Here is the motion that the Liberals will compel the House to debate on Tuesday.
That, given the recent sworn statements by RCMP Corporal Greg Horton, which revealed that:
(i) on February 21, 2013, the Prime Minister’s Office had agreed that, with regard to Mike Duffy’s controversial expenses, the Conservative Party of Canada would “keep him whole on the repayment”;
(ii) on February 22, 2013, the Prime Minister’s Chief of Staff wanted to “speak to the PM before everything is considered final”;
(iii) later on February 22, 2013, the Prime Minister’s Chief of Staff confirmed “We are good to go from the PM once Ben has his confirmation from Payne.”;
(iv) an agreement was reached between Benjamin Perrin and Janice Payne, counsels for the Prime Minister and Mike Duffy;
(v) the amount to keep Mike Duffy whole was calculated to be higher than first determined, requiring a changed source of funds from the Conservative Party to Nigel Wright’s personal funds, after which the arrangement proceeded and Duffy’s expenses were re-paid; and
(vi) and that subsequently, the Prime Minister’s Office engaged in the obstruction of a Deloitte audit and a whitewash of a Senate report;
the House condemn the deeply disappointing actions of the Prime Minister’s Office in devising, organizing and participating in an arrangement that the RCMP believes violated sections 119, 121 and 122 of the Criminal Code of Canada and remind the Prime Minister of his own Guide for Ministers and Ministers of State, which states on page 28 that “Ministers and Ministers of State are personally responsible for the conduct and operation of their offices and the exempt staff in their employ,” and the House call upon the Prime Minister to explain in detail to Canadians, under oath, what Nigel Wright or any other member of his staff or any other Conservative told him at any time about any aspect of any possible arrangement pertaining to Mike Duffy, what he did about it, and when.
The deal-breaker here, if there was any chance the Conservatives would vote in favour of such a motion, is probably the part about the Prime Minister explaining himself under oath—Conservatives have already defeated a previous Liberal motion that would have called on Mr. Harper to testify before a parliamentary committee.