Paul Calandra

[Ethics, June 13th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, a former senior Liberal cabinet minister and member of Parliament, and mayor of London, Ontario, Joe Fontana, has been found guilty of several serious offences in relation to his time in office. Former Liberal cabinet minister Fontana has been found guilty of breach of trust by a public official, fraud under $5,000, and forging documents. All of these charges stem from a $1,700 expense he filed with a doctored wedding contract for his son's wedding while serving as a federal Liberal MP and cabinet minister. Fontana admitted at the trial that he altered a Marconi Club contract that he had helped negotiate for his son's wedding reception. He then submitted it as an expense to cover a political reception in February 2005 for the member for Wascana, who was supposed to visit London.

These types of actions by an elected official are completely disgusting and disturbing and have no place at any level of government. We hope the former Liberal cabinet minister will apologize to the taxpayers of London and those across Canada whose tax dollars he gravely misused.

[Human Rights, June 11th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, we are very proud of the fact that the summer season is upon us. Across Canada, people will be celebrating. It is a great time for tourists to come to Canada. I know the Pride festival in Toronto brings a lot of people to the city of Toronto.

Toronto, of course, is an incredible destination for people to come and visit. We are very proud of the city of Toronto. As somebody from just north of Toronto, I am excited to invite people to my community, to Markham, to Stouffville, and to the York region. We have a lot to offer people from across Canada and from around the world.

I hope to see the hon. member in all of the amazing tourist destinations, and not only across Toronto but across the country.

[Democratic Reform, June 11th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, of course nothing could be further from the truth. As members know, Elections Canada investigated the false allegations by both opposition parties that they made over the last couple of years and found, of course, as we have been saying all along, that we ran a clean and ethical campaign.

The fact of the matter is that we were returned to government with a majority because we cut taxes for people, we invested in the economy, and we have had over a million net new jobs created in this country. It is because we provide a good government that Canadians rewarded us with another mandate, and that is why they will do it again after 2015.

[Democratic Reform, June 5th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, again, Elections Canada found no evidence of this.

The only scheme that we have before us right now is the scheme perpetrated by, I think, about 23 members of the NDP caucus to defraud Canadian taxpayers of millions of dollars in using parliamentary resources, taxpayer resources, to fund partisan political offices across this country.

It is up to the NDP, now, to apologize to Canadians, return all of these millions of dollars that it took from Canadians, and think about honesty and accountability for once.

[Democratic Reform, June 5th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, of course, nothing could be further from the truth.

What Elections Canada found was that, after listening to two years' worth of false allegations from the NDP, this government and this party actually ran a clean and ethical campaign. We actually won the last campaign because we had better policies, we provided good government, and we cut taxes for all Canadians, who have more money in their pocket.

At the same time, what we see is that the NDP has used money illegally to fund partisan political offices across this country. As opposed to living up to it and repaying taxpayers, it continues to try to run and hide to avoid accountability—

[Canada-Honduras Economic Growth and Prosperity Act, June 3rd, 2014]

No, I didn't grow up in your riding.

[Canada-Honduras Economic Growth and Prosperity Act, June 3rd, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, in the member's comments he said that one of the reasons we should not be trading with Honduras is because of corruption. I wonder if he feels the same way about other countries. We know that today the NDP was singled out as having potentially used about $3 million worth of taxpayers' money for partisan political purposes. That is, of course, a level of corruption that we have not seen in a long time.

Could he contrast the NDP's misuse of millions of dollars of taxpayers' funds for illegal partisan purposes with the type of corruption that he was talking about in Honduras? In the light of the fact that the NDP has had such corrupt practices with respect to taxpayers' dollars, does he feel that people should stop trading with us because of the poor example that the NDP has shown with taxpayer dollars?

[Corporate Social Responsibility of Extractive Corporations Outside Canada Act, June 3rd, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the member for bringing forward the bill. I have looked at the bill and I wonder if the member could table for me any assessments she has done with respect to the financial and legal implications of it.

I am also somewhat concerned by the massive encroachment into the rights of the provinces that the bill, if passed, would undertake. Could she also comment on the consultations she had with provincial counterparts with respect to the encroachment on their rights and would she also table those consultations?

Again, could she table the financial recommendations, the financial impacts, the legal impacts, and her consultations with the provinces? Quite honestly, if she has not done those types of consultations, would she consider withdrawing the bill until she has done that very important work? It would help us to be in a better position to decide whether we could support the bill.

[Canada-Honduras Economic Growth and Prosperity Act, June 3rd, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, again I am a bit confused by the NDP position. The member for Welland went even further. Not only did he mention that the best way to impact change in Honduras would be to try to trade with massive tariffs and that we should punish the people of Honduras, but he also said that we should cancel exchanges of workers between our two countries and that somehow would promote better relations with the people of Honduras.

Is it really the NDP position that by helping to increase the wealth of a society, business can play absolutely no role in improving relationships between two countries, that business and trade cannot have a role in helping the people of Honduras develop a better society? How is it that New Democrats think that punishing the people of Honduras, keeping their wealth down, impoverishing them, would somehow endear them to Canada and then would open a door for us to help them make changes in how they govern themselves in civil society? How do they square that circle? I just do not get it.

[Canada-Honduras Economic Growth and Prosperity Act, June 3rd, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I have been listening, but I get a lot of confusion in what the member is saying. On the one hand, the member is saying that trade is good with Honduras and is something we should pursue, but on the other hand, he is saying that liberalizing trade with Honduras is bad.

Is it the position of the NDP that we should trade with Honduras, but only if we put huge tariffs on them, and that this somehow would be a way Canada could actually impact change in that country?

Does the hon. member not believe that by having more opportunity for Canadians to actually trade with Hondurans, to go back and forth and to provide more opportunity for them to come here and see how this government and civil society operates, would be a positive that would actually help encourage Honduras' move towards democracy?

Is it the member's contention that the best way to impact change in Honduras is to trade but to levy huge tariffs on that trade, and somehow that would improve the economic situation between Canada and Honduras? Could the member explain that?