麻豆传媒

Prime Minister Stephen Harper appears unlikely to get his wish to have three senators caught up in an expense scandal suspended before the Conservative convention gets underway, as ongoing procedural wrangling appears to have pushed a vote on the suspensions to next week.

Senators Mike Duffy, Patrick Brazeau and Pamela Wallin had been the subject of suspension motions moved by Sen. Claude Carignan, government leader in the Senate, that called for them to be suspended without pay, benefits or access to Senate resources.

Conservative Sen. Yonah Martin tabled a notice of motion Wednesday to turn the current motions, which were tabled as 鈥渙ther business,鈥� into one motion as 鈥済overnment business.鈥� The new motion would still call for the three senators to be suspended without pay or access to Senate resources. However, the senators would still have access to their health and life insurance benefits.

Martin is expected to move the motion on Thursday.

Liberal Sen. James Cowan rose in the Senate to ask for clarification on Martin鈥檚 notice of motion, asking if she is proposing to amend the original motions, or if the intention is to turn the current motions into government motions, which he argued is not allowed.

鈥淲hat in the world are you doing?鈥� Cowan asked.

Carignan said the Conservatives will table a new motion as government business, which will also allow them to move a closure motion to cap debate at six hours, something they were not allowed to do with the original motions.

Martin had moved a closure motion on the original motions on Tuesday. However, Sen. Joan Fraser raised a point order that a closure motion is government business, and so can鈥檛 be moved on the original motions.

On Wednesday, Senate Speaker Noel Kinsella ruled Martin鈥檚 motion out of order.

Speaking later on CTV鈥檚 Power Play Wednesday, Cowan said because some Conservative senators had spoken out against the suspension motions, arguing that Wallin, Duffy and Brazeau were being denied due process, the new motion shows the Conservatives 鈥渁re concerned that they might lose this vote.

鈥淪o instead of it being private business where there was to be a free vote as it is in our side, they made it a piece of government business and they will bring in closure on that piece of government business,鈥� Cowan said. 鈥淚 assume that鈥檚 to bring all the government senators in line.鈥�

Conservative Sen. Hugh Segal, who had spoken out against the motions and signalled his intention to vote against them, said he would find it more difficult to vote against the new motion if it is government business.

"I have to assess what I'm going to do between now and then,鈥� Segal said. 鈥淎s a general principle, I've never voted against a government motion.鈥�

The back-and-forth means it is possible that senators will be unable to vote to suspend Duffy, Wallin and Brazeau until next week. However, another scenario would see the new suspension motion going to a vote late Friday, just as the prime minister is delivering his keynote address to party faithful at the Conservative convention.

When he left the Senate chamber Wednesday evening, Carignan would not answer reporters鈥� questions about when the suspension motion would be put to a vote.

The procedural wrangling followed a long day of debate in the upper chamber Tuesday over whether the senators should be suspended or be allowed to make their case at a public hearing. Cowan had proposed sending Brazeau鈥檚 suspension motion to committee for further study. However, that motion was defeated in a vote Wednesday evening.

Opposition hammers Harper

Meanwhile, in the House, Harper did little to clarify repeated questions over whether his former chief of staff Nigel Wright was dismissed or resigned after news of a $90,000 payment to help Duffy repay his expenses came to light.

"Why is the Prime Minister so afraid to answer such a simple question?" NDP Leader Thomas Mulcair asked.

Harper said the "facts are clear" in the matter, and suggested that the decision for Wright to leave the PMO was mutual.

"Mr. Wright and I both agreed that his actions are completely inappropriate. That is why he's no longer working for us," he said.

After news broke of the $90,000 payment to Duffy, Harper said he had accepted Wright's resignation.

However, speaking to a Halifax Radio station earlier this week, Harper changed his tune, saying Wright was "dismissed."

Liberal MP Ralph Goodale asked Harper what had changed between the time news of the $90,000 payment first broke, and when Wright left the PMO several days later.

"From May 15 to May 19 the Prime Minister said he had full confidence in Nigel Wright. He called him an honourable man, showing leadership. He said he was just protecting taxpayers, just helping a dear old friend," Goodale said. "Then suddenly Mr. Wright was thrown under the bus with Duffy. What changed?"

For a second day, the Prime Minister continued to divert questions over his knowledge of a deal worked out between Duffy and the PMO that saw the senator receive money to repay ineligible housing expenses, along with $13,560 for legal expenses, in what Duffy has characterized as a 鈥渕onstrous conspiracy鈥� to make a politically damaging problem go away.

"If the Prime Minister says he does not defend the actions of Mr. Duffy, why is he literally paying to defend the actions of Mr. Duffy," Mulcair asked.

Once again, Harper noted that "all political parties" provide legal assistance to their members.

"All political parties will provide legal assistance to members of its caucus in good standing," he said.

Mulcair later told Power Play that the expenses scandal has gone from concerns about senators鈥� ineligible expense claims to questions about what the prime minister knew about the deal to help Duffy repay his expenses.

鈥淚t鈥檚 about Stephen Harper. It鈥檚 not about Mike Duffy, it鈥檚 not about Pamela Wallin or where they live, wherever that might be,鈥� Mulcair said. 鈥淚t鈥檚 about him, it鈥檚 about his behaviour, it鈥檚 about what type of shop that he runs on behalf of Canadians.鈥�

Mulcair says that while Duffy 鈥渉as almost no credibility on any of this,鈥� he has tabled documents in support of some of his claims.

鈥淎t least he鈥檚 put forward documents, at least he鈥檚 provided explanations, he鈥檚 answered questions,鈥� Mulcair said. 鈥淭he prime has done none of the above. So even though Mike Duffy has almost no credibility, believe it or not the prime minister has even less. That鈥檚 quite a feat.鈥