- Member of Parliament
- Deputy House leader of the official opposition
- Conservative
- Mégantic—L'Érable
- Quebec
- Voting Attendance: 69%
- Expenses Last Quarter: $94,201.00
- Government Page
- Oct/17/23 4:20:06 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak to comments made yesterday by the member for Winnipeg North on the question of privilege raised by the member for Calgary Nose Hill on Thursday, October 5. Yesterday, in his remarks, the member for Winnipeg North misled the House. I would like to quote a few of his statements concerning the question of privilege raised by the member for Calgary Nose Hill.
The issue we are discussing has to do with the government's written responses to questions about the Prime Minister's travel. I submitted those three questions to the government myself, in writing. Yesterday, the member for Winnipeg North spoke about the last two questions that I asked. I would like to quote what the member for Winnipeg North said yesterday:
The crux of the questions posed is based on the notion of “total costs incurred by the government”. The government takes the view that “the government” includes all core departments of the public service and not independent arm's-length agencies, such as the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.
This is what the member for Winnipeg North stated and alleged yesterday. I will continue with the quotation:
The fact is that neither of these questions specifically asked for that information. It is not for the government to make assumptions about what the member means to ask when submitting an Order Paper question. The government simply responds to the precise question that was asked.
I feel that the questions were well formulated, that they were entirely in order and that the government was asked to provide all the information requested. The proof is in Question No. 1180, which I asked on January 31. I will read the questions that were asked and the specific requests that were made at the time:
(a) what were the total costs incurred by the government for (i) accommodations, (ii) per diems, (iii) other expenses for the flight crew and government officials who travelled to Jamaica in connection with the Prime Minister's trip....
That was the wording of the question asked on January 31.
I will now read Question No. 1417, which I asked on April 19 and to which the member for Winnipeg North referred yesterday:
(a) what were the total costs incurred by the government for (i) accommodations, (ii) per diems, (iii) other expenses, for the flight crew and government officials who travelled to Montana in connection with the Prime Minister's trip....
Other than the destination, both questions are identical. The difference is that, in its answer to Question No. 1180, the government included all the costs, including those incurred by the RCMP. This leads me to conclude that the government deliberately omitted the costs incurred by the RCMP in its answers to the two subsequent questions. All three questions were written in the same way.
I thought this was extremely important information for the House to consider, especially given that the answer to Question No. 1180 was signed off on by the members for Winnipeg North and Hull—Aylmer. The people saying that the questions were not properly written, specifically the member for Winnipeg North, actually answered the first question properly. They should have answered the other two in the same way by including the costs related to the RCMP's participation in the other two trips.
566 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/20/23 2:51:37 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, they do not want to talk about the Prime Minister because they know that we will talk about ethics and ethics violations.
There was the Prime Minister for vacationing on a private island, the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, Infrastructure and Communities for giving a permit to a company with ties to his family, the Prime Minister a second time in the SNC-Lavalin matter, the Minister of International Trade, Export Promotion, Small Business and Economic Development for awarding her best friend a contract, the member for Hull—Aylmer, and we learned yesterday that the interim Ethics Commissioner, the sister-in-law of the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, had resigned.
To whom will the Prime Minister now turn for advice about his next vacation at the estate of his rich friends from the Trudeau Foundation?
138 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/19/23 2:54:59 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, getting answers from the Prime Minister, even to the simplest questions, is so difficult. We asked him how much he personally paid for his most recent vacation to Jamaica. The Prime Minister refused to answer.
I asked a very simple question following a statement that he made today. He said that he had stayed on this private estate in Jamaica dozens of times.
I am asking him to tell us, in honest straightforward terms, how many times he has vacationed in Jamaica since becoming an MP.
89 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/19/23 2:53:53 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the Trudeau Foundation bears the name of the current Prime Minister's father, and according to its annual report, two seats on the board are reserved for family members: the Prime Minister and his brother, Alexandre Trudeau.
