Category: Politics/Conservatives

In the House of Commons today, Conservative MP Michael Chong, stood up to deliver the following statement:

Hon. Michael Chong (Wellington—Halton Hills, CPC): Mr. Speaker, I want to speak today about parliamentary reform.

A growing number of Canadians are disengaging from the political process. When citizens disengage the very legitimacy of this institution is at risk.

Canadians across the country may not be able to put their finger on exactly what ails our institutions, but they know that something is wrong. That is why I want to commend the minister for democratic reform for introducing a number of bills, including Bill C-12 which demonstrates the government's commitment to institutional renewal.

The heart of our democracy is Parliament, and the heart of Parliament is question period. Through the national media, millions of Canadians follow question period each and every day. I am optimistic that parliamentary reform can reconnect Canadians who feel disengaged by political behaviour that would not be tolerated around the kitchen table.

That is why we will be introducing motion M-517, a proposal that asks the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs to examine specific changes to reform question period. I ask members of this House to consider this motion and to lend it their support.

And here is the text of his motion M-517:

That the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs be instructed to recommend changes to the Standing Orders and other conventions governing Oral Questions, and to consider, among other things, (i) elevating decorum and fortifying the use of discipline by the Speaker, to strengthen the dignity and authority of the House, (ii) lengthening the amount of time given for each question and each answer, (iii) examining the convention that the Minister questioned need not respond, (iv) allocating half the questions each day for Members, whose names and order of recognition would be randomly selected, (v) dedicating Wednesday exclusively for questions to the Prime Minister, (vi) dedicating Monday, Tuesday, Thursday and Friday for questions to Ministers other than the Prime Minister in a way that would require Ministers be present two of the four days to answer questions concerning their portfolio, based on a published schedule that would rotate and that would ensure an equitable distribution of Ministers across the four days; and that the Committee report its findings to the House, with proposed changes to the Standing Orders and other conventions, within six months of the adoption of this order.

Earlier this week, Parliament's Lobbying Commissioner was provided with copies of 68 pages of documents, mostly e-mail exchanges, between former MP Rahim Jaffer and various Conservative politicians, Conservative political aides and senior government bureaucrats. Here's a summary of Jaffer's contact with Infrastructure Canada. He and his company had three proposals. The combined “ask” for all three proposals could have been as high as $135 million in federal funding.

Infrastructure Canada is largely responsible for administering the disbursement of billions of dollars in infrastructure money, notably the Green Infrastructure Fund. Its minister is John Baird, the MP for Ottawa West-Nepean. Brian Jean, the MP for Fort McMurray-Athabaska (AB), is Baird's Parliamentary Secretary.

In a letter filed April 26, 2010 with Parliament's Lobbying Commissioner, Jean says that in June, 2009, Jaffer and his partner Patrick Glemaud “stopped by my office on one occasion to inquire about the federal Green Infrastructure Fund. It was an unscheduled and informal meeting.” Jean said he explained to the two of them what the fund was about. Jean says no specific projects were discussed and no commitments were made. He says this meeting was the only occasion in person or by phone in which he discussed the fund with Jaffer or Glemaud. “Over the course of the next three months, I received three project summaries from Green Power Generation (Jaffer's and Glemaud's company). The first two projects were potentially eligible and were therefore sent to Infrastructure Canada for further analysis … Subsequently it became clear that these two projects did not fit well within the mandate of the fund ..” These two GPG projects are a Solar Power project and another one known as DPS Kinetics.

On July 7, 2009 at 12:46 pm, Jean's assistant Kimberley Michelutti sends an e-mail to one of the Parliamentary e-mail accounts assigned to Helena Guergis, Jaffer's wife, who was, at the time, Secretary of State for the Status of Women. She begins the e-mail: “Hi Rahim”. She tells Jaffer she's following up on the project summaries that Jaffer sent to Jean's office and explains how Jean's office will review them before sending them on to bureaucrats at Infrastructure Canada.

Unfortunately, the department has a lot on their plate at the moment and their turnaround is not that good … That's where we're currently at. I'll be sure to keep you posted on any further developments; feel free to contact me with any questions.

