Fair Elections Act  Mr. Speaker, that last answer was a bit rich. I will be sharing my time with my colleague from the riding of Louis-Saint-Laurent. I only have 10 minutes, so it is not a lot of time to try to hit the highlights and the low lights of Bill C-23. I am glad to see the chair of the committee is here to join in the heckling.

Democratic Reform  Mr. Speaker, last night the Conservatives delivered its Bill C-23 punchline in the mockery they have made of Parliament and of the committee process. New Democrats listened to experts. We went out and heard from ordinary Canadians. We came to the table in good faith with over 100 common-sense amendments that would improve the bill.

Democratic Reform  Mr. Speaker, they went from ID vouching to address vouching. Who are you kidding? Supposedly, the whole reason for changing—

Democratic Reform  Mr. Speaker, supposedly the whole reason for changing the Elections Act was to put an end to fraudulent robocalls. However, investigators testified the bill would not give them the powers they need. The bill would make them less independent and leave them so hamstrung that they say they would have to abandon investigations.

Democratic Reform  Mr. Speaker, against all logic and common sense, Conservatives still insist on banning the use of voter information cards as identification at the polls. To prevent the chaos that this new ban will cause, the NDP proposed something simple and helpful: make it clear and prominent to voters on the card that they can no longer use it as ID.

Democratic Reform  Once again, Mr. Speaker, the facts belie what the government has to say. The Chief Electoral Officer said the voter information card is likely the most accurate government ID that there is. This so-called perfect bill is facing 344 pages of amendments at committee, and today is the final day the committee can consider amendments.

Democratic Reform  Mr. Speaker, common sense would have been to talk to somebody other than those who have Conservative membership cards about the bill before they even brought it to the House. The bill was supposed to help Elections Canada better investigate voter suppression, so why does the bill still fail to put into law the duty to compel witnesses or the power to demand documents from political parties?

Democratic Reform  Mr. Speaker, Canadians have been telling us they are deeply concerned about the flawed and unfair changes to the Elections Act, but time and time again, the minister insulted or targeted all those who criticized him and stubbornly boasted that his bill was perfect and terrific just as it was.

Committees of the House  Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the fourth report of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts in relation to its study of chapter 2, “Access to Online Services”, of the fall 2013 report of the Auditor General of Canada. Pursuant to Standing Order 109 of the House of Commons, the committee requests that the government table a comprehensive response to the report.

Democratic Reform  Mr. Speaker, the bill would make major changes to the role of the Director of Public Prosecutions in election fraud investigations. Yet, the DPP, just like the elections commissioner, was never once consulted. Why did the minister take the time to consult the Conservative Party before tabling the bill but fail to consult the DPP or the Chief Electoral Officer or the Commissioner of Canada Elections?

Democratic Reform  Mr. Speaker, we think it should be a lot easier for the government to say the words “Sheila Fraser”. The Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons sent a letter to the committee studying the unfair elections act. He suggested that anyone who has ever worked for Elections Canada was somehow tainted.

Democratic Reform  Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister once praised Sheila Fraser saying, “Her competence and her courage have shone a bright light on...corruption...this Liberal government has been trying to hide”. Now, the Minister of State for Democratic Reform dismisses her and calls her just a mouthpiece for Elections Canada.

Committees of the House  Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, three reports of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts. The first report is on the Public Accounts of Canada, 2013; the second is on chapter 5, “Preventing Illegal Entry into Canada”, of the fall 2013 report of the Auditor General of Canada; and the third is on the main estimates 2014-15, vote 1, under Auditor General.

Democratic Reform  Mr. Speaker, yesterday the former chief electoral officer testified about serious problems with the government's unfair elections act. He said that the removal of vouching destroys a fundamental fail-safe in our voting system, and he said that limiting the ability of a chief electoral officer to communicate publicly is an unprecedented gag order.

Democratic Reform  It is interesting that the word has moved from “fraud” to “irregularities”, so we are getting a little closer to the truth. Mr. Speaker, Mr. Kingsley also testified that the one-year requirement for preserving robocall records is far too short. As a former owner of an automated calling firm himself, the minister knows that these records could and should be preserved for much longer.