James Moore

[Ethics, March 3rd, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals have this incredible way of taking a little bit of this and a little bit of that and, as I have said, trying to mash it together and turn it into some vast conspiracy.

The facts are clear on this and the facts were spoken clearly and plainly by Chuck Cadman on CTV National News, on Global and on CKNW in Vancouver. He said that there was no offer made in this regard.

The only thing that was discussed was our desire to have Chuck Cadman present himself as a Conservative candidate in a subsequent election campaign. That was all that was discussed. That was all that was offered. It was entirely appropriate. We wanted Chuck Cadman to present himself as a Conservative because Chuck was a dear friend of ours who believed in our agenda.

[Ethics, March 3rd, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, there was no offer concerning life insurance, as my hon. colleague states in his question and as others have stated. Each of the three people at that meeting all clearly said that no such offer was made. It is clear, it is out in the open and everyone knows it.

The Liberals can keep on trying to push this but they cannot ignore the facts. The simple facts are that no offer for insurance was put forward. The three people who were at the meeting have said so and it is clear as day even if the Liberals do not want to recognize it.

[Ethics, March 3rd, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, it was our desire to see Chuck Cadman present himself as a Conservative in the following election campaign. Chuck Cadman was elected as a Conservative and was then elected as an independent. He supported this Prime Minister when he ran for the leadership of the Conservative Party and we wanted to see him serve as a Conservative member of caucus and to continue that going forward.

If the Liberals are really so outraged, why did they sit on this story for a year? They sat on it for a year because they wanted to wheel it out now because they have no confidence in their leader and they want to distract Canadians from the truth, which is that the Liberal Party has no policies that Canadians like.

[Ethics, March 3rd, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague just mentioned the interview with Global that I cited in the House of Commons. I will read the entire thing right now.

Tara Nelson, from Global, interviewed Chuck Cadman and he said, “I was voting because two-thirds of my constituents were telling me they didn't want an election”. She then asked, “You had a meeting with the Prime Minister prior to the vote? Did he offer you a deal?” He said, “No, absolutely nothing. There was never any deal offered”. She said, “And the same with [the Prime Minister]?” He said, “Yeah, the same with [the Prime Minister]”.

[Ethics, March 3rd, 2008]

No, Mr. Speaker. Perhaps my colleague has not yet heard the news. Perhaps he should listen to what Mrs. Cadman said today. Once again, all I can say is that Mr. Cadman himself said that no inappropriate offers were made. Those are Mr. Cadman's own words. I can understand that the Bloc Québécois might not want to take my word for it, but they should take Chuck Cadman's word for it because during three separate interviews, two on television and one with a Vancouver radio station, he said that no such offer was made.

[Ethics, March 3rd, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, no such offer was made. The only offer presented to Mr. Cadman was the one the Prime Minister talked about. We wanted Mr. Cadman to run as the Conservative Party candidate if the budget vote triggered an election in 2005-06. The only offer that was made was to have Mr. Cadman run as a Conservative. That is all.

[Ethics, March 3rd, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals can invent their policy, but they cannot invent the facts. The facts are clear. There were three people at that meeting. Each of those three people has said that the only thing that was discussed was our desire to bring Chuck Cadman back into our caucus and have him run as a Conservative candidate in the next election.

Those are the facts. That is all that was discussed. All the Liberals' accusations are completely false.

[Ethics, March 3rd, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, the only financial inducement to change a vote was offered to the member for Newmarket—Aurora and we know what she did with that vote.

With regard to our government and Mr. Cadman, the only conversation that took place was in regard to our desire to have Chuck Cadman rejoin the Conservative Party and run for us in the subsequent election campaign. As Chuck Cadman himself said in television interviews, there was in fact no deal offered.

[Ethics, February 29th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, the issue on this is very clear. Chuck Cadman himself said there was no deal.

We remember well when the member for Halton was a member of the Conservative caucus and our government has never been more on track, more focused and more effective than when we kicked him out and threw him back into the Liberal Party where he belongs. He can stay over there and the Liberals can have him all he wants.

When we threw him out of the Conservative Party, he said in national interviews,“Why are they throwing me out? I don't get it”. He wanted to stay in the Conservative caucus. With questions like that, he knows clearly why we want nothing to do with that member.

[Ethics, February 29th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, how dare he? The member for Halton never served with Chuck Cadman. He did not know Chuck Cadman.

Chuck Cadman supported the Prime Minister when he was leader of the opposition and supported him in his leadership races. The Prime Minister wanted him to rejoin the Conservative Party.

Chuck Cadman was a dear friend of mine from a neighbouring riding and we always supported Chuck Cadman. He was a fantastic human being, a great member of Parliament and a dear friend.

The member has no proof. He has no evidence that the Prime Minister ever said that about Chuck Cadman. That is outrageous. We honour Chuck Cadman's memory. He was a dear friend. The member for Halton should withdraw that ridiculous question and those statements.