Context : Question
Mr. Peter Julian (Burnabyâ€”New Westminster, NDP): Mr. Speaker, the member is confused again. We are not talking about fake allegations from a Conservative kangaroo court. We are talking about a real criminal trial with a real judge.
Le 27 fÃ©vrier 2013, le premier ministre a dÃ©clarÃ© Ã la Chambre, et je le cite:
Tous les sÃ©nateurs se conforment aux exigences en matiÃ¨re de rÃ©sidence. C'est le critÃ¨re fondamental en vertu duquel ils sont nommÃ©s au SÃ©nat.
Pourquoi le premier ministre a-t-il donnÃ© cette assurance Ã la Chambre, alors que ce n'Ã©tait Ã©videmment pas le cas?
M. Paul Calandra (secrÃ©taire parlementaire du premier ministre et pour les Affaires intergouvernementales, PCC): Monsieur le PrÃ©sident, comme j'ai dÃ©jÃ dit, la pratique constitutionnelle Ã ce sujet est claire depuis 150 ans.
What is also clear is that House of Commons resources cannot be used for partisan political activities like the NDP did.
The Leader of the Opposition signed off on employees working in Ottawa, suggesting they were working and living in Ottawa, but actually they were working in an illegal, partisan office in Montreal.
The member for Scarborough Southwest thought this was so impressive that as opposed to giving $140,000 in resources to his community, he funnelled it through an illegal office in Montreal.