Nycole Turmel

[Democratic Reform, February 10th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, on the weekend, the Chief Electoral Officer said:

My reading of the act is that I can no longer speak about democracy in this country.

That is essentially what the bill says. The Chief Electoral Officer will be forbidden from discussing topics that have not been pre-approved by the Conservatives.

How will muzzling the Chief Electoral Officer promote voter turnout?

[Democratic Reform, February 6th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, in addition to gagging Parliament, the Conservatives are trying to gag the Chief Electoral Officer by limiting the number of matters on which he can and cannot express an opinion.

The Conservatives are now bringing into Parliament the battle against Elections Canada that they have fought so often before the courts.

Why do the Conservatives want to gag the Chief Electoral Officer?

[Democratic Reform, February 6th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, once again, the Conservatives are trying to stifle the opposition by ending debate on their reform of the Canada Elections Act. They are using the same strategy they use with a partisan, poorly written omnibus budget bill.

The Canada Elections Act, however, should not be dealt with in a partisan way. This is the 46th gag order since May 2011.

Are the Conservatives simply trying to avoid having to deal with the matter of their fraudulent phone calls?

[Democratic Reform, February 5th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, the power to compel witnesses to appear is a right that even parliamentary committees have. However, the Conservatives have refused to include this right in their reform of the Elections Act. That is a strange coincidence since we know that the Conservatives have refused to co-operate with Elections Canada on the investigation into the fraudulent calls.

Why have they refused to include the power to compel witnesses to appear in the reform of the Elections Act?

[Democratic Reform, February 5th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, this bill also states that fundraising from individuals who have donated to a political party in the past will no longer be calculated as an election expense.

Could the minister explain why he inserted this measure that clearly puts the Conservative Party at an advantage?

[Democratic Reform, February 5th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the Minister of State for Democratic Reform told the House that one of the reasons why people do not vote is because they do not have information.

If that is the case, why does his new bill prevent Elections Canada from advertising and giving voters information?

[Democratic Reform, February 4th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, the updated version of the Canada Elections Act prohibits Elections Canada from advertising in order to increase voter turnout, for example.

How can the minister justify the fact that his government is prohibiting this agency from publicizing the right to vote, and meanwhile, this same Conservative government thinks it is okay to advertise a job training program that does not even exist?

[Democratic Reform, February 4th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of State for Democratic Reform plans on preventing people from voting if they do not have government ID or a fixed address. Could the minister tell us whether that requirement could violate the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms?

[Elections Canada, February 3rd, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, can the Minister of State for Democratic Reform tell us why he did not consult the Chief Electoral Officer when he was coming up with his plan to reorganize Elections Canada?

[Ethics, December 10th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to go back to what happened this morning at the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics.

Could government ministers tell us what instructions were given to the Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister about that meeting?

Did my colleague opposite receive an order to oppose the motion? If no one gave him that order, why did he oppose the motion?