A few hours later, at 3:07 pm., an e-mail reply to Michelutti comes from the Guergis e-mail account:

Thanks Kim! I appreciate the update … Even if the department is not interested it would be good to know what their issues with the projects are for future preparation. … Take care, Rahim.

On July 17, 2009 at 12:27 p.m., Michelutti sends an e-mail to an assistant deputy minister and copies other senior officials at Infrastructure Canada. One of those officials is Mark Haney. Haney was the acting director general of strategic planning and reporting within the policy and priorities directorate at Infrastructure Canada. Michelutti wrote:

Please see the two attached project proposals from Green Power Generation for consideration under the Green Infrast ructure Fund. Your comments and preliminary review would be greatly appreciated.

On August 13, 2009, at 12:10 p.m., an e-mail is sent to Michelutti from Glemaud's Gmail account. Glemaud is higlighting some points about the Solar Power proposal. In that e-mail Glemaud writes:

The maximum of share funding required from the federal will be 25% of the total eligible cost, namely $58 million.

On Aug. 26, 2009 at 1:38 pm, an e-mail is received at Jean's personal Parliamentary e-mail account from the same Parliamentary e-mail account assigned to Guergis. The e-mail reads:

Have you had a chance to look at the proposal for our solar project and power systems. Our preference is for the solar if there needs to be a choice between the two. I would love to talk to you about it if you have some time. Thanks, Rahim

Jean tells the lobbying commissioner he did not respond to this e-mail.

On Aug. 31, 2009 at 2:25 pm, Michelutti sends an e-mail to Haney and Francis Bilodeau, asking for updates on the status of nine projects Jean's office has submitted to Infrastructure Canada Bilodeau is the director of environmental initiatives in Haney's office. Two of the projects mentioned in this e-mail are GPG's solar power project and DPS Kinetics project.

A few minutes after receiving this e-mail from Michelluti, at 2:42 p.m., Haney sends an e-mail to Sonya Read, asking her to prepare a response for Michelutti. Read was an acting director in Haney's department.

On Sept. 2, 2009 at 2:48 p.m., Read replies via e-mail to Michelutti and sends a carbon copy to Haney as well as to Jennifer Dawson, who, as a director general in Infrastructure Canada, is senior to Haney and Bilodeau. The e-mail from Read provides an update on the status of each of the nine projects Michelluti has asked about. As for each of the Green Power Generation projects, she simply writes: “Project is being assessed and note prepared.”

On Sept. 8, 2009, a briefing note is prepared for Baird and approved by Haney and Haney's superior assistant deputy minister Taki Sarantakis. The briefing note provides background and assessment on on the Solar Power Green Power Generation project. The bureaucrats recommend against approval.

Jean would then receive a third project by mail from Jaffer and Glemaud in the first week of September (2009). This is the Green Rite project. “I dismissed (it) right away,” Jean told the Lobbying Commissioner this week.

But before “right away” can happen, Jean has Michellutti do a little work on the Green Rite file. On Sept. 17, 2009 at 7:01 p.m., Michelutti sends an e-mail to Glemaud. She has some follow-up questions on the Green Rite project.

One Sept 22, 2009 at 12:22 p.m., Glemaud responds from his Gmail account with the answers that Michelutti was seeking.

On Sept. 30, 2009 at 6:56 p.m., Michelutti e-mails one more follow-up question, asking if the project could help dispose of trees destroyed by the Mountain Pine Beetle. Later that evening, at 11:09 p.m.. Glemaud replies by e-mail to Michelutti to say yes.

On Oct. 7, 2009, another briefing note from Infrastructure Canada bureaucrats, approved by Read and Sarantakis, that provides Baird with background and assessment of the GPG DPS Kinetics project. The bureaucrats again recommend that Baird spike the proposal.

The government says, at the end of it all, no federal funding was provided to any of these three projects.

