Peter Kent

[Ethics, June 12th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, a sitting Liberal MP's law firm has been seized by the Law Society of British Columbia. This sitting Liberal member has been removed from the B.C. bar. This sitting Liberal MP's law firm was used by a notorious Chinese drug boss to launder money in a multi-million dollar real estate deal.

When did the Prime Minister become aware of this latest Liberal scandal, and what is he going to do about it?

[Finance, June 11th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, bare trust deals are blamed for creating a veil of secrecy for international criminals trying to hide and launder proceeds of crime.

A B.C. inquiry is expected to focus on a loophole that exempts Canadian lawyers from reporting suspicious transactions to Canada's anti-money laundering watchdog. Now we learn that the Liberal member's firm was seized by the B.C. Law Society in April, and he has been removed from the B.C. bar.

Are we really expected to believe that the member for Steveston—Richmond East has not lobbied cabinet and that the Prime Minister is not aware of this developing scandal?

[Finance, June 11th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, we have learned that an alleged Chinese cartel drug boss used a Liberal MP's law firm to launder money through a B.C. condo purchase. The bare trust deal in 2011 allowed a key member of the “big circle boys” to conceal his investment of almost $9 million in a B.C. property. That property flipped four years later for almost $15 million.

Has the MP for Steveston—Richmond East ever lobbied members of cabinet on bare trust deals, mortgage rules, money laundering laws or FINTRAC reporting?

[Democratic Institutions, June 10th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals have dithered on developing meaningful measures to prevent foreign and domestic interference in Canada's democratic electoral process. They confected deeply deficient legislation to stack the deck in their favour. Now the minister fears that it will not be enough. She is afraid of voices she cannot control, so she is threatening to shut down Twitter during the election. Do the Liberals realize they are walking in the basic footsteps of the Chinese, Iranian and North Korean dictatorships?

[Democratic Institutions, June 10th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, we know the Liberal leader admires China's basic dictatorship. We know the Liberals are forcing Elections Canada to hire social media influencers to influence the election. We know the Liberals chose a partisan union to decide which newspapers will receive election-year subsidies and which will not. We know the Liberals have threatened to shut down Twitter if it does not promise to remove what they consider to be inauthentic content. Do the Liberals really want to follow China, Iran and North Korea regarding Twitter?

[Democratic Institutions, June 6th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, Elections Canada is keeping secret the names of its social media influencers: musicians, celebrities, athletes and YouTube producers. These folk become influencers because they have strong opinions. How can Elections Canada ensure that these influencers have never expressed political opinions?

The Chief Electoral Officer concedes that this unprecedented campaign is politically sensitive. Should Elections Canada not simply focus on administering a fair election?

[Democratic Institutions, June 6th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, we learned today that Elections Canada will spend $650,000 to hire social media influencers. Canadians are growing weary of hearing the linked words of “influence” and “elections”.

No one can claim to be free of opinions on the issues contained within each party's electoral platform, so how can Elections Canada ensure that these social media influencers have never had political opinions and do not have political opinions today?

[Business of Supply, June 3rd, 2019]

Madam Speaker, I would respond in much the same way I did when the heritage minister wagged his finger at me and said that Conservatives were accusing the government of attempting to buy journalists. I asked him if he would go up to the gallery where the journalists sit above us, some of them forced members of Unifor, and ask them whether they would give thumbs up or thumbs down to this outrageous government policy.

[Business of Supply, June 3rd, 2019]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question.

The reality that we face today is that the journalism of the last century, print newspapers, is collapsing. The transition to digital platforms has caught up and surpassed the old media. The newspapers that are asking and have celebrated the announcement of the $600-million election-year attempted bailout are newspapers that are fossilizing. They are failing. They have not been able to establish the digital platforms that will eventually determine which media organizations and newsrooms survive and which fail.

I mentioned that this issue needs bold political leadership and policy adjustments. The government should be looking at the taxation of Canadian advertisers on American digital platforms under chapter 19. Just as print publications no longer allow advertising on outside platforms to be deducted, exactly the same should apply to digital advertising.

[Business of Supply, June 3rd, 2019]

Madam Speaker, I do recall with a certain amount of fondness the days when we were both practising the craft of journalism in different newsrooms, and I do recognize and accept his point that I made occasional errors both as a journalist and in supporting a fledgling politician, who seems to have gone more than a little off the rails.

I understand and respect the fact that my hon. colleague is trying to deflect this debate from the motion at hand, but I would suggest that he look more closely and ask his Prime Minister and finance minister why, as I said, this motley panel is being asked to be sworn to confidentiality in their considerations and why the panel will not be allowed to comment on those applicants whose applications will ultimately be denied by the Liberal government.