2016-11-23

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are taking $15 billion away from communities to set up their new bank.We repeatedly warned that small and rural communities would be left out of the funding opportunities. Instead of listening, the Liberals called Canadians stupid and irresponsible for raising concerns.Yesterday, the finance minister was forced to admit that small communities will in fact be left out. When will the Liberals stop betraying rural communities, and start working to get infrastructure built in every part of the country?

Mr. Speaker, the government has announced a coal plan that will drive up electricity costs across Canada. We have seen the story before. In Ontario, Gerald Butts orchestrated the infamous green energy plan, where electricity rates skyrocketed to the highest in North America. The policy was such a disaster that Premier Wynne had to publicly apologize. Now Mr. Butts has convinced the Prime Minister to adopt the same crazy plan.Why are the Liberals so intent on driving seniors out of their homes and businesses out of our country, and why will the Prime Minister not stop this insanity before he also has to apologize?

Mr. Speaker, is he kidding? How can a feminist government be proud of a bill that penalizes women? Yesterday, Alberta MLA Sandra Jansen rose in the legislature to read out some of the hateful and misogynistic comments she had received after joining the NDP. We need to ask ourselves why women in politics are targeted with sexually violent language when men are not. Will the government stand with Sandra Jansen, denounce sexist language in our politics, and work with us to remove misogyny from this House?

Mr. Speaker, let us cut to the chase here. The Liberals' own open and accountable government guidelines are a charade. They have become a joke. The Prime Minister never intended to follow them and, frankly, his ministers might as well just rip them up. That said, I have one question. Is there anyone on that side of the House who has a problem with the Prime Minister selling access and influence to billionaire communist donors for the favours they want?

Mr. Speaker, when he is not busy calling his detractors stupid, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister sometimes makes sense. On Twitter, he conceded that there are times when it costs more to do things faster. Eureka! Well done. That is exactly what we have been speaking out against. We want the government to invest in infrastructure as promised. We do not want the privatization of revenue in the form of tolls and user fees.Will the Liberals scrap their infrastructure privatization bank, or will they keep listening to their friends and Bay Street and Wall Street interests?

Mr. Speaker, yesterday I asked about a case where a 50-year-old man sexually assaulted a 15-year-old girl, and the judge refused to give a one-year sentence to the perpetrator. Apparently one year was too much.However, the Prime Minister's response was staggering. He defended the judge and said that they “make responsible, reasonable decisions about the cases before them.”He could have stood up for the victim, but instead he stood up for the judge. Does the Prime Minister understand that comments like that make it harder for women to come forward when they are sexually assaulted?

Mr. Speaker, that is absolutely ridiculous. The Prime Minister's own guidelines say “there should be no preferential access to government, or appearance of preferential access...because they have made financial contributions”. Well, so much for that.The Prime Minister cannot keep himself from giving—

Mr. Speaker, the member obviously is on a fishing trip. What she is trying to do is to stitch together a whole series of things which, when taken together, have absolutely no basis in reality.One thing I can tell her is that instead of ripping up an artificial piece of paper, one thing we did not do is leave fundraising events in leg irons in a sheriff's van, or be like Peter Penashue and resign in disgrace for not following the fundraising rules.

Mr. Speaker, they are buying a bunch of flying white elephants.The Prime Minister is risking Canadian jobs, taxpayers' money, and the well-being of our pilots. The former head of procurement for National Defence, Alan Williams, said that we do not tell a company we intend on buying its product, and then try to negotiate a price. That is like me walking into a car dealership, telling the salesman that I will buy a car in the showroom, and then try to sit down to negotiate a price. Everybody knows that is ridiculous. The Liberals have bungled this file completely.Will the Prime Minister reverse this irresponsible decision and immediately launch a fair competition?

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has had a serious lapse in judgment. He is hosting Liberal Party fundraisers with Chinese billionaires. These are the Chinese 1%. These are also people who are in the upper echelons of the Communist Party. They do not have Canada's national interest at heart. In fact, they have been linked to engaging in corporate espionage and hacking our own government servers.Why is the Prime Minister willing to sell out our national interest for a donation to the Liberal Party?

Mr. Speaker, when the minister says closing the Vegreville immigration centre is to “ensure tax dollars are spent on quality services”, he insults my constituents. In fact, officials have praised Vegreville staff, saying that it is a model, and an innovative office doing exemplary work and exceeding targets. Claiming the closure is to improve efficiencies is a slap in the face to the hard-working staff there.When will the minister stop attacking my constituents and reverse this edict?

Mr. Speaker, it has been nearly a month since this House unanimously passed a motion to bring Yazidi women and girls to Canada.We thought we won a victory for women who have been persecuted and enslaved by ISIS terrorists, but now government officials have admitted they are only targeting 50 women and girls to bring to Canada for safe asylum. These women deserve more than a token effort. Their lives are on the line.Will the Prime Minister honour the spirit of this motion and do more for these girls?

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals' decision to sole-source the Super Hornet is very dangerous, and is another broken promise. It is dangerous for taxpayers since there was no price announced yesterday. It is dangerous for Canadian jobs since all F-18s are made in Missouri, and it is dangerous to our air force which will now be flying obsolete fighter jets.Do the Liberals even have a clue how much a Super Hornet is going to cost Canadian taxpayers, and how many jobs are going to be lost in Canada's aerospace industry?

It is clear, Mr. Speaker, that the government members do not understand the question being asked. This is not about following the rules. The Liberals have an ethical problem following their own rules that the Prime Minister has set out for himself. He set the bar here for his government's ethical behaviour. We are not talking about the election financing laws. We are talking about the bar that was set here. He has failed miserably to come close to even meeting that standard. This is about his rules, about his word, about his promise to the House and to Canadians.When will the Prime Minister put a stop to these shady shenanigans?

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the minister asked what the NDP would do to invest in infrastructure. I am happy to tell him. We would invest public dollars for public infrastructure. This is what the Liberals promised during the campaign, but now they are moving full speed ahead with privatization. We have seen how privatization and P3s cost taxpayers millions, yet the Liberal infrastructure bank is a P3 system on steroids.Why are the Liberals so intent on a system that will cost more, while imposing tolls and user fees on Canadians?

Mr. Speaker, our colleagues seem to find it funny that the foundation is independent.Perhaps they should ask former MP Chuck Strahl or former NDP member Megan Leslie about it, since they both sit on the board of the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation.

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has instructed the justice minister to gut the laws that punish criminals and protect victims of crime. These are the laws that the previous Conservative government supported.First, the victims surcharge got chopped, and now mandatory jail times are under threat. Why is it that the Liberals have a problem with a 50-year-old man molesting a 15-year-old girl not being subject to mandatory imprisonment? What is their problem with that? Let us hear it.

Mr. Speaker, I share the member's disgust at the misogyny that women in politics, in fact in public spheres, receive every single day in the cyber-world, but in the real world as well. We are working so hard to make sure that we have a comprehensive federal strategy that will address the violence that women are receiving, whether it is in the cyber-world, the real world, or in their personal lives. I am very proud of this work, and I look forward to working with the member opposite to make sure that we achieve our goal.

Mr. Speaker, I am committed to standing up and following-through with the mandate that the Prime Minister gave me to do a comprehensive review of the criminal justice system, including sentencing reform. That includes looking at mandatory minimum penalties to ensure the laws we have in place are meeting their objectives.This is what I am going to undertake. Certainly, with respect to child sexual assault, that is wrong. We are going to ensure that we work with the judiciary, and work with all the actors in the criminal justice system to ensure we are achieving the ends of the legislation we have in place.

Mr. Speaker, the previous government decided to risk manage the capability gap. Our government is not willing to take this risk. We are going to be investing in the Canadian Armed Forces. That is why we are going to have an interim fleet of new aircraft to fill this gap, making sure we can meet all our obligations to NORAD, NATO, and any unforseen situations.If anybody thinks we are not going to have any unforseen situations, then think about 9/11, when we had to put every single fighter up in the air.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to answer this question again.Child sexual assault is incredibly serious, and our government will take every step that we can in order to protect children, in part doing a broad review of the criminal justice system to ensure that we look at it broadly, including sentencing reform, including mandatory minimum penalties, to ensure that we provide the necessary discretion to judges to ensure that we have foremost in our minds public safety, as well as ensuring that we are compliant with the Constitution of the country.

Mr. Speaker, I would gladly tape this back up, and maybe the Prime Minister will follow his own ethical guidelines.If the Prime Minister cannot keep himself from selling influence to billionaire Chinese communists, how can Canadians trust any of his ethical standards?

Mr. Speaker, it is really too bad that the Prime Minister will not answer these questions himself. But the member of Parliament refers to all parties, but only one party is the government and can make that sort of decision.We are talking about a $1-million donation to the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation after a dinner that was attended by the Prime Minister. Why are the Liberals not following their own rules?I hope they will not answer once again: “We have the strictest rules in the country.”

Mr. Speaker, yesterday in response to my question about hosting this cash for access fundraiser with Chinese billionaires, the Prime Minister said himself, “That is why we have committed to engaging positively with the world to draw in investment.”He admitted that he is discussing government business at a fundraiser, which clearly violates his own ethical guidelines. We have said it before, these fundraisers do not pass the smell test.Will the Prime Minister do the right thing, and stop these cash for access programs?