Earlier this week, Parliament's Lobbying Commissioner was provided with copies of 68 pages of documents, mostly e-mail exchanges, between former MP Rahim Jaffer and various Conservative politicians, Conservative political aides and senior government bureaucrats. Here's a summary of the documentary record for Jaffer's contact with Western Economic Diversification Canada

Western Economic Diversification Canada, referred to frequently simply as WD, is the regional development agency for Western Canada. It has a budget this year of about $430 million, most of which is handed out in the form of grants and loans to fund a variety of economic development prospects. Lynn Yelich (Blackstrap – SK) is the Minister of State responsible for the deparment.

In the late spring of 2009 — more than seven months after he lost his Edmonton seat in the 2008 general election — Jaffer contacted Doug Maley, the No. 2 bureaucrat at WD. Jaffer wanted a loan or grant for $700,000 from Maley's department for a deal he was trying to put together for a company called RLP Energy Inc.

On May 27, 2009, at 7:56 a.m., Jaffer e-mailed Maley. He began by referencing a conversation from the day before, telling Maley he was looking forward to golfing with him in June. Then Jaffer got down to business, sketching out RLP Energy's proposal to test a new prototype technology to get rid of mercury at a TransAlta-operated power plant west of Edmonton.

Jaffer told Maley in the e-mail that a private investor was ready to put up U.S.$500,000, the U.S. Department of Energy would kick in U.S.$350,000 and “it is desired that the Canadian federal government, through Western Economic Diversification, invest approximately $700,000 as an active partner in the program.“

Minutes after receiving that e-mail — at 8:04 a.m. — Maley forwarded Jaffer's proposal and project description to one of his subordinates, David Woynorowski, a director general in charge of operations at the federal agency. Maley told him: “Can you have someone review this on a priority basis as I need to get back to Rahim this Friday afternoon on whether this may be of interest to WD?”

Woynorowski replied less than 30 minutes later, telling Maley the proposal was being reviewed and offering some preliminary observations on Jaffer's pitch; Woynorowski was skeptical that WD should help fund Jaffer's plan.

“Not sure why we would consider supporting tech development plan/testing for . . . Transalta. We would need some sort of wider industry/sectoral benefit to result,” Woynorowski wrote.

Three hours after that, Maley wrote to Jaffer: “We will review this and get back to you shortly.”

Then, on June 4, 2009, just after 10 a.m., Jaffer sent Maley an e-mail to see if the two could meet “for a coffee or lunch” when Jaffer was in Edmonton to receive his executive MBA.

“Congrats on your Convocation!!!“, Maley wrote back a few hours later, before giving Jaffer the bad news: because RLP Energy is a private-sector, for-profit corporation, the federal government could not help.

But Maley didn't exactly close the door and picked up on what Woynorowski mentioned in his preliminary review.

“If this technology rested with an industry association, we likely could get involved,” Maley wrote.

He then gave Jaffer a road map to other ministries and agencies at the federal level — such as Environment Canada — to lobby and also told him to find out if the provincial government in Alberta could help out.

The direction Jaffer took next is not clear, but the government says RLP Energy never received any funding for its mercury-capture testing.

Here is part of the documentary record provided to Parliament’s Lobbying Commissioner which includes copies of e-mails Jaffer sent from the Parliamentary account of his wife, Helena Guergis, in which he seeks meetings and funding approvals from several politicians and bureaucrats across several departments.

The e-mails started in the spring of 2009 and continued as recently as mid-March of this year.

Last week, during his testimony at the House of Commons Government Operations and Estimates committee, Jaffer was asked by NDP Pat Martin if he ever used Guergis’ e-mail account and her government-issued BlackBerry mobile device.

He said then: “The only reason I ever used the BlackBerry was to keep track of what my wife’s schedule was, and that was it. I have separate business accounts, separate business e-mail—everything.”

But the documentary evidence shows:

• A series of e-mails from July and August 2009 originating from Guergis’ account and signed “Rahim” that were sent to Conservative MP Brian Jean and his staff. Jaffer and his business partner Patrick Glemaud were trying to get Jean, who is the parliamentary secretary to the minister of infrastructure, to sign off on as much as $135 million in federal funds for three projects they were promoting.

