Gerry Byrne

[Qalipu Mi’kmaq First Nation Act, February 28th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I think the minister should make clear to the House that this is not enabling legislation for the establishment of the Qalipu band. It is an add-on piece to cover up the mistakes of the government that the Conservatives feel they made.

What needs to be clear here is that the minister made a statement that this would indemnify the government and prevent ineligible, illegitimate applicants from seeking damages; however, the courts will decide that. It is not the minister who will decide that.

The proposed legislation before us today would prevent anyone from getting reasonable access to the court system to determine whether or not the government is at fault and has erred over an eight-year process.

Let us be very clear with each other here. This is a four-clause piece of legislation. Clauses 1 and 2 are simply pro forma. However, clause 3 suggests that it would enable the government to make a revision to the Governor in Council, which establishes a schedule of membership for the Qalipu band and registry under the Indian Act.

Under the technical briefing we received yesterday from senior officials, we discovered, as we suspected all along, that the government does not need that legislative right to add to the schedule. It needs that reinforcement to delete from the schedule, because there have already been four separate additions.

Now clause 4 in the bill before us would not give immunity to anyone other than the government for its own mistakes. The Qalipu band was formed on one basis, and one basis only. The Mi'kmaq of Newfoundland had access to the courts. They filed a court challenge in 1989 and, if it were not for that, there would be no Qalipu band—

[Prime Minister's Office, February 26th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, old habits being the way they are, today the PMO chief of staff and some of the highest paid employees of the ministers' offices, some earning up to $170,000 a year, just tucked into a big taxpayer-funded free lunch, all in full violation of the rules. Yesterday the President of the Treasury Board tried to blame the PCO bureaucrats, but we know that is just not true. These $67,000 in lunches are part of the PMO disclosure, and the only person who could have approved them is the Prime Minister himself.

Therefore, to the Prime Minister, what was on today's menu, compliments of taxpayers?

[Prime Minister's Office, February 25th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, tomorrow is Wednesday, and it sounds like it will be the same as every Wednesday for the last 10 years. A catering van will pull up to the Langevin Block with several hundred dollars of food to be provided to PMO staffers. Now, other chiefs of staff from other ministerial departments will horde on over. They will make their way to the Langevin Block to be able to get, both figuratively and liberally, a free lunch.

These Conservative staffers are not being held in a budget lockup and there is no emergency session, but like every Wednesday for the last 10 years, they will enjoy a free lunch paid for by taxpayers.

Will the President of the Treasury Board end this practice? Will he comply with the rules and will the kids in the short pants have the—

[Business of Supply, January 30th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, in Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, in Corner Brook, Newfoundland and Labrador, there are two very important and productive offices that I would like to highlight. One is a Canadian Armed Forces recruitment centre, which is one of the most successful, efficient and highest-performing recruitment centres in all of Canada. Young people from western and northern Newfoundland are being recruited to the Canadian Armed Forces at a significant and substantial rate. In fact, the Canadian Armed Forces decided that they would expand that office. The other office is a Veterans Affairs service centre. That office is closing as of tomorrow.

I would like to ask the hon. member where exactly he thinks the veterans of tomorrow will come from. Will they come from a place where recruitment to the Canadian Armed Forces is on an upward trend and rising?

The current Canadian Armed Forces contingent is proudly overrepresented by the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. In fact, while Newfoundland and Labrador only represents 1.5% of the Canadian population, the actual contingent of its people within the Canadian Armed Forces represents 8% to 10%.

Where exactly are the future veterans coming from? They are coming from the places where—

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, January 27th, 2014]

With regard to the government's spending for fiscal years 2008-2009 to 2012-2013, what are the spending levels (i) by program activity, (ii) for each program activity, by standard object?

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, January 27th, 2014]

With regard to the loss or theft of “weapons and accessories” in the Department of National Defence (DND) as reported in the Public Accounts of Canada, for each year between 2006 and 2013: (a) which weapons and accessories were lost by DND due to an offense or other illegal act, broken down by (i) weapon or accessory, (ii) individual cost to the government for each item lost; and (b) which weapons and accessories were lost by the DND due to accidental loss, destruction, or damage, broken down by (i) weapon or accessory, (ii) individual cost to the government for each item lost?

[Points of Order, November 27th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, the wisdom of the Chair is clearly shining here this afternoon with the time that you offered me to reflect on my words spoken in the House. I will concur with the Chair that they were indeed unparliamentary. I apologize unreservedly in an unqualified manner.

However, on a matter of the business of administration of the House, I would ask the Chair to reflect on the following circumstance.

When the government provides key documentation from the executive that bears the name of a member of the House, it does make it difficult for the debate and discussion to occur within the House when that document bears the member's name.

[Government Advertising, November 27th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, Conservatives are using $200,000 of taxpayers' money to erase the title of “Government of Canada” from the public domain and replace it with a term that the Speaker and this House would find offensive.

Sending out 2,600 government press releases that refer to the federal government in a manner that is in violation of Treasury Board policy is also something that is offensive.

Will Conservatives commit to stop using taxpayers' money to rename the Government of Canada with such an offensive term as “the Harper Government”?

[Government Services, November 26th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, today's Auditor General's report says, “The government has not significantly expanded its online service offerings since 2005”. In fact, since the Conservatives have come to power they have taken Canada from being number one in e-government to number 11. Since 2006, it appears that all the funds that the government has spent on e-marketing has been for the government's benefit and not for that of its citizens.

How can any government expect to become a leader in the digital economy when the Conservative government is still in the stone age?

[Conservative Party of Canada, November 20th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, as the RCMP closes in on the former chief of staff to the Conservative Prime Minister and prepares to lay criminal charges, most senior Conservatives are only now trying to distance themselves from their old friend Nigel Wright.

When this scandal first broke and Nigel Wright allegedly resigned, Conservatives were lining up to praise him. The Minister of Industry said:

Nigel Wright is a great Canadian. Canada is stronger because of his service as Chief of Staff to our Prime Minister.

The Minister of Public Safety lamented:

Saddened by the departure of an honest and loyal public servant. Thank you Nigel for your service to our nation.

The Minister of Democratic Reform also mourned the loss of Mr. Wright. He said:

Saddened to hear of Nigel Wright's departure. He is an honourable man, and great Canadian.

When Canadians first learned about Nigel Wright's secret $90,000 payment to Senator Duffy, applaud as they might, they are now outraged by the corruption in the PMO—