Mr. Speaker, I am extraordinarily proud of the action taken by our government to phase-out coal-fired power by 2030. This is a very important measure. It will not only reduce greenhouse gas emissions, it will improve the health of Canadians. It will improve the health of elderly people and young kids who have asthma. It will stop premature deaths. We will be working with all of the provinces and territories to ensure we have a win-win solution for ratepayers, workers, and for the economy.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Liberals announced that they would be taking billions of dollars from Canadians to cover the Prime Minister's backside. The decision to purchase an interim aircraft makes no sense.According to the commander of the Royal Canadian Air Force, the current fleet of CF-18s will be operational until 2025, which means there is time to move forward with a competitive process now. The government is still going to purchase the F-18 Super Hornet as an interim aircraft at a cost of $335 million each, the price Kuwait just paid, to fill a gap that does not exist. How much is this useless acquisition going to cost Canadians?

Mr. Speaker, we keep seeing how the government puts a priority on its Bay Street friends instead of on everyday Canadians. We have a minister who will not stand up to the billionaire to whom the Liberals sold the Port of Churchill, and a Prime Minister who is busy going to cash for access fundraisers, yet has not visited Churchill or the Arctic since the election.Manitoba municipalities are calling for federal action to reopen the port in 2017. When will the Liberals stop catering to their billionaire friends and stand up for Canada by saving the Port of Churchill?

Mr. Speaker, if that were the case, why did they vote against letting the Conflict of Interest Commissioner take a look at this in the first place?The Prime Minister continues to stand in this place and defend his unethical and shady behaviour. The Prime Minister's open and accountable government document spells out in his words, his rules, his promise, yet the Prime Minister himself hosted a cash for access event with Chinese billionaires. Two of those billionaires then made a $1 million donation to the Trudeau Foundation a week later.We are not talking about fundraising laws. Why did the Prime Minister break his word, break his rules, and break his promise?

Mr. Speaker, I am happy to speak to this again. To repeat, without question, child sexual assault is absolutely unacceptable. The Prime Minister has instructed me to do a comprehensive review of the criminal justice system, including sentencing reform. That includes a comprehensive review of mandatory minimum penalties. It is evident, over the last number of years, that mandatory minimum penalties are being challenged by the courts. The necessary discretion for judges needs to be in place. We are going to move forward with this comprehensive review, and fundamentally ensure that the protection of the rights of Canadians are imbued in the sentencing reforms that we undertake.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Prime Minister, a self-described feminist, defended the disturbing decision of an Ontario judge to throw out a mandatory sentence for sexual interference involving a 15-year-old girl.Does the Minister of Justice support the position of the Prime Minister, or is she finally prepared to stand up for victims, and assure Canadians that the government will not roll back mandatory sentences for child sexual predators, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, talk about pumping up their rhetoric.We are all Canadians. The member should know that it is Canadians who donate to political parties, at least that is a part of the law. The law is important to recognize here, because, in fact, the Liberal Party has been following the law. This is why there is no conflict of interest.At the end of the day, we have a government that is open to all Canadians, and that has been demonstrated in a very historic fashion. Never before have I witnessed, in my 25 years, a government that has been so aggressively progressive in reaching out, connecting with Canadians, and delivering on the policies that are important to Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, our participation in the joint strike fighter program over the past few years has injected more than $1 billion into the Canadian economy and created and maintained thousands of job across the country.Yesterday the Premier of Manitoba, Mr. Pallister, expressed his concerns about the plan to purchase the Super Hornet, and with good reason, since those aircraft will be built almost entirely in the U.S.Is that what leadership means to this government, creating jobs outside the country?Can the Minister of Public Services say otherwise? Has she forgotten her mandate?

Mr. Speaker, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms is the pride of all Canadians, and our government is committed to ensuring our legislation is constitutional and ensures the highest standards that Canadians expect.As with all legislation that I have introduced as minister, I was very pleased last week to introduce a charter statement on Bill C-32, an act related to the repeal of section 159 of the Criminal Code, and in tabling a charter statement, ensuring that we invite the public and parliamentarians into the thinking and the review I have undertaken to ensure our legislation is constitutional.

Mr. Speaker, it is incredible. They just do not get it.Speaking of broken promises, the government seems to be preparing to table the approval of Kinder Morgan. The Prime Minister was crystal clear during the campaign that if the Liberals formed government the review would have to be “redone”. Our question is simple. What does the government have to say to British Columbians who voted Liberal and now feel completely betrayed because the government is about to approve Kinder Morgan?

Mr. Speaker, that number has nothing to do with our plans. Most important are events in the region, and our government has committed $1.6 billion to humanitarian capacity-building and military efforts in the region. But we will certainly honour our commitment, and my department is working very hard to devise a plan to bring in those who have suffered from the atrocities of Daesh, both Yazidis and others, into this country within the time period prescribed by Parliament.

Mr. Speaker, important files are piling up on the Prime Minister's desk. That is regrettable but not surprising. Apparently the Prime Minister is in no rush to deal with the most urgent issues for the good of all Canadians. Will all Canadians have to donate $1 million to the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation to get the Prime Minister to listen to them?

Mr. Speaker, I am glad the member recognized that we are indeed following the rules and the laws of this land. That is something we are doing. When one is following the laws, there cannot be a conflict of interest. The Conservatives know that, because we are following the same rules the Conservatives had in place when they were in government. We have a Prime Minister who is accessible to all Canadians, as is this cabinet, as are the members of the Liberal caucus, and there is no cost for that. We are in fact following the rules.

Mr. Speaker, according to the hon. member for Québec, it will cost no less than $400 million to repaint the Quebec Bridge, which is covered in rust. During the election campaign, the Liberals promised to take action if a solution was not found by June 30, 2016. Five months later, there is still no agreement in sight with CN.Is the Quebec Bridge an indication of the kinds of projects that might be funded by an infrastructure bank, where citizens, and not CN, will foot the bill through user fees?

Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition knows that when ministers, members of Parliament, and the Prime Minister attend partisan fundraisers, it is done to raise money for election campaign preparedness. Every single party in this House does exactly the same thing.When we go to those fundraisers, we talk to Canadians about a whole range of issues, as we do in thousands and thousands of open public events across the country, something her government never did.

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals promised that they would be transparent and work on behalf of all Canadians.However, with regard to the Saint-Cuthbert, Terrebonne and Mascouche aerodromes, the Minister of Transport is satisfied with completely subjective and bungled consultations that benefit only the developers, not Canadians. The government is not doing its due diligence.Can the minister set the record straight on the Saint-Cuthbert aerodrome?Will he listen to the people of Saint-Cuthbert and put a stop to the aerodrome project?

Mr. Speaker, that is embarrassing. One hundred thousand energy workers have lost their jobs since the government took office, and the Liberals are making things worse. The energy east pipeline is stalled as National Energy Board hearings are on an indefinite hold. The northern gateway pipeline is in limbo as the Liberals have refused to respond to a recent court ruling. The Kinder Morgan pipeline decision has been delayed by six months due to additional Liberal red tape.Middle-class energy workers are hurting in our country. When will the minister start doing his job, stand up for energy workers, and make sure these job-creating energy projects get built?

Mr. Speaker, cash for access fundraising leads to conflicts of interest. Every government must do everything it can to avoid conflicts of interest, and that is even more important with the current government, whether it be the selling off of public infrastructure to private interests or the single sourcing of fighter jets to Boeing.What will the federal government do to ensure that it is not making decisions based on who gave money to the Liberal Party?

Mr. Speaker, 10 times I stood in the House last week and asked if the government would fix its flawed CPP legislation, Bill C-26. Ten times I received non answers. Today, I will be introducing my amendment at committee to fix this Liberal flaw that would have serious consequences on the well-being of Canadian women and people living with disabilities. I have a very simple question for the minister. Will he fix the flaw in the bill by supporting my amendment, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, if those members really want to refer to what the Federal Court of Appeal said in the northern gateway case, it said that the Harper government had insufficiently consulted indigenous peoples. That was the reason. It was not because of the proponent, not because of the regulator but because of her government. Canadians deserve a better process, and that is what we are giving them.

Mr. Speaker, the only thing predictable is that Liberals will never stand up for Canadian energy workers. These pipeline projects are waiting for a green light. If built, they will create tens of thousands of well-paying jobs for Canadians from coast to coast. While middle-class energy workers are hurting, the Liberal government has done nothing to help them. When will the minister start to do his job, stand up for Canadian energy workers, and help get these projects built?

Mr. Speaker, there is an obligation of government to make sure that the men and women have the equipment they need to do the job expected of them. That is exactly what we are doing, because of the capability gap the former government did not take care of. We are taking care of that, so we can make sure they are not in harm's way, and that we can fulfill our obligations.In the meantime, we are having an open and transparent competition, just like we committed to do. We are taking care of our men and women in uniform.

Mr. Speaker, earlier this week, an Ontario judge set aside a one-year mandatory prison sentence for a 50-year-old man who sexually assaulted a 15-year-old girl. The judge said that a one-year sentence was too harsh.Yesterday, the Prime Minister, who considers himself a feminist, defended the judge.Given that this Prime Minister wants to eliminate some mandatory prison sentences, will he also eliminate mandatory sentences for cases of sexual assault of minors?

Mr. Speaker, let us be very clear that we have in Canada some of the strictest rules in the country. There are many ways in which other jurisdictions raise money. Let us be very clear that there have been no laws broken, and if there have been no laws broken, there is no conflict of interest.No matter how often the Conservatives and the NDP repeat it, the bottom line is there is no conflict of interest. It is as simple as that.

Mr. Speaker, we have certainly reached out to the mayor of Vegreville, through my staff. I have offered to have a meeting with the member opposite. However, the fact remains that this is a decision, driven by the need to produce lower processing times, better service and a growing immigration service.There will be a net addition of jobs in Alberta. All those currently working in Vegreville will be able to work in Alberta in the future.