• An e-mail originating from Guergis’ account, dated March 17, 2010 that begins “it’s Rahim here” that was sent to a senior aide in the office of Industry Minister Tony Clement. Jaffer was asking David Pierce, Clement’s director of parliamentary affairs, for information about the government’s plans to lift foreign ownership restrictions in the telecommunications sector.

• E-mails from September 2009 originated from Guergis’ e-mail account and signed “Rahim” in which Jaffer asks the chief of staff to MP Diane Ablonczy, who was then the minister of state for small business and tourism, for a meeting on behalf of a friend who once helped Jaffer with his political career.

The lobbying commissioner has been provided with other e-mails originating Jaffer’s personal or GPG accounts in which Jaffer asks the associate deputy minister at Western Econonic Diversification, the federal government’s regional development agency for the west, for a $700,000 federal investment for a project he and Glemaud were working on.

Last week, Jaffer testified to MPs: “The extent of our business is to advise people, from experience that both Mr. Glémaud and I have had with government. By no means do we ever try to secure public funding.”

The government has said that none of Jaffer’s projects ever received government funding.

A few minutes ago in the House of Commons, the following exchange took place between BQ MP Joanne Deschamps and Conservative MP Jim Abbott. Abbott is the parliamentary secretary for Bev Oda, the minister for international development, who is in Halifax meeting with her G8 counterparts. [This is a rush transcript from the press gallery in the House of Commons and will be updated when the Blues are released:)

Deschamps: (voice of translator): mr. speaker, this week, g8 development ministers are meeting in halifax in order to harmonize their policies on maternal and child health. we know that this government is ideologically opposed to abortion and would love to export its conservative values around the world. will the government put aside its ideological prejudices and recognize that family planning measures, including abortion, improve women and children's health?

Jim Abbott (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Development): We'll be leading the discussion at the upcoming g8 summit on child and maternal health. we're focused on how to make a positive difference to save the lives of mothers and children in the developing world. Canada's contribution to maternal and child health may include family planning. However, canada's contribution will not include funding abortion.

johanne deschamps (bq): (voice of translator): …the conservative government has asked for assistance from norway in order to come up with a strategy on maternal and child health in developing countries. norway's special advisor is emphasizing the need for family planning measures, including abortion, in the strategy. will the conservative government listen to this wise advice and provide all the resources to get women full choice?

Abbott: … always trying to score cheap political points on the issue of abortion. we're giving the opportunity to all our g8 partners to assist us in promoting maternal and child health. the standard practice is each country makes its own domestic decision, which areas it will peck us on. our government has no intention to reopen the abortion debate in canada. we will work with our partners on this important issue.

UPDATE: And here is that exchange as recorded in the “Blues”, the transcription provided by the House of Commons staff:

Mme Johanne Deschamps (Laurentides—Labelle, BQ): Monsieur le Président, cette semaine, les ministres du Développement du G8 se réunissent à Halifax afin d'harmoniser leurs politiques à l'égard de la santé maternelle et infantile. On sait que ce gouvernement s'oppose idéologiquement à l'avortement et qu'il voudrait bien exporter ses valeurs conservatrices à l'international. Est-ce que le gouvernement va mettre de côté son idéologie et reconnaître que les mesures de planification familiale, incluant l'avortement, contribuent à améliorer la santé des femmes et des enfants?

Hon. Jim Abbott (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Cooperation, CPC): Mr. Speaker, my minister is hosting the G8 development ministers in Halifax today where this issue will be discussed. We will be leading the discussion at the upcoming G8 summit on child and maternal health. We are focused on how to make a positive difference to save the lives of mothers and children in the developing world. Canada's contribution to maternal and child health may include family planning, however, Canada's contribution will not include funding abortion.

Mme Johanne Deschamps (Laurentides—Labelle, BQ): Monsieur le Président, le gouvernement conservateur a demandé l'aide de la Norvège afin d'établir sa stratégie à l'égard de la santé maternelle et infantile dans les pays en voie de développement. Le conseiller spécial de la Norvège insiste pour dire que les mesures de planification familiale, incluant l'avortement, sont essentielles à une telle stratégie. Est-ce que le gouvernement conservateur va écouter ce judicieux conseil et prévoir des ressources afin de donner la liberté de choix aux femmes?