The foundation is a family affair, since we have learned that the Prime Minister has chosen to spend at least $160,000 of taxpayers' money visiting its donors.
He has said several times today that he has stayed there many times. How many times has he vacationed in that place since he became a member of Parliament?
96 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/2/22 2:22:44 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, that is a pathetic excuse that does not hold water. This is a specific situation where the Prime Minister has admitted that neither he nor anyone else authorized him to accept an illegal gift.
Time does not erase the horrors of the past. We only have to ask the victims of crime who wait years to report their attacker.
Is this MP leader actually telling victims to keep quiet and not report these crimes? Why does the Minister of Justice not initiate an investigation into the matter currently involving the Prime Minister and ask the RCMP to reopen its investigation?
103 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/2/22 2:21:37 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister was the first federal leader in office to be found guilty of breaking the law.
The Prime Minister fired his justice minister, Jody Wilson-Raybould, because she did not follow his instructions with respect to SNC-Lavalin. He bought off NDP members so that he would not have to answer for his actions in the Winnipeg lab scandal. RCMP documents now show that he just narrowly avoided being accused of fraud in the matter of the illegal gift worth $215,000.
Who in this government will stand up and say that enough is enough?
99 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/28/22 2:24:31 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, with today's Motion No. 11, the government is in cover-up mode again, just like with WE Charity, Jody Wilson-Raybould and the secret documents from the Winnipeg lab.
The Prime Minister received an illegal gift. The RCMP even considered filing criminal charges of fraud against the Prime Minister.
Since the Prime Minister admits that no one gave him permission to break the law, will the Minister of Justice support our new request for an RCMP investigation?
80 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/27/22 3:12:15 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister cannot help himself. He just has to be the centre of attention.
He was the subject of an RCMP investigation. We know that he accepted a gift even though he did not authorize himself to do so. He is the first sitting prime minister to have been found guilty of multiple ethical violations.
Let us see if he also gave himself the right to break other laws. His aides have had time to look into this. Did he or did he not declare his trip as a taxable benefit on his tax return? That is an easy question.
103 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/26/22 2:24:37 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, as I understand it, from now on, the Prime Minister will never talk about things that happened years ago and that have been settled by various parties. This is what the Prime Minister is telling us.
However, he himself said just now that he did not give himself permission to accept a gift worth more than $200,000 in the form of a private vacation for him and his family. The RCMP considered laying fraud charges against the Prime Minister but ultimately did not do so for that exact reason.
Why will the Prime Minister not acknowledge his mistake or his fault? Will he meet with the RCMP to explain?
112 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/26/22 2:23:31 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister's doublespeak is rather ridiculous.
The RCMP considered charging the Liberal leader with fraud, but it did not because, as Liberal leader, he had the authority to approve a $200,000 gift for himself.
A few moments ago, he said that he did not do so. He said this is something that happened long ago. However, the Prime Minister has never hesitated to stand up and denounce things that happened even longer ago.
Does he know that it is never too late to report a crime?
91 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/25/22 2:22:52 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, in this case, what the reports of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner showed was the Prime Minister's lack of judgment on more than one occasion.
The RCMP considered laying fraud charges, but laws prevented it from doing so. The only person who can authorize the Prime Minister to receive a gift is the Prime Minister himself.
The Prime Minister cannot be above the law though. How many times did the Prime Minister meet with RCMP officers, and when did the most recent meeting take place?
90 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/25/22 2:21:33 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, what Canadians understand is that this government is out of touch. It blames others instead of taking responsibility for doing what is right to help Canadians. That is the reality.
An article in the Globe and Mail reports that the RCMP considered charging the Liberal Prime Minister with fraud over the infamous free trip that he and his family had accepted.
My question is simple. Does the Prime Minister accept the fact that there are two justice systems in this country: one that applies to everyone and one that does not apply to the Prime Minister?
98 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
