Michel Guimond

[Points of Order, April 16th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on the same point of order. I believe the hon. member is getting things mixed up.

My colleague from La Pointe-de-l'Île does not want to ridicule workers in the agri-food industry, or the people at Vachon, or the people from Beauce. She simply wanted to ridicule the fact that the Minister of Foreign Affairs went to Afghanistan and handed out Vachon Jos Louis snack cakes. That was what my colleague was referring to. Instead of resolving real problems, he was handing out snack cakes. I believe the hon. member is getting things mixed up and that he did not understand.

[Elections Canada, April 16th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to now list the Conservatives' election tricks. They are filibustering the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, refusing to cooperate with Elections Canada, attacking its credibility, and attempting to evade the issue. This reminds us of the National Citizen Coalition attacks against the limit on election expenses.

If the Prime Minister wishes to show good faith and transparency, why does he not immediately produce the search warrant in this House?

[Elections Canada, April 16th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, to downplay their election tricks, the Conservatives have the nerve to say that all parties cheated as they did. There is nothing further from the truth. The Conservatives are the only party whose returns are being challenged by Elections Canada. As proof, only the Conservative Party offices were searched by the RCMP.

If the Conservatives had handed over all the documents requested by Elections Canada, as they claimed, then why did the RCMP raid its offices?

[Elections Canada, April 15th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons has just spoken about all of the parties. I would remind the leader of the government that only the Conservatives' election reports are being challenged, not those of the other parties.

If this government, champion of transparency, has nothing to hide, let it table the search warrant in this House. That is what we want.

[Elections Canada, April 15th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, it is reasonable for us to suspect that the scheme whereby the Conservative government illegally spent $1.2 million in 2006 is behind the RCMP searches. The Prime Minister is telling us that it is normal for the RCMP to conduct a search. Next the Prime Minister will be telling us that the RCMP is paying a courtesy call to the Conservative Party.

We know that it takes a warrant to be able to conduct a search. Will the government commit to immediately making the RCMP warrant public?

[Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, April 14th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, last Thursday, to undermine opposition efforts to get things moving in the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, the member for Elgin—Middlesex—London finally resigned as chair of the committee.

In his letter of resignation, he goes on at length about a supposed “tyranny of the majority”, which he seems to be confusing with the democratic expression of the will of the majority of elected members of this House.

However, when the Chief Government Whip tells us to buckle under or else the Prime Minister will go to see the Governor General, that is tyranny. When the chair of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights vacates his chair to avoid holding a vote on a motion on the Cadman affair that is embarrassing to the government, that is tyranny. When the chair of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs resigns to avoid calling meetings and prevent us from shedding light on the Conservatives' irregular election spending, that is tyranny. When the Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons makes barely veiled threats that “there will be consequences”, that is tyranny.

[Budget Implementation Act, 2008, April 10th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, in order to make things easier for the House, I ask that you seek the unanimous consent of this House to fully apply the result of the previous vote to the current vote.

[Criminal Code, April 9th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, once again, I seek the unanimous consent of this House to apply the results of the vote just taken to this vote. If any members wish to vote differently, let them say so immediately.

[Criminal Code, April 9th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I seek the unanimous consent of the House to apply the results of the vote just taken. If any members wish to vote differently, let them say so immediately.

[Points of Order, April 9th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I listened to what my colleague from Scarborough—Rouge River had to say. Considering that we just learned that he was raising this issue, we are reserving our comments for later.

I simple want to mention that, despite the fine constitutional references our colleague made in his point of order, as the watchdog of procedure, Mr. Speaker, you know that the Subcommittee on Private Members' Business rules on the constitutionality of a bill and decides whether private members' bills are votable or not.

Through you, Mr. Speaker, I wish to remind my colleague—and I am sure he is a democrat—that obviously his argument did not hold up because the Subcommittee on Private Members' Business has ruled on the votability of this bill.

With all due respect and, as I was saying earlier, subject to comments we may make later, you do not have the authority, Mr. Speaker, to deal with this point of order since the rules are clear and the Subcommittee on Private Members' Business has ruled on the constitutionality of this bill.