SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 244

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
November 1, 2023 02:00PM
Context: House Hansard - 244 - Nov/1/23
Ms. Jennifer O'Connell (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety, Democratic Institutions and Intergovernmental Affairs (Cybersecurity), Lib.)
  • Nov/1/23 8:00:02 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I am happy to rise to answer this question once again. It is interesting to me that the Conservatives are so desperate to cover up and filibuster their spending scandal that they are trying to reinvent the past. With respect to calls for a criminal investigation by the RCMP, I note the RCMP has made very clear in this matter that there is no criminal investigation, there are no criminal charges and there are no reports of obstruction because the matter is closed. The RCMP made that independent decision. The commissioner has even recently been equally clear that due process has been followed, and he is satisfied with the result. It begs the question: Why would the Conservatives bring up an issue that has been resolved, with the RCMP commissioner saying himself that the matter is closed and there is no investigation? I think it is because at committee, the members opposite are refusing to tell Canadians that the Conservative members could have moved a motion 26 times to bring the RCMP commissioner to committee. Instead, they waited to filibuster when the committee was interested in looking at the spending scandal of five Conservative members who went on a trip to the U.K., where they dined on porterhouse steaks, chateaubriand, Scottish smoked salmon and 1,800 dollars' worth of champagne in one sitting. At the Savoy restaurant, they spent $1,000 on a three-course lunch and $1,200 at an oyster bar for dinner. They had 10 bottles of wine in one of these sittings, with three of the bottles at $600 a piece. What I find really interesting for Canadians to see is that the Conservatives are desperate to cover up the fact that they had lobbyists spending thousands of dollars to fly them to the U.K. to dine on chateaubriand and sip champagne. They do not want Canadians to look at this. They do not want the committee to ask questions about why lobbyists took them to the U.K. to spend tens of thousands of dollars on them and their champagne tastes. What we have here is Conservatives who do not accept the independent advice of the RCMP, which has determined with regard to the SNC matter that the matter is closed and there are no criminal charges, no investigations and no obstruction. What we see is the true root cause of the Conservatives' filibuster. It is because they want to cover up their champagne-sipping tastes.
415 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 244 - Nov/1/23
Ms. Jennifer O'Connell
  • Nov/1/23 8:04:26 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I trust the words of the RCMP commissioner. He has determined independently and said that due process has been followed, and he is satisfied with the result. There is no investigation. There are no criminal charges. There is no obstruction. However, the obstruction we should talk about here today relates to the fact that the member for Cumberland—Colchester received over $7,000 for a trip to the U.K. For the member for Northumberland—Peterborough South it was $8,300. For the member for Battlefords—Lloydminster it was $7,900. For the member for Lakeland it was $7,700. For the member for New Brunswick Southwest it was $13,548. It was paid for by lobbyists. Why will the Conservatives not let us talk about this at committee?
134 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border