoking their party memberships. That is actually a reward, I think, to most Canadians. Will the Prime Minister finally drop the idea of cutting a severance cheque to David Dingwall?

Canada Post November 14th, 2005

Mr. Speaker, over the last 13 months Revenue Canada has completed over 330,000 audits on ordinary Canadians, but on André Ouellet, none. Today the revenue minister trumpeted a taxpayer alert initiative to ensure “a level playing field for all taxpayers”. How ironic.

How level is the field when former Liberal pork master general Ouellet pays himself $2 million in lavish expenses, does not provide receipts and after 13 months still has not been audited? I would like the minister to tell the House and Canadians what other non-Liberal Canadian gets a deal like that.

David Dingwall November 3rd, 2005

Mr. Speaker, it is becoming increasingly hard to take the erratic responses of the minister very seriously. After all, they come from a man who was confused enough not to know the difference between Vimy and Vichy, who believes that Saskatoon is a suburb of Portage la Prairie, and who believes that Dingwall should be rewarded and whistleblower Allan Cutler should be punished. He seems befuddled, Mr. Speaker.

Here is a friendly little question for the minister. Will he guarantee that the André Ouellet audit will be made public?

David Dingwall November 3rd, 2005

Mr. Speaker, let us learn, then, from Justice Gomery's work. How about reading page 284? There the judge states that David Dingwall called Chuck Guité into his office, introduced him to Jacques Corriveau and stated “look after him”. Guité followed Dingwall's instructions and Corriveau went on to receive $35 million in sponsorship grants and delivered kickbacks to the Liberal Party.

Now that Justice Gomery has so clearly linked David Dingwall to Corriveau, does the Prime Minister still insist on paying him severance?

Canada Post November 3rd, 2005

Mr. Speaker, at noon today, the chair of the Quebec Conservative caucus, Josée Verner, announced that a Conservative Party government would review Canada Post's decision to close the Quebec City sorting centre.

It is unthinkable to us that the Montreal centre alone can provide consistent service quality across the province. The people of eastern Quebec deserve quality postal service, equivalent to that provided in the rest of the province.

The Conservative Party therefore opposes the decision. We are proud of the work done by Josée Verner in this matter. We firmly intend to carry on the work in order to meet the needs of Quebeckers and deliver quality public service.

Canada Post November 2nd, 2005

Mr. Speaker, André Ouellet awarded contracts to Liberal friendly firms. He hired dozens of Liberal friends and family. He spent $2 million in lavish expenses, without providing receipts over a year ago. What Canadian gets that deal?

What is the Prime Minister doing about it? He is doing nothing about it, except appointing more Liberal cronies to the Senate, inventing reasons to pay David Dingwall some severance and protecting Ouellet. This is his mess.

Mr. Clean over there likes to fire up the vacuum when he is cleaning up Jean Chrétien's house, but the fact of the matter is Canadians are expecting him to clean up his own house now. When will he get to it?

Canada Post November 2nd, 2005

Mr. Speaker, it is all talk. Post-Gomery word spin from the PMO describes the Prime Minister as Mr. Clean, but let us take a look at his actions.

When it comes to Liberal pork master general André Ouellet, for example, he has done nothing. All cover-up, no cleanup. One year ago, the Prime Minister promised Canadians that he would get to the bottom of the André Ouellet scandal at Canada Post. We are waiting.

In his report, Judge Gomery highlighted Ouellet as “favouring his friends over the interests of the corporation”. How truly Liberal.

When will the Prime Minister stop favouring his friends over the interests of Canada and Canadians?