Mr. Speaker, the problem is that all the projects he just listed are not part of the infrastructure bank, since it has not yet been created.The government is creating a new infrastructure bank for that party's cronies. It is taking back $15 billion that had been allocated to the regions, and reallocating it through that bank. Yesterday the Minister of Finance said himself that small municipalities are unlikely to benefit from this infrastructure bank.Can the Minister of Infrastructure and Communities explain to Canadians, and to the mayors in the House today, why he has been denying this fact for at least a month now?

Mr. Speaker, I am going to ask the member one of his favourite questions. How many kilometres of pipeline did his government build to export markets? The answer is zero. The reason the answer is zero is because the people of Canada lost credibility in the process. In order to rebuild that credibility, we have established a set of rules that will govern those projects currently under review that will lead to long-term reform of the National Energy Board, which is in Canada's interests.

Mr. Speaker, what I am very pleased about is our announcement yesterday for an open and transparent competition that will ensure that our men and women in uniform get the equipment they need to do the jobs expected of them.We are going to make sure that we have a robust, transparent competition that will ensure that Canadians will get jobs from coast to coast to coast, as a result of our determination to do what is right for the men and women in our military.

Their principles are interim, Mr. Speaker.During the election campaign, the Prime Minister promised to put an end to Stephen Harper's approach to energy project development, but now that he is in office, the Prime Minister is not only taking Stephen Harper's approach, he is also using exactly the same process for approving pipeline projects.My question is for the Minister of Environment.Does she seriously think that our ecosystems will be better protected if the exact same approval is given by the Liberals instead of the Conservatives? Is that what she thinks?

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada was given a mandate to ensure the government maintained the greatest possible respect for the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in all of its legislation. Could my hon. colleague inform the House what concrete steps the government is taking to demonstrate its commitment to the charter on behalf of all Canadians, including the LGBTQ2 community that has long advocated for equality of rights when it comes to sexual orientation?

Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition knows full well that, at all times, our party follows the fundraising rules applicable.She also knows that only Canadians can contribute to Canadian political fundraising efforts. She also knows that the names of every individual who attends these very routine fundraisers is disclosed publicly, as the law requires.The Liberal Party has had a considerable record of following the fundraising rules, something that her party cannot say.

Mr. Speaker, we are still looking for the $40 million. Maybe we will look in other places.Yesterday, the Prime Minister talked about meetings to promote investment in Canada and economic development. By making people pay for access to him, he often spends more time involved in Liberal Party fundraising than he does improving the lives of Canadians. If people have to give money to the Liberal Party to get the Prime Minister's attention, can he explain the difference between affairs of state and the affairs of the Liberal Party of Canada?

Mr. Speaker, I am somewhat disappointed. The truth will kind of set us free.I must say that the opposition members do seem to be confused about how donations to charities actually work. If they need a lesson on how independent charities and donations work, perhaps they should ask the member for Chilliwack—Hope to call his father. His father is a former Conservative MP who actually sits on the board of directors, so it might be worth making that telephone call.It should be clear that the Prime Minister has absolutely no involvement in this charity.

Mr. Speaker, if the member opposite and her party support public dollars for public infrastructure, they will support our budget. That is exactly what we are doing. We are investing $180 billion of public money into public infrastructure to help communities build public transit, more affordable housing, recreational and cultural facilities, as well as to invest into green infrastructure to reduce the impact of greenhouse gas emissions, and to make our communities more resilient and sustainable.

Mr. Speaker, we have shown certainty where before there was only uncertainty. We have a very specific set of timelines that are predictable. They are predictable to proponents. They are predictable for those who want to offer their opinion on all of these projects.The member has mentioned four or five projects. What they share is that there is predictability, there is a timeline, and there is a process, none of which was the case when we took power.

Mr. Speaker, as all members in the House are painfully aware, there is an opioid overdose crisis going on in B.C. and across Canada. Could the minister update the House on what she is doing to work with our partners in health from across Canada?

Mr. Speaker, our approach is based on science and facts. We are listening to Canadians, and we are working hard to restore their confidence in our environmental processes.That is how we do things, and that is how we will make our decisions.

Mr. Speaker, my colleague opposite knows very well that the complete disclosure of all of the donations that are received by every political party, and stringent limits with respect to the maximum personal donations that can be made, ensure that there is no conflict of interest. On this side of the House, we follow all of the fundraising rules and the Chief Electoral Officer himself has said that Canada's political financing laws are the most advanced, constraining, and transparent in the world. We agree with the Chief Electoral Officer, and we are happy to follow those rules.

Mr. Speaker, it will be much better than that. The member knows very well that the Pierre Elliott Trudeau foundation is an independent charitable organization with no political affiliation.I see my colleagues—

Mr. Speaker, we understand that infrastructure is the foundation for building strong and sustainable communities, including rural communities.Let me tell the House what we are doing. There are water and wastewater upgrades for Red Deer, Alberta; upgrades to the town of Lanigan water in Saskatchewan; wastewater treatment upgrades for Selkirk and Gimli in Manitoba; water and wastewater upgrades to Royal Oak, Bay, Ontario; and there is more I could say.I encourage members to actually visit the Infrastructure Canada website to see how many projects we are funding.

Mr. Speaker, our number one priority is to create good, quality jobs in Canada, and through this initiative, we are going to use the industrial technological benefit initiative to maximize opportunities for Canadian businesses. This will, of course, help Manitoba, Quebec, Ontario, Atlantic Canada, and British Columbia. From coast to coast to coast, we will see a very strong and vibrant aerospace and defence sector that contributes over 235,000 jobs and $31 billion of economic activity. That is what we are proud of. We are going to continue to invest in that sector and create good, quality jobs.

Mr. Speaker, we have put forward an agenda to invest more than $180 billion in public infrastructure from coast to coast to coast. Only 8% of that infrastructure will be delivered through the bank. The role of the bank is to build more infrastructure for Canadian communities, not less infrastructure. The vast majority of the communities, municipalities, and provinces are supportive of that plan, and we are proud to deliver it in partnership with them.

Mr. Speaker, as I said, we are conducting a broad review of the criminal justice system, including sentencing reform, including a comprehensive review of the mandatory minimum penalties that are contained within the Criminal Code, with an eye to ensuring that we provide the necessary discretion to our judiciary across the country; ensure that we uphold public safety; ensure that we provide efficiencies, effectiveness, and fairness in the criminal justice system; and fundamentally ensure that we are in compliance with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Constitution.

Mr. Speaker, we announced in January a new set of interim principles that would govern those projects that were currently under review. As part of those principles there was extensive consultation. In fact, there was a ministerial panel that worked up and down the coast. As a matter of fact, on the website there were more than 35,000 people who expressed themselves. That seems to me to be a much better process than the one we inherited from the previous government.

Mr. Speaker, I like the fact that the member opposite is asking this question. When this issue came to fruition, I reached out to her and her office and she was very reluctant to get involved. Therefore, we took leadership. I had the opportunity to work with my colleagues from Manitoba who showed leadership on this file. That is why we invested $4.6 million in Churchill. That is why I personally went to Churchill and met with the northern delegation. We are committed to finding a solution there. We are committed to creating jobs. That funding will help with Arctic research. That funding will help with tourism. That funding will help the community. That is leadership.

Mr. Speaker, as the member for Surrey Centre well knows, we are facing a growing and serious public health crisis in our country as it relates to opioids. We are determined to make sure that we proceed actively on a drug policy that is collaborative, comprehensive, compassionate, and evidence-based. It is for this reason that last week I co-hosted a conference and summit in Ottawa, where we brought together people with lived experiences, their families, health care professionals, and every level of government. We had educators and regulators there, and we all worked together on a plan to address this crisis.We will work in partnership to find immediate solutions to address the problem—

Mr. Speaker, I do not know which part of the plan the member does not understand.We are investing $180 billion. We have approved more than 980 projects with a combined investment of $12 billion. Out of that, hundreds of projects are for rural communities, helping with water and wastewater infrastructure, roadway infrastructure, and all kinds of infrastructure that our rural communities need.We are proud to develop a plan that is going to work for all communities, large cities, mid-size cities, and rural and northern communities.

Mr. Speaker, we are very proud of the fact that they are Canadians we are really talking about, Canadian donors.The reality is that we have some of the strictest political financing regulations in the country and they are always being followed.We find it peculiar that the opposition members are trying to politicize the particular issue, since they should very well know that the process for approval of this was in 2012 under the previous government. It was approved by the then minister of finance, Joe Oliver.

Mr. Speaker, I can tell the House that we were very pleased to enhance the Canada pension plan. We know that improves outcomes for Canadians, all Canadians in future, around Canada pension plan opportunities. We also recognize that it is particularly good for women, who have less participation in workforce pension plans, and who live longer, so we are indeed sure this is a positive thing for women. We will continue to advocate for provisions that will make sense for all Canadians, including women, and it is something I will bring up at the meeting with the premiers.

Mr. Speaker, as a former city councillor and now minister, I welcome the Federation of Canadian Municipalities to the Hill.Our government is delivering on our $180 billion, 12-year infrastructure plan in partnership with our municipalities, provinces, and territories. We will continue to listen to and work with rural and urban municipalities, and the FCM to ensure that our plan benefits all Canadians from coast to coast to coast.

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I would like to read to you from a document, which states: Ministers and Parliamentary Secretaries must avoid conflict of interest, the appearance of conflict of interest and situations that have the potential to involve conflicts of interest.... There should be no preferential access to government, or appearance of preferential access, accorded to individuals—

Mr. Speaker, in his answer today, the Minister of Fisheries actually referred to this document as artificial. It is the “Open and Accountable Government” document.I would like to seek unanimous consent to table this document in the House.

