Ralph Goodale

[Elections Canada, April 17th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, the government will not explain what Elections Canada and the RCMP were looking for at Conservative Party headquarters. The Conservatives were clearly asked for certain documents. They obviously failed to cooperate because Elections Canada then had to take the extraordinary step of getting a warrant. That warrant was authorized by a judge and executed by the RCMP. Canadians have a right to know what the search warrant did say they were looking for.

Will the government consent today to a court order to release the warrant and the affidavit that convinced the judge to issue it?

[Government Policies, April 11th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, it is obvious the government will not answer. The Conservatives deke and dodge and try to change the subject, but they are caught because they are their very own words, unmistakably, on tape.

The granddaddy of them all is the Prime Minister on tape, confirming financial considerations offered to Chuck Cadman. It is so damning because it corroborates the repeated, unwavering testimony of the Cadman family, including his widow who remains a Conservative candidate, and it is the Prime Minister live and in person.

Canadians have heard what Conservatives say behind closed doors. Why is there no accountability for it in public?

[Government Policies, April 11th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, tape recordings are a problem for the government, with the Secretary of State for Multiculturalism accusing the Sikh community of racism, on tape, with Senator Angus saying Conservatives are divided over Bill C-10 and censorship, on tape, and with the parliamentary secretary to the government House leader demeaning gay people, on tape. As for the Canada Border Services Agency destroying evidence of misused tasers, it was on tape until the agency got rid of it.

Is this the government strategy, deny members' own words and all that self-incrimination, destroy the evidence, and have an election before Canadians can find out the truth?

[Business of the House, April 10th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I have two further questions.

First, with respect to Bill C-21, as the minister will know, the amendments that happened in committee were indeed a reflection of the hopes and the aspirations of aboriginal organizations in this country, so I would hope the government would take a fresh look at that and be willing to respect the will of those aboriginal organizations, because that will is reflected in the amendments that were made.

Further, with respect to Bill C-50, I would remind the government House leader that the vote at second reading is not passage of the legislation. It is simply reference of the legislation to the appropriate standing committee. In the standing committee, the defects in the legislation can be debated and exposed, and of course Canadians for the first time will have the opportunity to speak in a parliamentary forum to tell parliamentarians what Canadians think about this legislation, which is extremely important.

I would ask the government House leader this question. The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration has indicated, I believe, a willingness to see not the bill itself but the immigration subject matter of Bill C-50, in addition to what may happen in the finance committee, also referred to the House Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration. I wonder if the minister would be willing to confirm the government's willingness to see that subject matter referred to the citizenship and immigration committee while the finance committee is dealing with Bill C-50.

[Business of the House, April 10th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the government House leader could indicate his proposed schedule for the rest of this week and next week, which will take us into the late April adjournment.

At the same time, could I ask him again what his plans are with respect to Bill C-21? It was reported back to the House from the committee dealing with aboriginal human rights on January 30. There has been more than enough time to deal with that legislation. I wonder when the minister intends to call it.

[Points of Order, April 7th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, on Friday, the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration made some remarks in the House which conveyed the wrong impression and the minister had to withdraw those remarks and correct herself.

Today a similar incident has happened where the minister implied in one of her answers that the official opposition had opposed the proposal to increase the age of protection in Canada. In fact, the official opposition supported that measure.

I think the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration would want to similarly rise today as she did on Friday to correct the record and to make sure no wrong impression is left.

[Fitness Tax Credit, April 7th, 2008]

Two dollars a week.

[Human Rights, April 4th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, there are a number of government measures before this House right now which seek to confer on Conservative ministers extreme new powers: powers to be exercised in secret behind closed doors, powers to discriminate among new immigrants, powers of censorship, and powers to override democratic rights.

How can Canadians possibly trust the government to make crucial decisions behind closed doors when they have seen what these Conservatives are like behind closed doors and it goes unpunished?

[Human Rights, April 4th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, the government may not grasp the gravity of its problem.

It says no discipline is appropriate for these most recently revealed anti-gay slurs. That changes the nature of the issue. It is no longer about a single MP or a parliamentary secretary. It is now about the Prime Minister and his standards.

Does the Prime Minister not realize that if he does not act on this matter, if he does nothing, then he owns it?

[Business of the House, April 3rd, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, the opposition whip is heckling on the subject. I will resist the temptation now to respond to him because I want to stay on the substance of the issue.

The Afghan mission is important. It is possible to have this committee up and running next week. I would ask the government House leader to see that that happens in the public interest of transparency and accountability.