House of Commons photoLost his last election, in 2011, with 35% of the vote.
Afghanistan April 26th, 2010
Mr. Speaker, according to U.S. military officials, major new combat operations are planned for Kandahar in the coming weeks. The New York Times even talked about the decisive battle for Kandahar, yet our government will not tell us anything.
I have two questions. Are the Canadian Forces taking part in these operations? Why is the government keeping Canadians in the dark?
Firearms Registry April 21st, 2010
Mr. Speaker, I will ask the question again in the other official language. I did not hear the Prime Minister or his government apologize to the police chiefs of Canada. I am still waiting to hear a simple, humble apology.
Will he apologize, yes or no?
Firearms Registry April 21st, 2010
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has not given an answer to my question. I asked him whether he would stand in this place on behalf of the government and condemn remarks which every member of Parliament must regard as disgraceful. Will he condemn them and apologize, yes or no?
Firearms Registry April 21st, 2010
Mr. Speaker, yesterday, one of the Prime Minister's members of Parliament insulted police chiefs across Canada. He called them a cult and he accused them of corruption all because they support a gun registry that we believe is a vital tool to keep our communities safe and our police officers safe.
Will the Prime Minister now rise in this place and apologize to police chiefs on behalf of the government and will he condemn those disgraceful remarks?
Ethics April 20th, 2010
Mr. Speaker, the affair remains covered in a smokescreen of secrecy.
The Prime Minister did not ask the minister any questions for seven months and did not explain why. He acted on second-hand information from some gumshoe and will not say why. He forced his own minister's resignation and will not say why. Each time he is asked a question in the House he will not say why.
When with the Prime Minister stand in this House and tell Canadians the truth?
Ethics April 20th, 2010
Mr. Speaker, that explanation is not credible. He acted 10 days ago, when he could have done something seven months ago.
It just is not credible. The Prime Minister had seven months to investigate, seven months to take responsibility for his cabinet, seven months to ask the minister about her relations with the business affairs of her husband but he did nothing.
Why the blind faith? Did the Prime Minister prorogue his own judgment?
Ethics April 20th, 2010
Mr. Speaker, I would remind the House that Mr. Jaffer was once the chair of the Conservative caucus. His wife was a minister. He was arrested by the police seven months ago, but the Prime Minister did not ask his minister for any explanations. We saw one warning sign after another for seven months, but he did nothing.
Can the Prime Minister explain his complete lapse in judgment for seven long months?
Ethics April 19th, 2010
Mr. Speaker, the issue is whether the government conforms to its own legislation. That is the issue.
The Prime Minister has said that the information he received from some shady detective is believable, yet he has rejected testimony from Mr. Colvin, who is an eminently credible witness.
How can Canadians trust the Prime Minister's judgment when he allows himself to be guided by partisanship rather than respect for the facts?
Ethics April 19th, 2010
Mr. Speaker, the allegations did not surface 10 days ago. They were perfectly available seven months ago. That is the issue.
When the Prime Minister gets information he likes, he calls it credible. When he gets information he does not like, he attacks the witness. When he gets information from a private detective, he listens. When he gets credible information from Richard Colvin, a reputable diplomat, he attacks the witness.
How can we trust the Prime Minister's judgment when he puts his political interests ahead of the public interest in every--
Ethics April 19th, 2010
Mr. Speaker, Mr. Jaffer was arrested in September 2009, more than seven months ago. The Prime Minister did not call in his minister and ask her about her involvement in Mr. Jaffer's tangled affairs, nor of her possible involvement in some of the criminal charges. He defended her in public for seven months after she made mistake after mistake after mistake.
How can the government possibly justify the Prime Minister's error of judgment in this matter?