Serge Ménard

[Public Safety, June 10th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, Julie Couillard attended a very private fundraising cocktail for the Conservative association in the riding of Châteauguay—Saint-Constant. In order to gain access, she turned to André Turcot, the president of the association, who knew her very well. Her name had been floating around in September as a potential Conservative candidate.

How does the Prime Minister expect us to believe that although the RCMP, a local Conservative Party organizer and the former minister of foreign affairs knew about this woman's shady past, he knew nothing?

[Public Safety, June 10th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, we just learned this morning that Julie Couillard spared no effort to get access to Conservative ministers. In just a few short days, she managed to meet two. Experts have told us that this is how criminal organizations infiltrate political circles.

Considering Julie Couillard's shady past, and also considering the fact that she was known to the RCMP, was there not a blatant disregard for public safety?

[Public Safety, June 9th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, this is clearly a public security matter, as a minister even had to resign. Yet, the Conservatives are not answering our questions in the House. That is why they have to appear before the committee. The secrecy surrounding this matter has to stop. This kind of governing under the seal of secrecy has to stop. The Conservative code of silence has to go, and so does their need to control everything.

Do the Conservatives realize that, if they refuse to testify, everyone will conclude that they have things to hide?

[Public Safety, June 9th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, we know that the home of Julie Couillard was under RCMP surveillance in 1998. Yet the Conservatives persist in saying that they were not aware of her shady past. The Prime Minister and those of his ministers who were involved in this matter ought to appear before the Standing Committee on Public Safety to show good faith and shed light on this sordid matter.

Will the Prime Minister and the ministers concerned reconsider their decision and agree to appear before the committee, yes or no?

[Foreign Affairs, June 5th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, once again, the Prime Minister is refusing to answer a clear and pertinent question. It is understandable that it would be unfair to punish a serious and conscientious minister for a small mistake that has no effect on security. However, the situation is quite different if a minister leaves a document with someone who has had close ties to members of organized crime.

Is that not the real reason why the member for Beauce was asked to resign? What the Prime Minister piously refers to as the private life of Ms. Couillard makes all the difference. Is that not the reason why this is a matter of public interest?

[Foreign Affairs, June 5th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, if a minister spends a weekend with his wife and children at his in-laws and he has an important meeting the following Monday, it is understandable that he would take with him the documents required to prepare for the meeting.

While studying the file, if he has the bad luck to be distracted and unfortunately does not notice that one of the classified documents has fallen to the ground, and he then leaves on Sunday without the document, will he have to resign for having left a classified document in an unsecured location?

[Foreign Affairs, June 4th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, the public can judge the relevance of the questions we are asking here and the sort of response we are getting. I will try another question.

We are told that the Department of Foreign Affairs is going to conduct its own investigation into the fact that the documents were missing for more than five weeks. By conducting its own investigation, the department is acting as both defendant and prosecutor, and it is difficult to imagine that the department will blame itself.

When did the former minister of foreign affairs tell the Prime Minister that sensitive documents had gone missing? Was it in mid-April or on the day of the TVA report? How long had the Prime Minister known that important documents had disappeared?

[Foreign Affairs, June 4th, 2008]

Here is one, Mr. Speaker. Since the Prime Minister refuses to appear before the committee, I will ask him a question in this House, and I would like a straight answer. It is clear that the RCMP, knowing Ms. Couillard's shady past, must have told the Prime Minister about the past relationships of his foreign affairs minister's new flame.

Can the Prime Minister tell us when the RCMP informed him of Ms. Couillard's shady past?

[Foreign Affairs, June 3rd, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, since the Couillard affair began, the Prime Minister has been stubbornly denying the facts and hiding behind false pretexts to avoid answering legitimate questions from the opposition and the public.

Will the Prime Minister finally assume his responsibilities, show the transparency that he promised when he was in opposition and appear before the public safety committee?

The best way to dispel any rumours is to come and tell the whole truth.

[Foreign Affairs, June 3rd, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, the investigations concerning criminal biker gangs and the mafia were conducted jointly by various police forces including the Montreal police, the Sûreté du Québec and the RCMP. Julie Couillard had three partners closely linked to the Hells Angels and another who was an influential mafioso. And the Prime Minister, who likes to control everything, would have us believe that he had no idea. That is impossible.

Will the Prime Minister stop denying this, claiming it is a matter of privacy, and admit that he concealed this information for partisan purposes?