Thomas Mulcair

[Ethics, March 10th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, we are willing and ready to go before a judge. Is he?

There were senior officials under the minister, a political staffer in her office, two other cabinet members, and, wait for it, Nigel Wright. Remember him? We remember that the Prime Minister fired him after he quit. In this case, Nigel Wright said that the Prime Minister himself knew that this was “an issue”.

What exactly did the Prime Minister know about this dirty insider deal involving his office, three Conservative ministers, and a dear friend of the Conservative Party?

[Ethics, March 10th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Public Works is the Prime Minister's closest and most faithful minister, and she has just been found guilty of conflict of interest by facilitating a multi-million dollar project for a close Conservative supporter. How will the Prime Minister respond to the ethic commissioner's report, which severely criticizes his Minister of Public Works?

[Ethics, March 10th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I wonder when the Conservative Party is going to make a full accounting of all the money it took, thanks to Pamela Wallin.

The Minister of Public Works is the Prime Minister's closest and most faithful minister—

[Ethics, March 10th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, actually here is what the Prime Minister said, and the first person singular here is himself. He personally vouched for Senator Wallin's travel claims, saying “In terms of Senator Wallin, I have looked at the numbers.”

That is what he told the House. He went on to say that according to him, everything was just fine.

Does the Prime Minister still believe that Ms. Wallin's expenses were perfectly legal and appropriate? He hired her to do the fundraising for the Conservative Party. Is that the reason that he saw no problems with it at the time?

[Ethics, March 10th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, when we questioned the Prime Minister about Pamela Wallin two years ago, he denied that she was using taxpayers' money to travel to Conservative Party fundraisers. He said that he categorically rejected such suggestions.

Does the Prime Minister still maintain that Pamela Wallin did not use taxpayers' money to attend Conservative Party fundraising activities?

[National Defence, March 10th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, let us look, word for word, at what the Prime Minister actually told Canadians and, word for word, what this Parliament voted on.

On September 30, he stated, “It is quite precise. It is to advise and to assist. It is not to accompany.” I am quoting word for word what the Prime Minister said on September 30.

This House adopted a motion that states, word for word, “that the Government of Canada will not deploy troops in ground combat operations”.

Why is it that our soldiers are not just accompanying, but are dying in combat on the front line?

[National Defence, March 10th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, when soldiers are so close to the front line that they are being shot at by their allies, it is because they are being mistaken for the enemy; it is because they are on the front line; it is because they are in combat. That is the simple reality.

Why are Canadian soldiers on the front line? That is not what this Parliament voted on. Why is the Prime Minister allowing it?

[National Defence, March 10th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, there is no difference. They are all combat deaths.

The White House has been very clear on this. American soldiers who are training Iraqis are not allowed on the front line. It has said that sending them to the front would constitute a major change in their mission and would require Congress's approval.

Why are our soldiers on the front line without Parliament's approval?

[National Defence, March 10th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, four Canadian soldiers who were killed by friendly fire while training and accompanying Afghan troops in 2002 were deemed killed in combat. The Department of National Defence even states on its website that, “The dead soldiers were universally described as the country's first combat fatalities since the Korean War”. Nobody insulted them by denying that they were killed in combat.

Can the Prime Minister please explain what is the difference between those deaths in Afghanistan and the death of Sergeant Doiron?

[National Defence, March 10th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, four days ago Sergeant Andrew Doiron of the Canadian Special Operations Regiment was tragically killed in Iraq. Canadians are grieving the first death of a Canadian soldier in combat in this war. Why were Kurdish forces not aware of the presence of Canadian troops on the front lines?