Alexandrine Latendresse

[Democratic Reform, April 29th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, even with its amendments, the government still refuses to budge on giving more powers to elections investigators. The former commissioner of Canada elections, William Corbett, was very clear in committee. He said that there was nothing in Bill C-23 that will enhance the ability of the commissioner to investigate alleged cases of fraud.

Why is the minister content to have a commissioner of Canada Elections whose hands are tied behind his back? Why is he more concerned about protecting fraudsters than protecting the integrity of the election process?

[Democratic Reform, April 29th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, although the Conservatives have made some amendments, their election reform is full of holes. Bill C-23 still does not give investigators the powers they need to uncover fraud. Even with the Conservatives' election reform, perpetrators of the robocall scandal would remain unpunished, because Bill C-23 does not allow Elections Canada to compel testimony and to get hold of the documents it needs for its investigation, nor does the bill force call centres to retain telephone numbers and the scripts of their calls.

Will the minister stop protecting fraudsters and fix the holes in his bill?

[Democratic Reform, April 28th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I am wondering if the member was proud when the court found that fraudulent calls were made with information from the Conservative Party database.

Four hundred and sixty academics, two Nobel Prize winners and 18 past presidents of the Canadian Political Science Association have all strongly criticized the Conservatives' electoral “deform”. Like us, they are calling for extensive consultation with Canadians and are particularly critical of the fact that Bill C-23 does not give Elections Canada the power to compel witnesses to testify or to compel the parties to produce documentation justifying their election expenses.

Will the Prime Minister acknowledge these comments and make more amendments to Bill C-23 or will he, as Tom Flanagan said, continue to show his vindictiveness toward Elections Canada, which has so often taken the Conservatives—

[Democratic Reform, April 28th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, the Competition Bureau has this power, but the government does not want to give it to those who investigate electoral fraud. That is really problematic.

The Conservatives were found guilty of using an in-and-out scheme to cheat in the 2006 election.

They also cheated in the 2008 election and they are still awaiting trial.

In 2011, fraudulent calls were made with information from the Conservative Party database. The Conservatives tried to stack the deck for the next election before abandoning the move. It is therefore understandable that people are suspicious of the Conservatives' amendments to Bill C-23.

Why are the Conservatives refusing to give Elections Canada the power to compel witnesses to testify and to compel the parties to produce documents justifying their election expenses?

[Democratic Reform, April 28th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, the NDP has shown that, through diligence and perseverance, it is possible to make this government change its mind on certain fundamental aspects of the electoral deform.

We commend the government for its openness, but more is required. Canadians deserve a fair and equitable elections act. Rather than taking revenge on Elections Canada, the Conservatives need to strengthen that institution.

Why are they refusing to give Elections Canada the power to compel witnesses to testify and to require the parties to provide documentation justifying their election expenses?

[Democratic Reform, April 7th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, on Friday, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons tried to attack Sheila Fraser's credibility.

Fraser was an officer of Parliament when she exposed the schemes behind the Liberal sponsorship scandal. She did not try to protect the government. She just tried to uncover the facts. The same is true here. The fact that she is on the Elections Canada board should not prevent her from freely criticizing a lousy bill.

Will the Conservatives be as willing to listen to Sheila Fraser on this issue as they were when she submitted her report on the sponsorship scandal?

[Democratic Reform, April 7th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, it turns out that the Director of Public Prosecutions was not even consulted about the Conservatives' electoral reform. Had he been, the minister would have realized that, by placing the Office of the Commissioner of Canada Elections under the authority of the Director of Public Prosecutions, he is violating another fundamental principle of justice: the one investigating must not be in the same office as the one deciding whether to prosecute.

Did the minister consult any credible experts at all before introducing his reform, or did he just talk to people on his party executive and in his caucus?

[Democratic Reform, April 4th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of State for Democratic Reform has used the former auditor general's name in the House 65 times. Now, he pretends not to know her and that he knows nothing about her criticisms.

It is much easier for him to attack elections experts than someone he has blithely used for political purposes.

Sheila Fraser is saying exactly the same thing as Neufeld, Côté, Mayrand, Corbett, and the list goes on. What does the Minister for Democratic Reform think of Ms. Fraser's criticisms?

[Democratic Reform, April 4th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, does the Minister of State for Democratic Reform know Sheila Fraser? If so, has he read her position on Bill C-23? If so, what does he think about the former auditor general's criticism of the electoral reform?

[Democratic Reform, April 3rd, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I have been listening to the Minister of State for Democratic Reform ignore Sheila Fraser's serious warning, and I just cannot get over it, especially coming from the man who used the name of the former auditor general 65 times in the House to bash the Liberals, and rightly so.

If I understand the minister's logic correctly, when Sheila Fraser uncovers the Liberals' schemes, she is quite credible, but when she criticizes the Conservatives' electoral reform, then all of a sudden she is no longer reliable.

Could there be better proof of the bad faith and crass partisanship of this government and this minister?