Ralph Goodale

[Business of the House, May 1st, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I would ask the government House leader to outline the business that he intends to call for the balance of this week and next week. In the information that he has provided so far in an informal way, the agenda seems to end at the end of the day next Tuesday, so I would be interested to know what he has in mind for the whole week following this one.

I also would ask him specifically if he is in a position today to agree to concurrence by unanimous consent in the Senate amendments that have been made to Bill C-293. That bill is done in the Senate. It has been reported back to the House with some technical amendments, amendments that were in fact proposed by the Conservative Party. All other parties are prepared to accept those amendments and agree to that bill proceeding to conclusion now by unanimous consent, so I would ask the government House leader if he is prepared to agree to his own amendments.

Second, there are still three opposition days that need to be designated in this sitting before the House adjourns in June. I wonder if the government House leader could tell us if he intends to designate opposition days in the period between now and May 16 and, if so, which days those would be.

Finally, in the business of supply, it is the prerogative of the official opposition to select two government departments to bring before the House and the committee of the whole for examination of their estimates in that forum. It is then the government's responsibility to designate the two dates upon which those estimates will be heard in the committee of the whole.

The official opposition has in fact now designated the Minister of Finance and the Minister of Foreign Affairs to appear before the committee of the whole. I wonder if the government House leader could designate on which two dates those two ministers will appear to defend their estimates in the committee of the whole.

[Ethics, May 1st, 2008]

The Prime Minister did not know that?

[Point of Order, April 29th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I think it is important to point out to the House that the government has, both today and yesterday, followed a very extraordinary practice of attacking Elections Canada, the Chief Electoral Officer and the Elections Commissioner on the floor of the House of Commons.

Mr. Speaker, that is a practice that I suggest to you is dangerous in this House because it brings disrespect upon the institutions of Parliament and we should be very careful about going down that road.

I have one point of specific clarification. A search warrant cannot be exercised without the authority having been given by a Superior Court judge.

[Points of Order, April 28th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, obviously, we will be happy to see that document tabled in the House. But I think it bears repeating at this point that the advertising practices of the Conservative Party in the last election have been reviewed by the Chief Electoral Officer, both Mr. Kingsley and Mr. Mayrand, and the Chief Electoral Officer, past and present, has determined that the flaw rests with the Conservative Party, the Conservative Party alone, and no other party in this House.

[Elections Canada, April 28th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, the parliamentary secretary will not be able to hide the truth. The election overspending scandal that is engulfing the Conservative government involved, according to Elections Canada, improper advertising by 67 Conservative candidates across the country. Money flowed in and out, advertising flowed back and forth, all apparently to circumvent the law.

To clarify the scheme, if the parliamentary secretary is so confident, will the government simply table here and now copies of all the actual ads and all the details of where and when they ran and who paid for them in these 67 ridings?

[Elections Canada, April 18th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has a personal vendetta against Elections Canada. Back in 2001, he called Elections Canada officials “jackasses”, his words, not mine. Time and again Elections Canada has blown the whistle on his right-wing schemes to violate the rules that guarantee fair and honest elections in Canada. So when he came into office, he changed the people at Elections Canada. But guess what? Those new officials believe in the law. They are the ones who raided the Prime Minister's party office.

Why is the government trying to reduce Canadian election laws to tin pot standards?

[Elections Canada, April 18th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservative spending scandal is about one thing: national party spending limits. The Conservative Party of Canada broke the law. That is what Elections Canada is investigating with police raids and search warrants. The law puts a limit on how much any party can spend in total at the national level. The Conservatives broke that law and had to find somewhere to hide the illegal spending.

Will the minister now consent to any court proceeding today or next week on unsealing the affidavit supporting the search warrant?

[Business of the House, April 17th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, on that last point, just to be clear, is it the government's intention to designate opposition days in the first week that we are back after the April break?

[Business of the House, April 17th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the government House leader would be good enough to explain not only what he has in mind for the rest of today and tomorrow, but for the week that the House will resume after the April break.

Since the government House leader designated this particular week as a week of fighting crime, I wonder if he would explain how that has been going, especially at Conservative Party headquarters. I wonder if he would take the opportunity to explain the difference between financial transactions and political parties that are under the national spending limit and those transactions that exceed the limit and break the law.

[Elections Canada, April 17th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, it is just not credible for Conservatives to say that they are victims in the police raid on their party headquarters. They appointed the Chief Electoral Officer. They appointed the Elections commissioner. They appointed the head of the RCMP. It is their own hand-picked people who are pursuing this investigation.

However, here is a different question. Was the Prime Minister personally present at his party's headquarters at any point on the morning this raid began? Was he there and did he have access to any material the police were about to seize?