Qalipu Mi'kmaq First Nation Act   and the vote. Again, we see the government bringing in not only an unfair election act but also an undemocratic process around it, and that is what is going on right here. We cut an honourable deal with the government, at least I thought it was an honourable deal. It was honourable on my

Qalipu Mi'kmaq First Nation Act  Mr. Speaker, let us understand this. The government, throughout the history of its unfair election act, has attempted at every point not only to muzzle the Chief Electoral Officer but to deny Canadians even some modicum of consultation and respect. Now, the Conservatives take

Qalipu Mi'kmaq First Nation Act   that his government is cynically putting him up. It is much as they did with the member from Mississauga, to perpetrate mistruths in the House, and it is all to justify the unfair election act; all to muzzle the Chief Electoral Officer; and going into the future, all to disenfranchise

Canada-Honduras Economic Growth and Prosperity Act   issue that we have to deal with this week.” What I did have were phone calls and emails about the unfair elections act, to be frank, and a lot about Canada Post. Those were the issues I thought we would be talking about this week. Those are the issues I thought were the most

Democratic Reform  Mr. Speaker, Canada's Chief Electoral Office testified today that the unfair elections act proposed by the Conservatives would in fact allow them to dress up campaign advertising as fundraising appeals to get around all existing campaign spending limits in the next election. Mr

Democratic Reform   contributions, within spending limits. Does the minister agree with the Chief Electoral Officer that these new loan provisions in the unfair elections act need to be amended in order to be effective; and will the minister acknowledge that this is one of the many major problems in his bill?

Democratic Reform  Mr. Speaker, today at committee the Chief Electoral Officer confirmed the unfair elections act is an attack on Elections Canada's ability to enforce the law. He said, “Without a power to compel testimony...the Commissioner's ability to carry out his investigations will remain

Business of the House   right now. Today, in its latest stroke of parliamentary brilliance, the government tried to sabotage the testimony given by the Chief Electoral Officer in today’s committee hearings on its unfair elections act, Bill C-23. Unfortunately after stumbling out of the gates

Canada-Honduras Economic Growth and Prosperity Act   to get the opportunity to speak about this bill that is being rushed through the House of Commons. What is the rush? Are Conservatives trying to hide something from Canadians? We saw the shenanigans this morning in regard to the unfair elections act. The Chief Electoral Officer

Business of Supply   electoral democracy is in serious danger as a consequence of a bill before the House, Bill C-23, the fair elections act, which I think almost everybody who knows anything about the act is now calling the unfair elections act. Conservatives and the Minister of State (Democratic Reform

Business of Supply   those outside of Canada are looking at this unfair elections act, blowing the whistle, raising the flag, and asking “What is going on”? Once again, the world is left shaking its head, asking “What happened to Canada? Where did Canada go? We have this Harper government thing

Business of Supply   had a chance to read The Globe and Mail. It has been editorializing on Bill C-23 for over six days now, sharing more information on this unfair elections act than the government is with Canadians. I thank The Globe and Mail. In today's piece, it decried the bill, saying to kill

Energy Safety and Security Act  . Another fellow I met was very unhappy with the unfair elections act. He let me and the government have it in regard to an institution that has been built over many years and is world renowned. Our ability to conduct fair and democratic elections is a role model for all countries

Democratic Reform  Mr. Speaker, as Jean-Pierre Kingsley testified today, the unfair elections act only requires data about potential voter fraud to be retained for one year, one short year. This is made worse by the fact that without the power to compel testimony, witnesses can refuse to co

Democratic Reform   by none other than Harry Neufeld himself. Moreover, the minister has consistently failed to provide any examples of fraud through vouching. Therefore, the minister's bill is unravelling before his eyes. Will he now agree to remove this unjustifiable part of the unfair elections act?