Mr. Speaker, it is the federal government's responsibility to review airport construction applications. We are doing just that, with the public interest and security in mind.As for Mascouche and Saint-Cuthbert, I issued a ministerial order to force the developers in each case to hold consultations. It is an important process that I insisted on before making a decision. No decision has yet been made regarding Saint-Cuthbert.

Mr. Speaker, as a former mayor, I know that virtually all of my colleagues, including my successor in Hamilton, were enthusiastic about our platform to support local communities by investing in infrastructure projects. These projects will not only strengthen our local economies, but would also improve the quality of life for Canadians. With many of my colleagues meeting today with representatives and stakeholders, could the Minister of Infrastructure and Communities tell the House how our government is supporting our municipalities?

Mr. Speaker, I am glad that my colleague is giving me the opportunity to talk about how much the situation in the Quebec City region has changed compared to what we saw over the past 10 years. People are talking to one another, they are working together, and sharing information that is essential for collaboration and important to everyone. People are being respectful of and listening to one another.We are working for the middle class. We are working toward a forward-looking economy and sustainable development, which is fundamental to the development of the Quebec City region. This is very good news for the Quebec City region. I am very pleased to be part of it.

Mr. Speaker, 31 aboriginal communities are partners, equity owners, in the northern gateway project. As they wrote in statement last September, “Collectively, our communities stand to benefit from more than $2 billion directly from this Project.” That is going to be $2 billion for jobs, for businesses, for educational opportunities, and for long-term benefit.Will the minister follow the court order and immediately start consultations with the indigenous communities?

Mr. Speaker, our approach is based on science and facts. We are listening to Canadians, and we are working hard to restore their confidence in our environmental processes.That is how we do things, and that is how we will make our decisions.

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals' decision to sole-source the Super Hornet is very dangerous, and is another broken promise. It is dangerous for taxpayers since there was no price announced yesterday. It is dangerous for Canadian jobs since all F-18s are made in Missouri, and it is dangerous to our air force which will now be flying obsolete fighter jets.Do the Liberals even have a clue how much a Super Hornet is going to cost Canadian taxpayers, and how many jobs are going to be lost in Canada's aerospace industry?

Mr. Speaker, the government has announced a coal plan that will drive up electricity costs across Canada. We have seen the story before. In Ontario, Gerald Butts orchestrated the infamous green energy plan, where electricity rates skyrocketed to the highest in North America. The policy was such a disaster that Premier Wynne had to publicly apologize. Now Mr. Butts has convinced the Prime Minister to adopt the same crazy plan.Why are the Liberals so intent on driving seniors out of their homes and businesses out of our country, and why will the Prime Minister not stop this insanity before he also has to apologize?

Mr. Speaker, in his answer today, the Minister of Fisheries actually referred to this document as artificial. It is the “Open and Accountable Government” document.I would like to seek unanimous consent to table this document in the House.

Mr. Speaker, as I said, we are conducting a broad review of the criminal justice system, including sentencing reform, including a comprehensive review of the mandatory minimum penalties that are contained within the Criminal Code, with an eye to ensuring that we provide the necessary discretion to our judiciary across the country; ensure that we uphold public safety; ensure that we provide efficiencies, effectiveness, and fairness in the criminal justice system; and fundamentally ensure that we are in compliance with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Constitution.

Mr. Speaker, the problem is that all the projects he just listed are not part of the infrastructure bank, since it has not yet been created.The government is creating a new infrastructure bank for that party's cronies. It is taking back $15 billion that had been allocated to the regions, and reallocating it through that bank. Yesterday the Minister of Finance said himself that small municipalities are unlikely to benefit from this infrastructure bank.Can the Minister of Infrastructure and Communities explain to Canadians, and to the mayors in the House today, why he has been denying this fact for at least a month now?

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are taking $15 billion away from communities to set up their new bank.We repeatedly warned that small and rural communities would be left out of the funding opportunities. Instead of listening, the Liberals called Canadians stupid and irresponsible for raising concerns.Yesterday, the finance minister was forced to admit that small communities will in fact be left out. When will the Liberals stop betraying rural communities, and start working to get infrastructure built in every part of the country?

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has instructed the justice minister to gut the laws that punish criminals and protect victims of crime. These are the laws that the previous Conservative government supported.First, the victims surcharge got chopped, and now mandatory jail times are under threat. Why is it that the Liberals have a problem with a 50-year-old man molesting a 15-year-old girl not being subject to mandatory imprisonment? What is their problem with that? Let us hear it.

Mr. Speaker, we have shown certainty where before there was only uncertainty. We have a very specific set of timelines that are predictable. They are predictable to proponents. They are predictable for those who want to offer their opinion on all of these projects.The member has mentioned four or five projects. What they share is that there is predictability, there is a timeline, and there is a process, none of which was the case when we took power.

Mr. Speaker, I am committed to standing up and following-through with the mandate that the Prime Minister gave me to do a comprehensive review of the criminal justice system, including sentencing reform. That includes looking at mandatory minimum penalties to ensure the laws we have in place are meeting their objectives.This is what I am going to undertake. Certainly, with respect to child sexual assault, that is wrong. We are going to ensure that we work with the judiciary, and work with all the actors in the criminal justice system to ensure we are achieving the ends of the legislation we have in place.

Mr. Speaker, the member obviously is on a fishing trip. What she is trying to do is to stitch together a whole series of things which, when taken together, have absolutely no basis in reality.One thing I can tell her is that instead of ripping up an artificial piece of paper, one thing we did not do is leave fundraising events in leg irons in a sheriff's van, or be like Peter Penashue and resign in disgrace for not following the fundraising rules.

Mr. Speaker, 10 times I stood in the House last week and asked if the government would fix its flawed CPP legislation, Bill C-26. Ten times I received non answers. Today, I will be introducing my amendment at committee to fix this Liberal flaw that would have serious consequences on the well-being of Canadian women and people living with disabilities. I have a very simple question for the minister. Will he fix the flaw in the bill by supporting my amendment, yes or no?

It is clear, Mr. Speaker, that the government members do not understand the question being asked. This is not about following the rules. The Liberals have an ethical problem following their own rules that the Prime Minister has set out for himself. He set the bar here for his government's ethical behaviour. We are not talking about the election financing laws. We are talking about the bar that was set here. He has failed miserably to come close to even meeting that standard. This is about his rules, about his word, about his promise to the House and to Canadians.When will the Prime Minister put a stop to these shady shenanigans?

Mr. Speaker, I am somewhat disappointed. The truth will kind of set us free.I must say that the opposition members do seem to be confused about how donations to charities actually work. If they need a lesson on how independent charities and donations work, perhaps they should ask the member for Chilliwack—Hope to call his father. His father is a former Conservative MP who actually sits on the board of directors, so it might be worth making that telephone call.It should be clear that the Prime Minister has absolutely no involvement in this charity.

Mr. Speaker, let us be very clear that we have in Canada some of the strictest rules in the country. There are many ways in which other jurisdictions raise money. Let us be very clear that there have been no laws broken, and if there have been no laws broken, there is no conflict of interest.No matter how often the Conservatives and the NDP repeat it, the bottom line is there is no conflict of interest. It is as simple as that.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to answer this question again.Child sexual assault is incredibly serious, and our government will take every step that we can in order to protect children, in part doing a broad review of the criminal justice system to ensure that we look at it broadly, including sentencing reform, including mandatory minimum penalties, to ensure that we provide the necessary discretion to judges to ensure that we have foremost in our minds public safety, as well as ensuring that we are compliant with the Constitution of the country.

Mr. Speaker, that is embarrassing. One hundred thousand energy workers have lost their jobs since the government took office, and the Liberals are making things worse. The energy east pipeline is stalled as National Energy Board hearings are on an indefinite hold. The northern gateway pipeline is in limbo as the Liberals have refused to respond to a recent court ruling. The Kinder Morgan pipeline decision has been delayed by six months due to additional Liberal red tape.Middle-class energy workers are hurting in our country. When will the minister start doing his job, stand up for energy workers, and make sure these job-creating energy projects get built?

Mr. Speaker, if that were the case, why did they vote against letting the Conflict of Interest Commissioner take a look at this in the first place?The Prime Minister continues to stand in this place and defend his unethical and shady behaviour. The Prime Minister's open and accountable government document spells out in his words, his rules, his promise, yet the Prime Minister himself hosted a cash for access event with Chinese billionaires. Two of those billionaires then made a $1 million donation to the Trudeau Foundation a week later.We are not talking about fundraising laws. Why did the Prime Minister break his word, break his rules, and break his promise?

Mr. Speaker, we keep seeing how the government puts a priority on its Bay Street friends instead of on everyday Canadians. We have a minister who will not stand up to the billionaire to whom the Liberals sold the Port of Churchill, and a Prime Minister who is busy going to cash for access fundraisers, yet has not visited Churchill or the Arctic since the election.Manitoba municipalities are calling for federal action to reopen the port in 2017. When will the Liberals stop catering to their billionaire friends and stand up for Canada by saving the Port of Churchill?

Mr. Speaker, the only thing predictable is that Liberals will never stand up for Canadian energy workers. These pipeline projects are waiting for a green light. If built, they will create tens of thousands of well-paying jobs for Canadians from coast to coast. While middle-class energy workers are hurting, the Liberal government has done nothing to help them. When will the minister start to do his job, stand up for Canadian energy workers, and help get these projects built?

