Charlie Angus

[Jobs, Growth and Long-term Prosperity Act, June 18th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I listened with great interest to my hon. colleague. He seems to have a much clearer vision of what is actually in the bill than the Conservatives and some of the stuff we heard earlier from them. They were talking about how senior citizens in this country were creating such a dead weight on the system that it was all going to collapse. We know the attack by the Conservatives on OAS is an attack on the poorest of seniors, the people who do not have savings or RRSPs. They will have to work until age 67. The Conservatives did not campaign on that, but they are now bringing it in.

The Parliamentary Budget Officer said that the government's numbers were made up. Ever since then the Conservatives have been denying the Parliamentary Budget Officer access to information. The Conservatives broke the law by denying Parliament the ability to do its work, to do due diligence, to ensure that people, senior citizens for example, are not unfairly targeted by the government.

Could my hon. colleague tell me why he thinks the government has made up this fiction about senior citizens being a dead weight on our tax system when OAS is sustainable? Could he tell me why the government has gone to the lengths of breaking the law to deny the Parliamentary Budget Officer access to information and keep him from doing his work?

[Jobs, Growth and Long-term Prosperity Act, June 18th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I just finished reading The Guardian. I do not know if my colleague reads it or not, but it talks about the urgency around the world to get a new environment agreement. This is a British newspaper, but it specifically mentioned Canada as a country that cannot be trusted because of the Conservative government's attitude. The Guardian talks about how the Conservatives break international agreements and have a reputation now of undermining environmental standards. We see that all through this budget.

I want to concentrate specifically on the decision to attack the Freshwater Institute. Not only Canadian scientists but international scientists have decried that as an attack on science that is going to undermine our capacity to manage our freshwater resources. The government has shut down the round table on the environment. However, we now find out that it is going to cost millions to actually shut the program down, so my question to my hon. colleague is this: why would the government spend millions to shut down a world-class program when for less it could keep it open? Where is the fiscal sense?

[Jobs, Growth and Long-term Prosperity Act, June 18th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, the issue is about misrepresenting facts in Parliament.

That is what we are here to do. The Conservatives call us out all the time if they think we are off the line. I am asking him to speak truthfully, as opposed to misrepresenting facts in the House. That is something we all have to respect. We cannot just make things up and attribute them to people. That is an abuse of his position.

[Jobs, Growth and Long-term Prosperity Act, June 18th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I was listening to him. That is why I stood up to tell him he had to correct the record, because he was making big—

[Jobs, Growth and Long-term Prosperity Act, June 18th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, on a point of order. In all fairness, I love fantasy and fiction as much as anybody, but the member needs to be careful about what the member for Burnaby—New Westminster was talking about. It was the failure of the budget. I want that on the record. This member is just making things up.

[Jobs, Growth and Long-term Prosperity Act, June 18th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I think we need to maintain a level discussion. The words “sad” and “pathetic” are pitiful. The member should stick to the facts when we are number one in the country.

[Ethics, June 18th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, again I appeal to the member for Peterborough. He has a pretty lousy defence attorney because the issue here is the fact that he is being investigated for concealing and misrepresenting spending. He is being investigated for fraud and forgery. Now there are allegations of a bonus-for-bucks kickback scheme. Could he just move the Nepean member out and explain whether or not he has spoken to the Prime Minister, whether the Prime Minister is backing him, and why the Prime Minister is not asking him to step down while this ethical cloud hangs over his head?

[Ethics, June 18th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, this has gone on and on. Last week we learned about fraud and forgery in the Peterborough election scandal. Now we are learning about this alleged kickback scheme for donations. Yet the Prime Minister seems to think that he will just damn the torpedoes and ride this one out. It is a question of his judgment. Does he really think that Canadians would believe that he was not aware of these damning court documents? When was he aware—

[Ethics, June 18th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I am glad the Conservatives raised the issue of donations because nobody on our side is being accused of a kickback scheme, unlike the Conservatives.

[Ethics, June 15th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, the member has to stop pretending that this is a case of The Art of War and spend more time studying All the President's Men. What we are dealing with here are allegations of fraud and forgery that have been raised by Elections Canada through court documents.

The affidavit indicates that the member for Peterborough acted in a manner that facilitated the concealing and the misrepresenting of the paper trail.

Will the Prime Minister do the right thing in saying that he actually takes these allegations seriously? Will he ask the member for Peterborough to step aside until this investigation is complete?