Mr. Speaker, this $1,600 amounts to about the cost of two nights for Bev Oda at the Savoy hotel, or about—
Won his last election, in 2019, with 47% of the vote.
National Defence April 22nd, 2013
Mr. Speaker, this $1,600 amounts to about the cost of two nights for Bev Oda at the Savoy hotel, or about—
National Defence April 22nd, 2013
Mr. Speaker, the 100 soldiers and their families who have had their danger pay clawed back in Afghanistan want to know why the Minister of National Defence let this happen.
Why did he let his department go after our soldiers serving in Mazar-e-Sharif, while spending hundreds of millions of dollars on a new campus for DND headquarters instead of saving money there?
How is it that the minister let this happen right under his nose?
Business of Supply April 16th, 2013
Now, now.
Ethics April 15th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, the fact is that Mr. Penashue has failed to come clean for his last campaign, and Conservatives just do not care, just as they do not care when Mr. Penashue pits region against region.
The Premier of Newfoundland and Labrador said if it were her minister, she would have given him the boot.
Will the Conservatives now admit it was wrong for Mr. Penashue to brag about withholding project funding for Newfoundland to favour his own riding, or will they continue to defend this unacceptable behaviour by their former and now disgraced minister?
Government Appointments March 28th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, the minister's former aide was hired at a lucrative salary and given two years of paid French training in his home, yet the Conservatives say that they have done nothing wrong. This was patronage, clear and simple, just like Peter Penashue's former campaign manager, Reg Bowers, receiving a golden parachute on to the Newfoundland and Labrador offshore petroleum board.
How can Labradorians trust Peter Penashue when Conservatives treat Atlantic Canadian agencies like their own private patronage pasture? How can they trust a government that has failed to keep its promises of accountability?
Workplace Safety March 26th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, in Newfoundland they expect fishermen to speak Italian.
In Labrador West, the prevalence of silicosis is unusually high among workers at iron ore mines. Retired workers and their spouses are being made sick and even dying from chronic exposure to silica dust. They are looking to the government for help. The government has been aware for years of the dangers of silica dust.
What are the Conservatives doing to ensure the health of workers in Labrador?
Ethics March 21st, 2013
Mr. Speaker, penalties for breaking election laws can carry a five-year ban on running. That is five years. Mr. Penashue knows he broke the law. The Conservatives have paid back over $40,000 in illegal donations, but instead of waiting for Elections Canada to finish its investigation, the Prime Minister has chosen him to run and is promoting his candidacy.
Should the government not let Elections Canada finish its investigation so the voters would at least know whether or not Mr. Penashue can even sit in the House of Commons?
Strengthening Military Justice in the Defence of Canada Act March 21st, 2013
Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, I do not think it is appropriate for a member of Parliament who is on a committee to put facts that are not true to another member of Parliament who was not there and ask him to comment on it.
There was an amendment proposed and defeated in committee on the section the member is talking about. The bill passed at committee on division, not supported by this hon. member. Therefore, I do not think it is appropriate to put untrue matters to a member and ask him to comment on it based on—
Strengthening Military Justice in the Defence of Canada Act March 21st, 2013
Mr. Speaker, one of the issues on the amendment that has come up from time to time is what I call a bogus issue of the live fire exception: that somehow the VCDS—not the commanding officer, not the guy in the field—will know that there is potentially a live fire operation. When it is the VCDS sitting in Ottawa, the guy who tells the chief of police—that is, the Provost Marshal—what to do and not the investigators in the field, the real worry here is other types of investigations. What about detainee issues in Afghanistan? What about the incident that occurred when our committee was in Afghanistan, when the commanding officer was charged with conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline and sent home because of an inappropriate fraternization with another officer? What about potential interference with those things?
These are the kinds of worries we have. They are worries that the relationship is not proper and professional and at arm's length. That is why we think the protocol that was signed in 1998 is the proper way to go, not the backward step that is being taken here.
Does the member have any comment to make in that regard?
Strengthening Military Justice in the Defence of Canada Act March 21st, 2013
Mr. Speaker, I am afraid the member for Scarborough—Guildwood is precisely right, that there is no qualification, and that the qualification we are hearing here is essentially a justification for a possible particular circumstance, whereas the actual rule is very general in nature.
As I just said, we are not talking about the person in charge of a particular operation; we are talking about the Vice Chief of the Defence Staff, who is part of the chain of command that the Provost Marshal reports to, and it is precisely because of that relationship that the accountability framework was put in place to ensure that, while there was a right to give instructions to maintain professional standards, et cetera—and it says, as “other police” forces would have—that the operational investigations could not be interfered with by the VCDS. I think that is a good rule.