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I would like to read to you from a document, which states: Ministers and Parliamentary Secretaries must avoid conflict of interest, the appearance of conflict of interest and situations that have the potential to involve conflicts of interest.... There should be no preferential access to government, or appearance of preferential access, accorded to individuals—

Mr. Speaker, when he is not busy calling his detractors stupid, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister sometimes makes sense. On Twitter, he conceded that there are times when it costs more to do things faster. Eureka! Well done. That is exactly what we have been speaking out against. We want the government to invest in infrastructure as promised. We do not want the privatization of revenue in the form of tolls and user fees.Will the Liberals scrap their infrastructure privatization bank, or will they keep listening to their friends and Bay Street and Wall Street interests?

Mr. Speaker, as the member for Surrey Centre well knows, we are facing a growing and serious public health crisis in our country as it relates to opioids. We are determined to make sure that we proceed actively on a drug policy that is collaborative, comprehensive, compassionate, and evidence-based. It is for this reason that last week I co-hosted a conference and summit in Ottawa, where we brought together people with lived experiences, their families, health care professionals, and every level of government. We had educators and regulators there, and we all worked together on a plan to address this crisis.We will work in partnership to find immediate solutions to address the problem—

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Liberals announced that they would be taking billions of dollars from Canadians to cover the Prime Minister's backside. The decision to purchase an interim aircraft makes no sense.According to the commander of the Royal Canadian Air Force, the current fleet of CF-18s will be operational until 2025, which means there is time to move forward with a competitive process now. The government is still going to purchase the F-18 Super Hornet as an interim aircraft at a cost of $335 million each, the price Kuwait just paid, to fill a gap that does not exist. How much is this useless acquisition going to cost Canadians?

Mr. Speaker, it is really too bad that the Prime Minister will not answer these questions himself. But the member of Parliament refers to all parties, but only one party is the government and can make that sort of decision.We are talking about a $1-million donation to the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation after a dinner that was attended by the Prime Minister. Why are the Liberals not following their own rules?I hope they will not answer once again: “We have the strictest rules in the country.”

Mr. Speaker, they are buying a bunch of flying white elephants.The Prime Minister is risking Canadian jobs, taxpayers' money, and the well-being of our pilots. The former head of procurement for National Defence, Alan Williams, said that we do not tell a company we intend on buying its product, and then try to negotiate a price. That is like me walking into a car dealership, telling the salesman that I will buy a car in the showroom, and then try to sit down to negotiate a price. Everybody knows that is ridiculous. The Liberals have bungled this file completely.Will the Prime Minister reverse this irresponsible decision and immediately launch a fair competition?

Mr. Speaker, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms is the pride of all Canadians, and our government is committed to ensuring our legislation is constitutional and ensures the highest standards that Canadians expect.As with all legislation that I have introduced as minister, I was very pleased last week to introduce a charter statement on Bill C-32, an act related to the repeal of section 159 of the Criminal Code, and in tabling a charter statement, ensuring that we invite the public and parliamentarians into the thinking and the review I have undertaken to ensure our legislation is constitutional.

Mr. Speaker, the previous government decided to risk manage the capability gap. Our government is not willing to take this risk. We are going to be investing in the Canadian Armed Forces. That is why we are going to have an interim fleet of new aircraft to fill this gap, making sure we can meet all our obligations to NORAD, NATO, and any unforseen situations.If anybody thinks we are not going to have any unforseen situations, then think about 9/11, when we had to put every single fighter up in the air.

Mr. Speaker, according to the hon. member for Québec, it will cost no less than $400 million to repaint the Quebec Bridge, which is covered in rust. During the election campaign, the Liberals promised to take action if a solution was not found by June 30, 2016. Five months later, there is still no agreement in sight with CN.Is the Quebec Bridge an indication of the kinds of projects that might be funded by an infrastructure bank, where citizens, and not CN, will foot the bill through user fees?

Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition knows that when ministers, members of Parliament, and the Prime Minister attend partisan fundraisers, it is done to raise money for election campaign preparedness. Every single party in this House does exactly the same thing.When we go to those fundraisers, we talk to Canadians about a whole range of issues, as we do in thousands and thousands of open public events across the country, something her government never did.

Mr. Speaker, I like the fact that the member opposite is asking this question. When this issue came to fruition, I reached out to her and her office and she was very reluctant to get involved. Therefore, we took leadership. I had the opportunity to work with my colleagues from Manitoba who showed leadership on this file. That is why we invested $4.6 million in Churchill. That is why I personally went to Churchill and met with the northern delegation. We are committed to finding a solution there. We are committed to creating jobs. That funding will help with Arctic research. That funding will help with tourism. That funding will help the community. That is leadership.

Mr. Speaker, talk about pumping up their rhetoric.We are all Canadians. The member should know that it is Canadians who donate to political parties, at least that is a part of the law. The law is important to recognize here, because, in fact, the Liberal Party has been following the law. This is why there is no conflict of interest.At the end of the day, we have a government that is open to all Canadians, and that has been demonstrated in a very historic fashion. Never before have I witnessed, in my 25 years, a government that has been so aggressively progressive in reaching out, connecting with Canadians, and delivering on the policies that are important to Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition knows full well that, at all times, our party follows the fundraising rules applicable.She also knows that only Canadians can contribute to Canadian political fundraising efforts. She also knows that the names of every individual who attends these very routine fundraisers is disclosed publicly, as the law requires.The Liberal Party has had a considerable record of following the fundraising rules, something that her party cannot say.

Mr. Speaker, our colleagues seem to find it funny that the foundation is independent.Perhaps they should ask former MP Chuck Strahl or former NDP member Megan Leslie about it, since they both sit on the board of the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation.

Their principles are interim, Mr. Speaker.During the election campaign, the Prime Minister promised to put an end to Stephen Harper's approach to energy project development, but now that he is in office, the Prime Minister is not only taking Stephen Harper's approach, he is also using exactly the same process for approving pipeline projects.My question is for the Minister of Environment.Does she seriously think that our ecosystems will be better protected if the exact same approval is given by the Liberals instead of the Conservatives? Is that what she thinks?

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Prime Minister, a self-described feminist, defended the disturbing decision of an Ontario judge to throw out a mandatory sentence for sexual interference involving a 15-year-old girl.Does the Minister of Justice support the position of the Prime Minister, or is she finally prepared to stand up for victims, and assure Canadians that the government will not roll back mandatory sentences for child sexual predators, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, if the member opposite and her party support public dollars for public infrastructure, they will support our budget. That is exactly what we are doing. We are investing $180 billion of public money into public infrastructure to help communities build public transit, more affordable housing, recreational and cultural facilities, as well as to invest into green infrastructure to reduce the impact of greenhouse gas emissions, and to make our communities more resilient and sustainable.

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has had a serious lapse in judgment. He is hosting Liberal Party fundraisers with Chinese billionaires. These are the Chinese 1%. These are also people who are in the upper echelons of the Communist Party. They do not have Canada's national interest at heart. In fact, they have been linked to engaging in corporate espionage and hacking our own government servers.Why is the Prime Minister willing to sell out our national interest for a donation to the Liberal Party?

Mr. Speaker, we announced in January a new set of interim principles that would govern those projects that were currently under review. As part of those principles there was extensive consultation. In fact, there was a ministerial panel that worked up and down the coast. As a matter of fact, on the website there were more than 35,000 people who expressed themselves. That seems to me to be a much better process than the one we inherited from the previous government.

Mr. Speaker, it is incredible. They just do not get it.Speaking of broken promises, the government seems to be preparing to table the approval of Kinder Morgan. The Prime Minister was crystal clear during the campaign that if the Liberals formed government the review would have to be “redone”. Our question is simple. What does the government have to say to British Columbians who voted Liberal and now feel completely betrayed because the government is about to approve Kinder Morgan?

Mr. Speaker, that is absolutely ridiculous. The Prime Minister's own guidelines say “there should be no preferential access to government, or appearance of preferential access...because they have made financial contributions”. Well, so much for that.The Prime Minister cannot keep himself from giving—

Mr. Speaker, I am glad the member recognized that we are indeed following the rules and the laws of this land. That is something we are doing. When one is following the laws, there cannot be a conflict of interest. The Conservatives know that, because we are following the same rules the Conservatives had in place when they were in government. We have a Prime Minister who is accessible to all Canadians, as is this cabinet, as are the members of the Liberal caucus, and there is no cost for that. We are in fact following the rules.

Mr. Speaker, that number has nothing to do with our plans. Most important are events in the region, and our government has committed $1.6 billion to humanitarian capacity-building and military efforts in the region. But we will certainly honour our commitment, and my department is working very hard to devise a plan to bring in those who have suffered from the atrocities of Daesh, both Yazidis and others, into this country within the time period prescribed by Parliament.

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals promised that they would be transparent and work on behalf of all Canadians.However, with regard to the Saint-Cuthbert, Terrebonne and Mascouche aerodromes, the Minister of Transport is satisfied with completely subjective and bungled consultations that benefit only the developers, not Canadians. The government is not doing its due diligence.Can the minister set the record straight on the Saint-Cuthbert aerodrome?Will he listen to the people of Saint-Cuthbert and put a stop to the aerodrome project?

Mr. Speaker, our participation in the joint strike fighter program over the past few years has injected more than $1 billion into the Canadian economy and created and maintained thousands of job across the country.Yesterday the Premier of Manitoba, Mr. Pallister, expressed his concerns about the plan to purchase the Super Hornet, and with good reason, since those aircraft will be built almost entirely in the U.S.Is that what leadership means to this government, creating jobs outside the country?Can the Minister of Public Services say otherwise? Has she forgotten her mandate?