Hon. Jim Abbott (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Cooperation, CPC): Mr. Speaker, it is getting a little tiresome to have the opposition always trying to score cheap political points on the issue of abortion. We are giving the opportunity to all our G8 partners to assist us in promoting maternal and child health. The standard practice is each country makes its own domestic decision which areas it will focus on. Our government has no intention to reopen the abortion debate in Canada. We will work with our partners on this important issue.

An hour or so ago, Environment Minister Jim Prentice had this to say in the House of Commons:

[Note: This contains English and French audio, split on right/left. Adjust your settings accordingly to hear one or the other)

From today's headlines first and then a response from one of the key players:

The federal government introduced new documents Thursday that show former MP Rahim Jaffer's company sought as much as $135 million in federal government grants or loans for three different business projects, revelations that amount to potentially damning new evidence against Jaffer and his wife, MP Helena Guergis.

Jaffer's company was promoting one project involving a division of Wright Tech Systems, the documents show. Guergis, on her MP letterhead, sent a letter last September to a municipal council in her riding asking the council to consider doing business with Wright Tech for a waste-management project.

Jaffer wanted his former Conservative colleagues to sign off on a $100-million government grant to the Wright Tech business unit known as Green Rite Solutions, the documents indicate.

… in the spring of 2009, Glemaud met with [Infrastructure Minister John Baird's Parliamentary Secretary Brian] Jean and, at that meeting, gave him the executive summaries of business plans for two projects. One project for Green Rite Solutions, was seeking $100 million in financing … Jean took no action on the third proposal, which described how Green Rite Solutions was hopeful of securing $100 million in federal financing.

…on Sept. 10, Guergis sent a letter on the letterhead of her MP constituency office to her cousin, Tony Guergis, who was then the warden of Simcoe Country. In that letter, Guergis recommended that Simcoe County consider Wright Tech for some municipal waste-management services. Wright Tech is the parent company behind Green Rite Solutions, the proponent of the project that Glemaud and Jaffer's company had told Jean needed $100 million in federal financing.

Here's the response for Wright Tech/Green Rite:

Wright Tech Systems, Gillani and Jaffer; Setting the record Straight

“We never had any financial dealings with Gillani or Jaffer” – Jim Wright, Chairman Wright Tech Systems.

  “At no time has Wright Tech Systems or Green Rite Solutions had any financial dealings with Nazim Gillani or Rahim Jaffer” states Jim Wright, owner of Wright Tech Systems Inc. and partner in Green Rite Solutions Inc. Mr. Wright states further that “At no time has either Gillani or Jaffir had any financial interest in these companies; at no time have any payments of any kind been made between any of these parties. We certainly never discussed lobby efforts.”

Wright Tech Inc. and its marketing division, Green Rite Solutions Inc., met these individuals in the course of promoting their advanced waste conversion technology in Canada and abroad. Capital funding meetings and institutional marketing efforts have brought them into contact with diverse financial interests over the years.

Meetings were arranged with Gillani in the firm's Richmond Hill boardroom specifically to assess potential financial opportunities. These were preliminary, exploratory and fact-finding initiatives only, says Wright. Nazim Gillani’s involvement ended after several meetings. Mr. Jaffer was introduced to Wright Tech and Green Rite Solutions at a meeting chaired by Gillani and held at La Castile Steak House, the only time Gillani and Jaffer were together with respect to these companies. During subsequent meetings with Mr. Jaffer Wright observes that Rahim Jaffer “appeared to always act in good faith but did not bring any substance to the discussions”. Further involvement with Mr. Jaffir was terminated shortly thereafter when it became apparent that in order to receive any funding all of the effort was to be provided by Green Rite Solutions and Wright Tech.   

The summary sheet that was sent by GPG and evidenced in the parliamentary hearing was an internal communication from Green Power Generation. Wright says it was planned for their use to ascertain investor interest in the Wright Tech system. Further, neither Wright Tech Systems nor Green Rite Solutions was involved in the creation of said documents beyond providing data about their system’s Canadian market potential.

