The opposition questioned the "gall" of federal Liberals Monday, after the governing party asked the RCMP to investigate the possibility it was a victim of fraud in the sponsorship program.

"They have the gall to depict the Liberal Party as the victim of the sponsorship scandal," Conservative Leader Stephen Harper said as the daily question period got underway in the House of Commons Monday afternoon.

"Will the Government at least have the decency to simply admit that the only victim is the Canadian taxpayer whose money was stolen?"

The Liberal Party called in the RCMP in apparent response to testimony last week at the Gomery Inquiry. The details cannot be made public due to a publication ban.

Prime Minister Paul Martin replied to Harper by defending party workers.

"There are of thousands of men and women in Quebec and across this country who are dedicated to the Liberal Party and to their country," Martin said.

"Those members of the Liberal Party should not have to bear the rumours ... or the burden of the activities of a very small few who may have colluded against the party," he added, promising to defend them.

Later outside the House of Commons, NDP Leader Jack Layton told reporters that he believes his party agrees with most Canadians in supporting Gomery's work to its conclusion.

"We shouldn't be trying to undermine it, trying to sidetrack it," he said. "That is what the prime minister is now trying to do with his claims that somehow the Liberal party or his organization is somehow the victim here."

If the government really believes that, Layton said, "Why wouldn't they give Canadians their money back. They're the real victims."

Earlier Monday, Liberal party lawyer Doug Mitchell told reporters that he has asked the RCMP to investigate the possibility his party was a victim of fraud in the sponsorship scandal.

"I have been directed by my clients to contact the RCMP to ask that they investigate the possibility that the party itself may have been the target of fraud or other harmful acts by certain individuals,'' Mitchell said.

"Using inappropriate means to gain undeserved benefit ... is, if proven to be true, criminal action, plain and simple.''

It was the second major piece of news to come out of the sponsorship inquiry Monday.

Mitchell's announcement came shortly after Justice John Gomery granted the Liberals full standing, meaning party lawyers can now cross-examine witnesses. The Liberals already had intervener status.

"It's obvious that the interests of the Liberal party are clearly at stake here and the reputation of the party risks being affected by what I've heard and maybe by what I will hear,'' said Gomery.

"I think it would be unfair if the Liberal party didn't have the right to cross-examine witnesses.''

This adds to the mystery of last week's so-called "explosive" testimony by former Groupaction advertising executive Jean Brault. Details of his testimony, said to be damning to the Liberal minority, are covered by a publication ban.

Gomery agreed to the ban for Brault and two others -- Paul Coffin of Coffin Communications and former civil servant Chuck Guite -- because the three are facing criminal charges.

Their lawyers successfully argued that testimony at the sponsorship inquiry could bias potential jurors in the criminal trial.

However, the media and the opposition may push to have the ban lifted, now that Brault's lawyers have asked to have his trial delayed until September. A decision on that is expected Wednesday.

While Canadian media can't report on the details, an account of banned testimony has been published on a U.S. political weblog, and transcripts of the testimony are being circulated among Ottawa insiders.