Mr. Speaker, cash for access fundraising leads to conflicts of interest. Every government must do everything it can to avoid conflicts of interest, and that is even more important with the current government, whether it be the selling off of public infrastructure to private interests or the single sourcing of fighter jets to Boeing.What will the federal government do to ensure that it is not making decisions based on who gave money to the Liberal Party?

Mr. Speaker, we have certainly reached out to the mayor of Vegreville, through my staff. I have offered to have a meeting with the member opposite. However, the fact remains that this is a decision, driven by the need to produce lower processing times, better service and a growing immigration service.There will be a net addition of jobs in Alberta. All those currently working in Vegreville will be able to work in Alberta in the future.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday I asked about a case where a 50-year-old man sexually assaulted a 15-year-old girl, and the judge refused to give a one-year sentence to the perpetrator. Apparently one year was too much.However, the Prime Minister's response was staggering. He defended the judge and said that they “make responsible, reasonable decisions about the cases before them.”He could have stood up for the victim, but instead he stood up for the judge. Does the Prime Minister understand that comments like that make it harder for women to come forward when they are sexually assaulted?

Mr. Speaker, we are still looking for the $40 million. Maybe we will look in other places.Yesterday, the Prime Minister talked about meetings to promote investment in Canada and economic development. By making people pay for access to him, he often spends more time involved in Liberal Party fundraising than he does improving the lives of Canadians. If people have to give money to the Liberal Party to get the Prime Minister's attention, can he explain the difference between affairs of state and the affairs of the Liberal Party of Canada?

Mr. Speaker, there is an obligation of government to make sure that the men and women have the equipment they need to do the job expected of them. That is exactly what we are doing, because of the capability gap the former government did not take care of. We are taking care of that, so we can make sure they are not in harm's way, and that we can fulfill our obligations.In the meantime, we are having an open and transparent competition, just like we committed to do. We are taking care of our men and women in uniform.

Mr. Speaker, I am happy to speak to this again. To repeat, without question, child sexual assault is absolutely unacceptable. The Prime Minister has instructed me to do a comprehensive review of the criminal justice system, including sentencing reform. That includes a comprehensive review of mandatory minimum penalties. It is evident, over the last number of years, that mandatory minimum penalties are being challenged by the courts. The necessary discretion for judges needs to be in place. We are going to move forward with this comprehensive review, and fundamentally ensure that the protection of the rights of Canadians are imbued in the sentencing reforms that we undertake.

Mr. Speaker, as a former mayor, I know that virtually all of my colleagues, including my successor in Hamilton, were enthusiastic about our platform to support local communities by investing in infrastructure projects. These projects will not only strengthen our local economies, but would also improve the quality of life for Canadians. With many of my colleagues meeting today with representatives and stakeholders, could the Minister of Infrastructure and Communities tell the House how our government is supporting our municipalities?

Mr. Speaker, is he kidding? How can a feminist government be proud of a bill that penalizes women? Yesterday, Alberta MLA Sandra Jansen rose in the legislature to read out some of the hateful and misogynistic comments she had received after joining the NDP. We need to ask ourselves why women in politics are targeted with sexually violent language when men are not. Will the government stand with Sandra Jansen, denounce sexist language in our politics, and work with us to remove misogyny from this House?

Mr. Speaker, as a former city councillor and now minister, I welcome the Federation of Canadian Municipalities to the Hill.Our government is delivering on our $180 billion, 12-year infrastructure plan in partnership with our municipalities, provinces, and territories. We will continue to listen to and work with rural and urban municipalities, and the FCM to ensure that our plan benefits all Canadians from coast to coast to coast.

Mr. Speaker, it is the federal government's responsibility to review airport construction applications. We are doing just that, with the public interest and security in mind.As for Mascouche and Saint-Cuthbert, I issued a ministerial order to force the developers in each case to hold consultations. It is an important process that I insisted on before making a decision. No decision has yet been made regarding Saint-Cuthbert.

Mr. Speaker, when the minister says closing the Vegreville immigration centre is to “ensure tax dollars are spent on quality services”, he insults my constituents. In fact, officials have praised Vegreville staff, saying that it is a model, and an innovative office doing exemplary work and exceeding targets. Claiming the closure is to improve efficiencies is a slap in the face to the hard-working staff there.When will the minister stop attacking my constituents and reverse this edict?

Mr. Speaker, I share the member's disgust at the misogyny that women in politics, in fact in public spheres, receive every single day in the cyber-world, but in the real world as well. We are working so hard to make sure that we have a comprehensive federal strategy that will address the violence that women are receiving, whether it is in the cyber-world, the real world, or in their personal lives. I am very proud of this work, and I look forward to working with the member opposite to make sure that we achieve our goal.

Mr. Speaker, what I am very pleased about is our announcement yesterday for an open and transparent competition that will ensure that our men and women in uniform get the equipment they need to do the jobs expected of them.We are going to make sure that we have a robust, transparent competition that will ensure that Canadians will get jobs from coast to coast to coast, as a result of our determination to do what is right for the men and women in our military.

Mr. Speaker, 31 aboriginal communities are partners, equity owners, in the northern gateway project. As they wrote in statement last September, “Collectively, our communities stand to benefit from more than $2 billion directly from this Project.” That is going to be $2 billion for jobs, for businesses, for educational opportunities, and for long-term benefit.Will the minister follow the court order and immediately start consultations with the indigenous communities?

Mr. Speaker, my colleague opposite knows very well that the complete disclosure of all of the donations that are received by every political party, and stringent limits with respect to the maximum personal donations that can be made, ensure that there is no conflict of interest. On this side of the House, we follow all of the fundraising rules and the Chief Electoral Officer himself has said that Canada's political financing laws are the most advanced, constraining, and transparent in the world. We agree with the Chief Electoral Officer, and we are happy to follow those rules.

Mr. Speaker, we are very proud of the fact that they are Canadians we are really talking about, Canadian donors.The reality is that we have some of the strictest political financing regulations in the country and they are always being followed.We find it peculiar that the opposition members are trying to politicize the particular issue, since they should very well know that the process for approval of this was in 2012 under the previous government. It was approved by the then minister of finance, Joe Oliver.

Mr. Speaker, we understand that infrastructure is the foundation for building strong and sustainable communities, including rural communities.Let me tell the House what we are doing. There are water and wastewater upgrades for Red Deer, Alberta; upgrades to the town of Lanigan water in Saskatchewan; wastewater treatment upgrades for Selkirk and Gimli in Manitoba; water and wastewater upgrades to Royal Oak, Bay, Ontario; and there is more I could say.I encourage members to actually visit the Infrastructure Canada website to see how many projects we are funding.

Mr. Speaker, I would gladly tape this back up, and maybe the Prime Minister will follow his own ethical guidelines.If the Prime Minister cannot keep himself from selling influence to billionaire Chinese communists, how can Canadians trust any of his ethical standards?

Mr. Speaker, I am going to ask the member one of his favourite questions. How many kilometres of pipeline did his government build to export markets? The answer is zero. The reason the answer is zero is because the people of Canada lost credibility in the process. In order to rebuild that credibility, we have established a set of rules that will govern those projects currently under review that will lead to long-term reform of the National Energy Board, which is in Canada's interests.

Mr. Speaker, as all members in the House are painfully aware, there is an opioid overdose crisis going on in B.C. and across Canada. Could the minister update the House on what she is doing to work with our partners in health from across Canada?

Mr. Speaker, I do not know which part of the plan the member does not understand.We are investing $180 billion. We have approved more than 980 projects with a combined investment of $12 billion. Out of that, hundreds of projects are for rural communities, helping with water and wastewater infrastructure, roadway infrastructure, and all kinds of infrastructure that our rural communities need.We are proud to develop a plan that is going to work for all communities, large cities, mid-size cities, and rural and northern communities.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday in response to my question about hosting this cash for access fundraiser with Chinese billionaires, the Prime Minister said himself, “That is why we have committed to engaging positively with the world to draw in investment.”He admitted that he is discussing government business at a fundraiser, which clearly violates his own ethical guidelines. We have said it before, these fundraisers do not pass the smell test.Will the Prime Minister do the right thing, and stop these cash for access programs?

Mr. Speaker, it will be much better than that. The member knows very well that the Pierre Elliott Trudeau foundation is an independent charitable organization with no political affiliation.I see my colleagues—

Mr. Speaker, important files are piling up on the Prime Minister's desk. That is regrettable but not surprising. Apparently the Prime Minister is in no rush to deal with the most urgent issues for the good of all Canadians. Will all Canadians have to donate $1 million to the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation to get the Prime Minister to listen to them?

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada was given a mandate to ensure the government maintained the greatest possible respect for the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in all of its legislation. Could my hon. colleague inform the House what concrete steps the government is taking to demonstrate its commitment to the charter on behalf of all Canadians, including the LGBTQ2 community that has long advocated for equality of rights when it comes to sexual orientation?

Mr. Speaker, I can tell the House that we were very pleased to enhance the Canada pension plan. We know that improves outcomes for Canadians, all Canadians in future, around Canada pension plan opportunities. We also recognize that it is particularly good for women, who have less participation in workforce pension plans, and who live longer, so we are indeed sure this is a positive thing for women. We will continue to advocate for provisions that will make sense for all Canadians, including women, and it is something I will bring up at the meeting with the premiers.

Mr. Speaker, we have put forward an agenda to invest more than $180 billion in public infrastructure from coast to coast to coast. Only 8% of that infrastructure will be delivered through the bank. The role of the bank is to build more infrastructure for Canadian communities, not less infrastructure. The vast majority of the communities, municipalities, and provinces are supportive of that plan, and we are proud to deliver it in partnership with them.

