David McGuinty

[Ethics, November 25th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, RCMP court records make it perfectly clear that the PMO was negotiating in February with Mike Duffy's lawyer to arrive at a five-point scheme to have the Conservative Party “keep him whole on the repayment” and pay his legal fees.

Nigel Wright is explicit in indicating that he wanted to speak with the Prime Minister about these points, and less than an hour later he writes, “We are good to go from the PM”.

In light of the damning evidence, how can the Prime Minister possibly continue to claim he was not in the loop?

[Ethics, November 25th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, that is yet another contradiction from the Prime Minister's Office on the Wright-Duffy affair.

The PMO spokesperson claimed on the weekend, “...the Prime Minister was not always presented with the facts that we now know”.

Last Friday, the Prime Minister was asked whether anyone, other than Wright and Duffy, hid anything from him, and he said categorically, “No”.

No matter how hard they try, The Conservatives just cannot keep their stories straight. How long will the Prime Minister persist with this internal cover-up?

[Respect for Communities Act, November 8th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, years ago, an addictions expert told me that being addicted to something means that a person pretty much has no freedom. It is the antithesis of being free, because one is addicted. Right now, in Canadian society, people are watching on television the goings-on and the playing out of a very troubled situation in Toronto, where there is a mayor who is clearly dealing with a very serious challenge with substance abuse.

Canadians know about substance abuse. They know about the difficulties around addiction. However, I want to ask my colleague a question about health care costs.

He talked about the Supreme Court saying that it is a balance between public health and public safety.

In the city of Ottawa several years ago, there was a meaningful debate about an InSite injection site. At that time, the public health officer informed the citizenry that it costs between $600,000 and $1 million in health care costs to treat one HIV patient. That is one HIV patient. That does not count the millions of dollars in costs from hepatitis C infections and beyond.

I would have thought that a fiscally Conservative regime like the one across the floor would be weighing heavily the implications of health care costs, with scarce dollars being allocated to our health care system. I am wondering if my colleague can comment on the fact that the Conservative government is not even mentioning the health care costs that can be held in abeyance and prevented if we actually take a more public health approach to this than simply pounding people on the head saying that this is all about crime and then locking people up.

[Petitions, November 8th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36, I rise today to table a petition. The petition is signed by local residents who are urging the government to prohibit any Canadian from being involved with the use of cluster munitions anywhere in the world. I am pleased to table this petition. I look forward to the government's response.

[Ethics, November 8th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, despite access to information requests and questions asked in the House, the government said for months that it had no information.

Now we know about the hundreds of emails, but Canadians might have to wait for a criminal trial before they can see those emails for themselves. It is unbelievable that Mr. Woodcock is now the chief of staff to the Minister of Natural Resources.

Can the government confirm whether Mr. Woodcock has had any contact whatsoever with the RCMP?

[Ethics, November 8th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, we know that the PMO was forced to provide emails and other records to the RCMP. For months, countless ministers stood up in the House and asserted there was no written agreement between Wright and Duffy. Over and over again, it was outright denial.

Can the government confirm that one of the documents it turned over to the RCMP is the February 20 email which summarizes the Wright-Duffy legal agreement, and can it confirm that Mr. Woodcock has had this email in his possession since last spring?

[Ethics, November 8th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, Chris Woodcock was the Prime Minister's director of issues management, the top official, the go-to guy for handling dangerous political files. He crafted the strategy to cover up the Wright-Duffy deal; he wrote the false media lines which instructed Mr. Duffy to hide the real source of the $90,000 cheque.

Mr. Duffy has provided the RCMP with all his emails and records related to Mr. Woodcock. Has the government turned over to the RCMP all of Mr. Woodcock's records relating to Mr. Duffy?

[Economic Action Plan 2013 Act No. 2, October 28th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for a very thoughtful and measured speech. I would like to ask the member where he might see the country going in terms of innovation.

Several years ago, in a previous government led by then-minister Allan Rock, now the president of the University of Ottawa, a very comprehensive Canadian strategy was put in place to pursue an innovation strategy for the country. Four or five round tables were struck, and at the time I had the privilege of chairing an environmental technologies round table, to take a closer look at where we were going. Back then, around the year 2000, in the national capital region, we were receiving 60% of all the venture capital monies in Canada. That has been cut now by over 80%. We have also lost half of our high-tech firms.

What is the member's view with respect to an innovation strategy for the country? How does he see that dovetail with manufacturing and with information technology?

[Elimination of Partisan Government Advertising Act, October 24th, 2013]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-544, An Act to amend the Auditor General Act (government advertising).

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise today to introduce my private member's bill, the elimination of partisan government advertising act. It would amend the Auditor General Act to appoint an advertising commissioner to oversee government spending on advertising. It is time to bring Canada's advertising rules into the 21st century. The appointment of an advertising commissioner would provide accountability for all Canadians.

I call on my colleagues from all sides of the House to support this bill and work with me to eliminate partisan government advertising.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

[Business of Supply, October 22nd, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciated my colleague's remarks.

I have read the motion several times. There is a lot in the motion that is of merit, leaving aside the NDP's choice to bring this motion on its first opposition day in this new sitting.

The area that I am having the most difficulty with is the question of senators participating in caucus meetings. What is the rationale behind the NDP's call for senators not to be able to participate in caucus meetings?

The member knows full well that although caucus meetings are occasionally political and partisan, they are also very much policy-based. They are discussions about the merits of bills, they are internal meetings about private members' bills, and, for that matter, about motions like this one being debated today that has been put forward by the NDP.

Would the NDP agree that if we preclude senators from participating in caucus meetings of their own party and if we want senators to be non-partisan, why do we not say to senators that they should participate in all caucus meetings, including caucus meetings of the NDP?