Marlene Jennings

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, June 7th, 2010]

With respect to the Special Report to Parliament published by the Information Commissioner of Canada in April 2010: (a) what specific recommendations will the government implement for each department or agency listed in the report; (b) for each recommendation, when does the government expect to be in full compliance; and (c) generally, what other initiatives does the government intend to pursue to reduce the number of responses to access to information requests that exceed the deadlines required by the Access to Information Act?

[Questions on the Order Paper, June 7th, 2010]

With respect to the press release published on the Department of Justice Web site on January 29, 2010, initially entitled “New Senators to Help End Opposition Obstruction of Law-And-Order Bills”: (a) was this press release initially drafted by public servants or political staffers; (b) what modifications were made to this press release, documented by date, time and modification, after its initial publication; (c) did any departmental employee or political staffer access the Web page containing the press release, for the purposes of modification, intentionally or unintentionally, on February 1, 2010, whether or not any modification was in fact made; and (d) at what date and time was the Web page containing the press release last accessed for the purposes of modifications, intentionally or unintentionally, whether or not any modification was in fact made, by either a departmental employee or a political staffer?

[Questions on the Order Paper, June 7th, 2010]

With respect to allegations of political interference in responding to requests under the Access to Information Act: (a) how many allegations have been brought to the attention of the Privy Council Office or the Prime Minister’s Office since January 23, 2006; (b) in which departments or agencies were these allegations made; (c) on what dates did each alleged incident occur; and (d) what actions were taken to remedy each situation?

[Len Macdonald, June 7th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, today I would like to pay tribute and to honour the life of Mr. Len Macdonald, a constituent from my riding of Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine and a strong advocate for the English-speaking minority communities of Quebec for many years.

Len Macdonald passed away on April 28, 2010, following a heroic battle with cancer. Throughout his life, Len was active in supporting many English-speaking organizations, such as Alliance Quebec.

On behalf of Quebeckers and especially the English-speaking minority community of Quebec, I would like to express my deep sadness for the loss of such an influential and passionate person.

I would also like to extend my most heartfelt condolences to his wife, Kathleen Tansey, and to all his family and friends. Len's passion and dedication to protect fundamental rights will surely be missed by many.

[Ethics, June 3rd, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, we know the Department of Justice was studying legal avenues to get the $2.1 million back when it first learned of the payments from Schreiber, but someone shut down the department. The government has had only two ministers of justice: the former PC minister from Manitoba and the former PC minister who was a member of Mulroney's caucus for nine years. Which one of those two shut down the Department of Justice to prevent Canadians from getting back their money?

[Ethics, June 3rd, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, Brian Mulroney was repeatedly asked under oath, “Did you maintain contact with Schreiber after you ceased being prime minister?” Each time he failed to disclose the cash payments he received from Schreiber.

The attorney general of the day told a House of Commons committee that if the government had known about these payments, it would have had a tremendous impact on the civil litigation and the resulting $2.1 million settlement.

Why are Conservatives still defending Brian Mulroney and not getting Canadians back their money?

[Questions on the Order Paper, June 3rd, 2010]

With respect to the representation of the provinces in the House of Commons: (a) what studies or consultations have been conducted by the government for the purposes of drafting Bill C-12, An Act to amend the Constitution Act, 1867 (Democratic representation), or any previous version of this bill; and (b) what studies or consultations have been conducted by the government for the purposes of considering any legislative proposal that would guarantee Quebec no fewer than 25 percent of the total number of seats in the House of Commons, (i) in advance of the Charlottetown Accord, (ii) at any other time?

[Ethics, June 2nd, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, maybe the justice minister is not the best person to decide if the government will try to get Canadians their money back. He may be conflicted. He served for over nine years in Mr. Mulroney's caucus and Mr. Mulroney appointed him parliamentary secretary twice.

It is reported that the Justice Department's efforts to explore recovering the settlement paid to Mr. Mulroney were shut down. Who ordered the Justice Department to stop trying to find a way to get Canadians their money back, and why did they do that? Why did they shut down the Justice Department?

[Ethics, June 2nd, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, in 1997, taxpayers gave Brian Mulroney a $2.1 million settlement after he swore under oath that he had no business dealings with Schreiber. Canadians deserve that money back with interest. Compounded over 13 years, it would amount to over $4 million today. That is enough to fund the Toronto gay pride parade for the next 10 years.

Why will the Conservative government not recover these funds that Mr. Mulroney had no right to in the first place? Why will--

[Ethics, June 1st, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians paid Mr. Mulroney $2.1 million based on testimony that has been called absurd.

Any other citizen would be held accountable. After all, that is taxpayers' money. The same is true for Mr. Mulroney's legal costs, which were paid for by Canadians.

Based on Justice Oliphant's conclusions, will the government ask Mr. Mulroney to also pay back the $1.6 million, plus interest, that Canadians had to pay in legal fees?