Ève Péclet

[Ethics, May 28th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives continue to happily fly at taxpayers' expense, as did the Liberals before them.

The other problem is that they are refusing to give us information about the identity of those travelling with the Prime Minister and his ministers.

For example, previously we could find out that the Prime Minister regularly gave lifts to an important Conservative Party fundraiser. Now the rules seem to have changed suddenly, and we are no longer given that information. They obviously believe that those paying the bills may be asking too many questions.

Does the government have something to hide?

[Ethics, May 28th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, as I was saying, we see that the Conservative ministers make rather liberal use of government aircraft.

Over the past five years, such flights have cost us more than $4 million. The Minister of Justice, who returned from vacation on a military Challenger, has a $330,000 bill.

When will they finally decide to limit their travel and to take commercial flights like everyone else?

[Ethics, May 28th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, in response to a question on the order paper, the NDP has obtained the most up-to-date information on the use of the government's Challenger aircraft by Conservative ministers. We can conclude that they use these aircraft—

[Ethics, May 26th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, Arthur Porter, who, again, is still a member of the Privy Council, and former Senator Angus were wearing two hats: director of the MUHC and lobbyist for SNC-Lavalin. Both were lobbying for SNC-Lavalin. The senator was even harassing the Premier of Quebec to ensure that the contract was awarded to SNC-Lavalin, while Arthur Porter was working on torpedoing the candidacy of the other bidder.

Can the Minister of Public Works and Government Services tell us whether the former senator or the former chair of the Security Intelligence Review Committee, Arthur Porter, ever lobbied for SNC-Lavalin to obtain federal contracts?

[Ethics, May 26th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, last week the Charbonneau commission revealed that the McGill University Health Centre was secretly paying for Arthur Porter's Bentley. Mr. Porter is still a member of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada. His pay was inflated and he even received a $500,000 loan for his residence. All of this was approved by the chairman of the board of directors, none other than Conservative Senator David Angus, who, at the time, was in charge of ethics at the Senate.

Is the Conservative government aware of these questionable transactions?

[Ethics, May 15th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, unlike others, when it is our turn we answer questions. Out of sight, out of mind does not cut it.

Bruce Carson was personally chosen by the Prime Minister to be part of his inner circle, and we are just now learning the extent of his deceit.

If a company learns that one of its senior employees is a crook, it will investigate and ensure that that does not happen again instead of sweeping the whole thing under the rug.

Have the Conservatives changed the process for vetting the Prime Minister's advisers, or are they waiting once again for the police to show up?

[Citizenship and Immigration, May 15th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, as we saw today, the Conservatives will stop at nothing when it comes to making vicious attacks on law-abiding Canadians.

The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration slammed Negendra Selliah, an immigration consultant, claiming that he had been banned for committing fraud. The problem is that the minister fabricated the whole thing. He did not tell the truth. He reluctantly apologized but refuses to do anything about it. That is unacceptable.

Why does the minister think it is his job to lie and make unwarranted and unfounded attacks on citizens?

[Mining Industry, May 14th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, Canadian mining companies are doing business in more and more developing countries. In many cases, the host countries where these companies do business do not have the political will or the ability to enforce adequate environmental and human rights protection measures.

The list of cases of Canadian companies committing abuses is far too long. This is an especially important responsibility for Canada, which is a world leader in the mining sector because 75% of the world's mining companies are registered here in Canada.

To correct the situation, I introduced Bill C-584, which would create an ombudsman for extractive sector responsibility. I introduced this bill because for a long time now, individuals and a number of organizations have been asking for it, and companies themselves signed on in 2006 in the report by the National Roundtables on Corporate Social Responsibility.

Today, Development and Peace is on Parliament Hill to ask the government to pass this bill and take action on this issue. I applaud the work of Development and Peace, which, since 2006, has been giving a voice to those who, in too many cases, have none.

[Fair Elections Act, May 12th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate my colleague on his speech.

It was very beneficial to hear the Chief Electoral Officer's quote about voter cards. It would have been even more beneficial if the Chief Electoral Officer had been consulted. The Conservatives could have learned something. However, that is a topic for another time.

Does my colleague think it is possible to trust a government that was found guilty of several counts of electoral fraud? There was the in and out scandal, of course, but we also know that many government MPs were accused of electoral fraud in relation to their spending. Then there were also the robocalls.

Is it possible to trust a government that does not obey the law or uphold democratic tradition? Why does this government always try to push ahead even though it knows full well that, according to our country's democratic tradition, electoral reform is usually agreed upon by the majority, out of respect for all Canadians?

I would like to hear my colleague's thoughts on this government, which has been found guilty of fraud and could not care less about democratic tradition.

[Fair Elections Act, May 12th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask my colleague a very simple question. In 2011, the Chief Electoral Officer allowed voter information cards to be used as proof of address. However, to supplement that, individuals also had to have a piece of ID with their name on it.

Now that voter cards cannot be used any more, people will have to have two pieces of identification: one with their address and another with their name. Of the 39 acceptable pieces of ID on the list, only a tiny percentage include an address. It is extremely difficult for the most vulnerable segments of our society, such as students, seniors and aboriginal peoples, to obtain that type of ID.

What will he say to the Canadians who are listening and who may be denied the right to vote? I know that there are a lot of people listening, including some from his riding. What will he say to those people who will not be able to vote in 2015?