“It is my belief that allegations against MP Helena Guergis Simcoe-Grey as to impropriety or conflict of interest are misguided as regards this matter.” Mr. Wright recalls having spoken with Ms. Guergis once briefly on the telephone– and as a private constituent – about the merits of his technology for use in Simcoe County. He also had a similar discussion in person with Simcoe North MPP Garfield Dunlop as to the merits of the technology for waste management in Simcoe County. Neither discussion, to his knowledge, had any result.

The Conservative Party of Canada this week launched a series of radio ads in the the ridings of eight Liberal MPs. Each of those MPs voted with the Conservatives last fall to kill the long–gun registry. Now, Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff says that his party, should it form the government, would keep the long-gun registry but make it easier for gun owners to register and be a little more forgiving for those caught failing to register on a first offence. He also says that, with those changes, any future vote on the gun registry will be whipped, that is to say, those eight Liberal MPs are not going to have a choice.

Newfoundland Liberals Scott Andrews and Todd Russell — who voted to kill the registry last fall — now say the compromise is good enough for them and they'll vote now to maintain the registry, on the understanding their party will modify the registry's requirements.

The Conservative radio ads, now airing in the ridings of the eight Liberal MPs not only identify each MP by name but they encourage listeners to phone up the MPs office and tell them to do vote to kill the registry.

Also, this week, the Conservatives rolled out their latest fundraising letter and the gun registry is the hot button Tory fundraisers believe will bring in the cash. Here's that letter. (You'll have to find the links referred to in the letter on your own).

Wednesday, April 21, 2010

Dear ———,

Earlier this week, Michael Ignatieff turned his back on rural Canadians by renewing his vow to protect and preserve the failed long-gun registry. And this time around, he's promised to whip his rural MPs into protecting and preserving this costly Liberal legacy.

If Michael Ignatieff succeeds, the failed long-gun registry will continue to threaten law-abiding farmers, hunters and sport-shooting competitors – while doing nothing to reduce gun crime in our major cities.

We need your support now to prevent that from happening. Please make a contribution of $1000 or $500 by following this link right now.

During the last session of Parliament, eight Liberal MPs stood with their constituents and voted with the Conservative Government to scrap the long-gun registry.

Liberal MP Todd Russell was clear:

“I've been clear about my position and I will be consistent with that particular position, and I will vote subsequently to scrap the long-gun registry,” (The Labradorian, Dec. 29, 2009).

So was Liberal MP Anthony Rota. He went so far as to call the long-gun registry “disgusting” (North Bay Nugget, June 18, 2004).

Russell and Rota were joined by six other Liberal MPs in voting against the long-gun registry: Scott Andrews, Larry Bagnell, Jean-Claude D'Amours, Wayne Easter, Keith Martin and Scott Simms.

These MPs have now been told that they MUST support Michael Ignatieff. They must vote to protect and preserve the failed long-gun registry. They must choose their leader over their constituents. They must do what they have been told.

We need your help today to hold these Liberal MPs to their previous commitment. They need to understand the political consequences of going back on their word. Of voting against their constituents. Of choosing Michael Ignatieff over their friends and neighbours back home.

The Conservative Party is launching a campaign to do just that. Please make a contribution of $1000 or $500 right now by following this link in support of this campaign. We will ensure that every long-gun owner, every citizen and every voter in these eight Liberal ridings will be fully aware of the choice they must make.

Their choice will be clear: SCRAP the failed long-gun registry or KEEP it. It's as simple as that. No shifting, no sliding.

We need your help today to keep these Liberal MPs to their word. Make a contribution of $1000 or $500 right now by following this link.

Working together we can scrap the failed Liberal long-gun registry. Support our campaign today.

Sincerely,

Irving R. Gerstein, C.M., O.Ont.

Chair, Conservative Fund Canada

PS – Remember that you'll receive a tax receipt for any contribution you make. This can make the actual cost of your contribution as low as 25% of your overall giving this year. Please, follow this link right now and make a contribution of $1000 or $500.