Ethics   Mr. Wright that Mr. Wright had not been forthcoming about. That is the responsibility of those two individuals. Mr. Wright has taken responsibility. Those two individuals are under inquiry and investigation. It is very different than the leader of the NDP, who for 17 years knew

Ethics  Mr. Speaker, the RCMP has made very clear that there are two individuals under investigation. The individual referred to by the leader of the NDP is not under investigation.

Ethics  , these two individuals are under investigation.

Ethics   here is the event that took place, the payment that was not properly disclosed. It was misrepresented, and for that reason we have taken action and the two individuals in question are under investigation.

Ethics  . The RCMP has made very clear there are two individuals under investigation. They are Mr. Duffy and Mr. Wright. These are the individuals against whom we have taken appropriate sanction, and we will continue to co-operate with the RCMP.

Ethics   taken in this case against these two individuals and why they are under investigation and, of course, why we continue to assist with that investigation.

Ethics  . Duffy did not properly disclose this transaction. When we became aware of that, we made sure that it was reported publicly. We have taken the appropriate action, and it is those two individuals who are under investigation for this particular affair.

Ethics   these two individuals are under investigation, as they should be, and we will continue to assist.

Ethics  Mr. Speaker, the Liberal Party leader's statements are false. The RCMP did not say that. It said that two individuals are under investigation for an inappropriate payment. We are co-operating with this investigation, and we have taken appropriate action against these individuals.

Ethics  Mr. Speaker, once again, there are two individuals under investigation, and of course it is not that individual. There was no payment of Mr. Duffy's inappropriate expenses by the party, but the leader of the NDP would be an expert in that, having received six figures worth

Ethics  Mr. Speaker, what was inappropriate here was that Mr. Duffy claimed to have repaid inappropriate expenses when he had not done so. On the contrary, it was Mr. Wright who paid those expenses, and those two individuals had not sought authority and had not properly disclosed

Ethics  Mr. Speaker, it was Mr. Duffy who made claims about having repaid inappropriate expenses. Those claims were completely untrue. The fact of the matter was that Mr. Wright had paid those expenses on his behalf. As those two individuals did not properly disclose that information

Ethics  Mr. Speaker, once again the member cites the RCMP. The RCMP is clear that there are two individuals who are under investigation, Mr. Duffy and Mr. Wright. The issue at hand here is the fact Mr. Duffy made claims to repay inappropriate expenses when he had not done so. Mr

Ethics  Mr. Speaker, it is clear that two individuals are under investigation in relation to the fact that Mr. Duffy claimed that he repaid expenses, but did not. On the contrary, Mr. Wright did. Mr. Wright did not provide this information. He was not authorized to do it and he did

Ethics  Mr. Speaker, there are two individuals who are responsible for the payment in question, a payment that was made without authority and that was not properly reported or disclosed. In this party, we hold those who undertake actions responsible for their own actions. Unlike