Michel Guimond

[National Security, May 8th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, it appears from this morning's newspapers that the former spouse of the Minister of Foreign Affairs has a shady past. She was so closely linked with organized crime that her life was allegedly threatened at one time.

Knowing that the underworld does not hesitate to put pressure on people and knowing his former spouse's shady past, should the Minister of Foreign Affairs not have disclosed this situation during his security screening as Minister of Foreign Affairs?

[Nuclear Liability and Compensation Act, May 6th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, my colleagues from the Bloc Québécois will vote against this motion.

[Elections Canada, May 6th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind the member that the candidate for Pontiac was reimbursed. Elections Canada agreed to that method, but it did not agree to the Conservatives' scheme. It is easy to see that the ministers from Quebec are afraid of defending their honour.

My question is for the Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister, the member for Beauport—Limoilou. Can she tell us if the same logic applied when she paid $37,000 for advertising for the Minister of Canadian Heritage when she herself spent—

[Elections Canada, May 6th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, despite what the Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, who was the political lieutenant for Quebec during the last election, has told us, he was very aware of how advertising expenses were distributed among various Conservative candidates. The party was rerouting large invoices to candidates who had room to manoeuvre.

Does that not explain why the Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities was able to put only $6,100 into the strategy while two other Conservative candidates in the Outaouais each put in $45,000?

[Elections Canada, May 5th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, why was the Bloc reimbursed in Pontiac? Why was the Bloc not investigated in Pontiac? It is the Conservatives who are under investigation. Using the in and out scheme, the minister transferred only $6,100, while the other Conservatives in the Outaouais transferred $45,000.

Does this not confirm that this entire scheme was orchestrated at the national level, here in Ottawa, to receive funding—

[Elections Canada, May 5th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, these are more false statements to try to divert attention, but let us return to the case at hand. The Minister of Transport, who was the political lieutenant for Quebec during the most recent election, claims he does not know how advertising money was allocated. Yet the minister received an email from Mike Donison in December 2005.

Does the minister realize that by pleading ignorance, he is in all likelihood providing new evidence of the Conservatives' disregard for the truth?

[Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999, May 1st, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, the members of the Bloc Québécois will be voting in favour of this motion.

[Elections Canada, May 1st, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I asked the parliamentary secretary about the comment he made yesterday, but instead of an answer, all we got was twaddle.

The Prime Minister had this to say about a lawsuit with Elections Canada concerning the 2005 Conservative convention: “All of the laws were obeyed”. Six months later, the Conservative Party admitted that it had failed to disclose several hundreds of thousands of dollars to the Chief Electoral Officer.

Does the Prime Minister understand that Elections Canada is the people's only guarantee that the Conservatives will obey the law?

[Elections Canada, May 1st, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Treasury Board told Radio-Canada how the Conservatives would approach the next election: “We will be keeping a close eye on Elections Canada to ensure that it follows the rules—” That is crazy. The independent agency in charge of monitoring political parties will be monitored by the Conservatives. It seems we have quite the democracy.

How can the Conservatives attack the agency that ensures that elections are—

[Election Expenses, April 30th, 2008]

It is extraordinary, Mr. Speaker, to hear the Conservatives tell us that a sovereignist party received preferential treatment from Elections Canada. Come on. What a joke. According to the Prime Minister, either Ms. Dixon lied to the Elections Canada investigator, or the investigator made a false statement in the affidavit. I would like the Prime Minister to say that outside this House.

Will the Prime Minister admit that his theory is being completely rejected by Elections Canada and by his own advertising agency?