Mr. Speaker, earlier this week, an Ontario judge set aside a one-year mandatory prison sentence for a 50-year-old man who sexually assaulted a 15-year-old girl. The judge said that a one-year sentence was too harsh.Yesterday, the Prime Minister, who considers himself a feminist, defended the judge.Given that this Prime Minister wants to eliminate some mandatory prison sentences, will he also eliminate mandatory sentences for cases of sexual assault of minors?

Mr. Speaker, let us cut to the chase here. The Liberals' own open and accountable government guidelines are a charade. They have become a joke. The Prime Minister never intended to follow them and, frankly, his ministers might as well just rip them up. That said, I have one question. Is there anyone on that side of the House who has a problem with the Prime Minister selling access and influence to billionaire communist donors for the favours they want?

Mr. Speaker, I am extraordinarily proud of the action taken by our government to phase-out coal-fired power by 2030. This is a very important measure. It will not only reduce greenhouse gas emissions, it will improve the health of Canadians. It will improve the health of elderly people and young kids who have asthma. It will stop premature deaths. We will be working with all of the provinces and territories to ensure we have a win-win solution for ratepayers, workers, and for the economy.

Mr. Speaker, it has been nearly a month since this House unanimously passed a motion to bring Yazidi women and girls to Canada.We thought we won a victory for women who have been persecuted and enslaved by ISIS terrorists, but now government officials have admitted they are only targeting 50 women and girls to bring to Canada for safe asylum. These women deserve more than a token effort. Their lives are on the line.Will the Prime Minister honour the spirit of this motion and do more for these girls?

Mr. Speaker, I am glad that my colleague is giving me the opportunity to talk about how much the situation in the Quebec City region has changed compared to what we saw over the past 10 years. People are talking to one another, they are working together, and sharing information that is essential for collaboration and important to everyone. People are being respectful of and listening to one another.We are working for the middle class. We are working toward a forward-looking economy and sustainable development, which is fundamental to the development of the Quebec City region. This is very good news for the Quebec City region. I am very pleased to be part of it.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the minister asked what the NDP would do to invest in infrastructure. I am happy to tell him. We would invest public dollars for public infrastructure. This is what the Liberals promised during the campaign, but now they are moving full speed ahead with privatization. We have seen how privatization and P3s cost taxpayers millions, yet the Liberal infrastructure bank is a P3 system on steroids.Why are the Liberals so intent on a system that will cost more, while imposing tolls and user fees on Canadians?

Mr. Speaker, if those members really want to refer to what the Federal Court of Appeal said in the northern gateway case, it said that the Harper government had insufficiently consulted indigenous peoples. That was the reason. It was not because of the proponent, not because of the regulator but because of her government. Canadians deserve a better process, and that is what we are giving them.

Mr. Speaker, our number one priority is to create good, quality jobs in Canada, and through this initiative, we are going to use the industrial technological benefit initiative to maximize opportunities for Canadian businesses. This will, of course, help Manitoba, Quebec, Ontario, Atlantic Canada, and British Columbia. From coast to coast to coast, we will see a very strong and vibrant aerospace and defence sector that contributes over 235,000 jobs and $31 billion of economic activity. That is what we are proud of. We are going to continue to invest in that sector and create good, quality jobs.

Mr. Speaker, our number one priority is to create good, quality jobs in Canada, and through this initiative, we are going to use the industrial technological benefit initiative to maximize opportunities for Canadian businesses. This will, of course, help Manitoba, Quebec, Ontario, Atlantic Canada, and British Columbia. From coast to coast to coast, we will see a very strong and vibrant aerospace and defence sector that contributes over 235,000 jobs and $31 billion of economic activity. That is what we are proud of. We are going to continue to invest in that sector and create good, quality jobs.

Mr. Speaker, if those members really want to refer to what the Federal Court of Appeal said in the northern gateway case, it said that the Harper government had insufficiently consulted indigenous peoples. That was the reason. It was not because of the proponent, not because of the regulator but because of her government. Canadians deserve a better process, and that is what we are giving them.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the minister asked what the NDP would do to invest in infrastructure. I am happy to tell him. We would invest public dollars for public infrastructure. This is what the Liberals promised during the campaign, but now they are moving full speed ahead with privatization. We have seen how privatization and P3s cost taxpayers millions, yet the Liberal infrastructure bank is a P3 system on steroids.Why are the Liberals so intent on a system that will cost more, while imposing tolls and user fees on Canadians?

Mr. Speaker, I am glad that my colleague is giving me the opportunity to talk about how much the situation in the Quebec City region has changed compared to what we saw over the past 10 years. People are talking to one another, they are working together, and sharing information that is essential for collaboration and important to everyone. People are being respectful of and listening to one another.We are working for the middle class. We are working toward a forward-looking economy and sustainable development, which is fundamental to the development of the Quebec City region. This is very good news for the Quebec City region. I am very pleased to be part of it.

Mr. Speaker, it has been nearly a month since this House unanimously passed a motion to bring Yazidi women and girls to Canada.We thought we won a victory for women who have been persecuted and enslaved by ISIS terrorists, but now government officials have admitted they are only targeting 50 women and girls to bring to Canada for safe asylum. These women deserve more than a token effort. Their lives are on the line.Will the Prime Minister honour the spirit of this motion and do more for these girls?

Mr. Speaker, I am extraordinarily proud of the action taken by our government to phase-out coal-fired power by 2030. This is a very important measure. It will not only reduce greenhouse gas emissions, it will improve the health of Canadians. It will improve the health of elderly people and young kids who have asthma. It will stop premature deaths. We will be working with all of the provinces and territories to ensure we have a win-win solution for ratepayers, workers, and for the economy.

Mr. Speaker, earlier this week, an Ontario judge set aside a one-year mandatory prison sentence for a 50-year-old man who sexually assaulted a 15-year-old girl. The judge said that a one-year sentence was too harsh.Yesterday, the Prime Minister, who considers himself a feminist, defended the judge.Given that this Prime Minister wants to eliminate some mandatory prison sentences, will he also eliminate mandatory sentences for cases of sexual assault of minors?

Mr. Speaker, let us cut to the chase here. The Liberals' own open and accountable government guidelines are a charade. They have become a joke. The Prime Minister never intended to follow them and, frankly, his ministers might as well just rip them up. That said, I have one question. Is there anyone on that side of the House who has a problem with the Prime Minister selling access and influence to billionaire communist donors for the favours they want?

Mr. Speaker, we have put forward an agenda to invest more than $180 billion in public infrastructure from coast to coast to coast. Only 8% of that infrastructure will be delivered through the bank. The role of the bank is to build more infrastructure for Canadian communities, not less infrastructure. The vast majority of the communities, municipalities, and provinces are supportive of that plan, and we are proud to deliver it in partnership with them.

Mr. Speaker, I can tell the House that we were very pleased to enhance the Canada pension plan. We know that improves outcomes for Canadians, all Canadians in future, around Canada pension plan opportunities. We also recognize that it is particularly good for women, who have less participation in workforce pension plans, and who live longer, so we are indeed sure this is a positive thing for women. We will continue to advocate for provisions that will make sense for all Canadians, including women, and it is something I will bring up at the meeting with the premiers.

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada was given a mandate to ensure the government maintained the greatest possible respect for the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in all of its legislation. Could my hon. colleague inform the House what concrete steps the government is taking to demonstrate its commitment to the charter on behalf of all Canadians, including the LGBTQ2 community that has long advocated for equality of rights when it comes to sexual orientation?

Mr. Speaker, it will be much better than that. The member knows very well that the Pierre Elliott Trudeau foundation is an independent charitable organization with no political affiliation.I see my colleagues—

Mr. Speaker, important files are piling up on the Prime Minister's desk. That is regrettable but not surprising. Apparently the Prime Minister is in no rush to deal with the most urgent issues for the good of all Canadians. Will all Canadians have to donate $1 million to the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation to get the Prime Minister to listen to them?

Mr. Speaker, yesterday in response to my question about hosting this cash for access fundraiser with Chinese billionaires, the Prime Minister said himself, “That is why we have committed to engaging positively with the world to draw in investment.”He admitted that he is discussing government business at a fundraiser, which clearly violates his own ethical guidelines. We have said it before, these fundraisers do not pass the smell test.Will the Prime Minister do the right thing, and stop these cash for access programs?

Mr. Speaker, I do not know which part of the plan the member does not understand.We are investing $180 billion. We have approved more than 980 projects with a combined investment of $12 billion. Out of that, hundreds of projects are for rural communities, helping with water and wastewater infrastructure, roadway infrastructure, and all kinds of infrastructure that our rural communities need.We are proud to develop a plan that is going to work for all communities, large cities, mid-size cities, and rural and northern communities.

Mr. Speaker, I would gladly tape this back up, and maybe the Prime Minister will follow his own ethical guidelines.If the Prime Minister cannot keep himself from selling influence to billionaire Chinese communists, how can Canadians trust any of his ethical standards?

Mr. Speaker, I am going to ask the member one of his favourite questions. How many kilometres of pipeline did his government build to export markets? The answer is zero. The reason the answer is zero is because the people of Canada lost credibility in the process. In order to rebuild that credibility, we have established a set of rules that will govern those projects currently under review that will lead to long-term reform of the National Energy Board, which is in Canada's interests.

Mr. Speaker, as all members in the House are painfully aware, there is an opioid overdose crisis going on in B.C. and across Canada. Could the minister update the House on what she is doing to work with our partners in health from across Canada?

