Irwin Cotler

[Sponsorship Program, June 17th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, ultimately, in terms of principles, we have supported the Gomery inquiry in the past and will continue to do so in the future.

[Sponsorship Program, June 17th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, there was no secret agreement. As the leader of the Bloc Québécois said himself, it was merely a legal statement of the facts.

[Sponsorship Program, June 15th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I think there is some confusion between substance and procedure.

In terms of substance, we have supported and will continue to support Justice Gomery against any charges of bias. As for procedure, we also support Justice Gomery regarding his hearing before the court.

[Sponsorship Program, June 15th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, according to the June 9 letter, the factum presented on behalf of the Attorney General of Canada, in response to Mr. Chrétien's request for a judicial review, shows clearly that the government vigorously opposed Mr. Chrétien's request. The Attorney General argues primarily that Mr. Chrétien's allegations of bias are unfounded and that Mr. Chrétien's right to procedural fairness has always been respected.

[Sponsorship Program, June 15th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I repeat that we supported Judge Gomery in the past when allegations of bias were levelled against him and we will continue to support him in the future. We opposed attempts to delay the commission and, in the future, we will do so again.

[Sponsorship Program, June 15th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, at this point the member opposite is correct. The public interest demands full cooperation with Mr. Justice Gomery's commission which, I would remind him again, we established. We not only cooperate with him but have fully supported and will continue to fully support him against any allegation of partiality. We will continue to support him against any attempt to retard or delay the commission. Our position is that we support Mr. Justice Gomery fully.

[Sponsorship Program, June 15th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, I think I need to remind the member opposite of what is written in this exchange of letters:

It is clear from the memorandum of fact and law filed on behalf of the Attorney General in response to Mr. Chrétien's judicial review application that the government was vigorously opposing Mr. Chrétien's application. The Attorney General's principal position in the memorandum was that Mr. Chrétien's allegation of bias was without merit and that Mr. Chrétien's right to procedural fairness had at all times been respected.

That remains our position.

[Sponsorship Program, June 14th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, once again, conspiracy is in the mouth of the speaker. There is no sense here of any conspiracy. We can stretch it all we want. There is no pact. There is no secret accord. There is only support for the Gomery commission. If we have to, we will continue to repeat it. That is the situation.

[Sponsorship Program, June 14th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, ultimately, the problem has to do with the question. There was no secret agreement and there was no secret deal, period.

[Sponsorship Program, June 14th, 2005]

Mr. Speaker, we have not hidden anything. Everything is public. There has been an exchange of letters between lawyers. There is nothing to hide.