Mr. Speaker, we understand that infrastructure is the foundation for building strong and sustainable communities, including rural communities.Let me tell the House what we are doing. There are water and wastewater upgrades for Red Deer, Alberta; upgrades to the town of Lanigan water in Saskatchewan; wastewater treatment upgrades for Selkirk and Gimli in Manitoba; water and wastewater upgrades to Royal Oak, Bay, Ontario; and there is more I could say.I encourage members to actually visit the Infrastructure Canada website to see how many projects we are funding.

Mr. Speaker, we are very proud of the fact that they are Canadians we are really talking about, Canadian donors.The reality is that we have some of the strictest political financing regulations in the country and they are always being followed.We find it peculiar that the opposition members are trying to politicize the particular issue, since they should very well know that the process for approval of this was in 2012 under the previous government. It was approved by the then minister of finance, Joe Oliver.

Mr. Speaker, my colleague opposite knows very well that the complete disclosure of all of the donations that are received by every political party, and stringent limits with respect to the maximum personal donations that can be made, ensure that there is no conflict of interest. On this side of the House, we follow all of the fundraising rules and the Chief Electoral Officer himself has said that Canada's political financing laws are the most advanced, constraining, and transparent in the world. We agree with the Chief Electoral Officer, and we are happy to follow those rules.

Mr. Speaker, 31 aboriginal communities are partners, equity owners, in the northern gateway project. As they wrote in statement last September, “Collectively, our communities stand to benefit from more than $2 billion directly from this Project.” That is going to be $2 billion for jobs, for businesses, for educational opportunities, and for long-term benefit.Will the minister follow the court order and immediately start consultations with the indigenous communities?

Mr. Speaker, what I am very pleased about is our announcement yesterday for an open and transparent competition that will ensure that our men and women in uniform get the equipment they need to do the jobs expected of them.We are going to make sure that we have a robust, transparent competition that will ensure that Canadians will get jobs from coast to coast to coast, as a result of our determination to do what is right for the men and women in our military.

Mr. Speaker, I share the member's disgust at the misogyny that women in politics, in fact in public spheres, receive every single day in the cyber-world, but in the real world as well. We are working so hard to make sure that we have a comprehensive federal strategy that will address the violence that women are receiving, whether it is in the cyber-world, the real world, or in their personal lives. I am very proud of this work, and I look forward to working with the member opposite to make sure that we achieve our goal.

Mr. Speaker, is he kidding? How can a feminist government be proud of a bill that penalizes women? Yesterday, Alberta MLA Sandra Jansen rose in the legislature to read out some of the hateful and misogynistic comments she had received after joining the NDP. We need to ask ourselves why women in politics are targeted with sexually violent language when men are not. Will the government stand with Sandra Jansen, denounce sexist language in our politics, and work with us to remove misogyny from this House?

Mr. Speaker, as a former city councillor and now minister, I welcome the Federation of Canadian Municipalities to the Hill.Our government is delivering on our $180 billion, 12-year infrastructure plan in partnership with our municipalities, provinces, and territories. We will continue to listen to and work with rural and urban municipalities, and the FCM to ensure that our plan benefits all Canadians from coast to coast to coast.

Mr. Speaker, it is the federal government's responsibility to review airport construction applications. We are doing just that, with the public interest and security in mind.As for Mascouche and Saint-Cuthbert, I issued a ministerial order to force the developers in each case to hold consultations. It is an important process that I insisted on before making a decision. No decision has yet been made regarding Saint-Cuthbert.

Mr. Speaker, when the minister says closing the Vegreville immigration centre is to “ensure tax dollars are spent on quality services”, he insults my constituents. In fact, officials have praised Vegreville staff, saying that it is a model, and an innovative office doing exemplary work and exceeding targets. Claiming the closure is to improve efficiencies is a slap in the face to the hard-working staff there.When will the minister stop attacking my constituents and reverse this edict?

Mr. Speaker, I am happy to speak to this again. To repeat, without question, child sexual assault is absolutely unacceptable. The Prime Minister has instructed me to do a comprehensive review of the criminal justice system, including sentencing reform. That includes a comprehensive review of mandatory minimum penalties. It is evident, over the last number of years, that mandatory minimum penalties are being challenged by the courts. The necessary discretion for judges needs to be in place. We are going to move forward with this comprehensive review, and fundamentally ensure that the protection of the rights of Canadians are imbued in the sentencing reforms that we undertake.

Mr. Speaker, as a former mayor, I know that virtually all of my colleagues, including my successor in Hamilton, were enthusiastic about our platform to support local communities by investing in infrastructure projects. These projects will not only strengthen our local economies, but would also improve the quality of life for Canadians. With many of my colleagues meeting today with representatives and stakeholders, could the Minister of Infrastructure and Communities tell the House how our government is supporting our municipalities?

Mr. Speaker, we are still looking for the $40 million. Maybe we will look in other places.Yesterday, the Prime Minister talked about meetings to promote investment in Canada and economic development. By making people pay for access to him, he often spends more time involved in Liberal Party fundraising than he does improving the lives of Canadians. If people have to give money to the Liberal Party to get the Prime Minister's attention, can he explain the difference between affairs of state and the affairs of the Liberal Party of Canada?

Mr. Speaker, there is an obligation of government to make sure that the men and women have the equipment they need to do the job expected of them. That is exactly what we are doing, because of the capability gap the former government did not take care of. We are taking care of that, so we can make sure they are not in harm's way, and that we can fulfill our obligations.In the meantime, we are having an open and transparent competition, just like we committed to do. We are taking care of our men and women in uniform.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday I asked about a case where a 50-year-old man sexually assaulted a 15-year-old girl, and the judge refused to give a one-year sentence to the perpetrator. Apparently one year was too much.However, the Prime Minister's response was staggering. He defended the judge and said that they “make responsible, reasonable decisions about the cases before them.”He could have stood up for the victim, but instead he stood up for the judge. Does the Prime Minister understand that comments like that make it harder for women to come forward when they are sexually assaulted?

Mr. Speaker, we have certainly reached out to the mayor of Vegreville, through my staff. I have offered to have a meeting with the member opposite. However, the fact remains that this is a decision, driven by the need to produce lower processing times, better service and a growing immigration service.There will be a net addition of jobs in Alberta. All those currently working in Vegreville will be able to work in Alberta in the future.

Mr. Speaker, cash for access fundraising leads to conflicts of interest. Every government must do everything it can to avoid conflicts of interest, and that is even more important with the current government, whether it be the selling off of public infrastructure to private interests or the single sourcing of fighter jets to Boeing.What will the federal government do to ensure that it is not making decisions based on who gave money to the Liberal Party?

Mr. Speaker, our participation in the joint strike fighter program over the past few years has injected more than $1 billion into the Canadian economy and created and maintained thousands of job across the country.Yesterday the Premier of Manitoba, Mr. Pallister, expressed his concerns about the plan to purchase the Super Hornet, and with good reason, since those aircraft will be built almost entirely in the U.S.Is that what leadership means to this government, creating jobs outside the country?Can the Minister of Public Services say otherwise? Has she forgotten her mandate?

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals promised that they would be transparent and work on behalf of all Canadians.However, with regard to the Saint-Cuthbert, Terrebonne and Mascouche aerodromes, the Minister of Transport is satisfied with completely subjective and bungled consultations that benefit only the developers, not Canadians. The government is not doing its due diligence.Can the minister set the record straight on the Saint-Cuthbert aerodrome?Will he listen to the people of Saint-Cuthbert and put a stop to the aerodrome project?

Mr. Speaker, that number has nothing to do with our plans. Most important are events in the region, and our government has committed $1.6 billion to humanitarian capacity-building and military efforts in the region. But we will certainly honour our commitment, and my department is working very hard to devise a plan to bring in those who have suffered from the atrocities of Daesh, both Yazidis and others, into this country within the time period prescribed by Parliament.

Mr. Speaker, I am glad the member recognized that we are indeed following the rules and the laws of this land. That is something we are doing. When one is following the laws, there cannot be a conflict of interest. The Conservatives know that, because we are following the same rules the Conservatives had in place when they were in government. We have a Prime Minister who is accessible to all Canadians, as is this cabinet, as are the members of the Liberal caucus, and there is no cost for that. We are in fact following the rules.

Mr. Speaker, it is incredible. They just do not get it.Speaking of broken promises, the government seems to be preparing to table the approval of Kinder Morgan. The Prime Minister was crystal clear during the campaign that if the Liberals formed government the review would have to be “redone”. Our question is simple. What does the government have to say to British Columbians who voted Liberal and now feel completely betrayed because the government is about to approve Kinder Morgan?

Mr. Speaker, that is absolutely ridiculous. The Prime Minister's own guidelines say “there should be no preferential access to government, or appearance of preferential access...because they have made financial contributions”. Well, so much for that.The Prime Minister cannot keep himself from giving—

Mr. Speaker, we announced in January a new set of interim principles that would govern those projects that were currently under review. As part of those principles there was extensive consultation. In fact, there was a ministerial panel that worked up and down the coast. As a matter of fact, on the website there were more than 35,000 people who expressed themselves. That seems to me to be a much better process than the one we inherited from the previous government.

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has had a serious lapse in judgment. He is hosting Liberal Party fundraisers with Chinese billionaires. These are the Chinese 1%. These are also people who are in the upper echelons of the Communist Party. They do not have Canada's national interest at heart. In fact, they have been linked to engaging in corporate espionage and hacking our own government servers.Why is the Prime Minister willing to sell out our national interest for a donation to the Liberal Party?

Mr. Speaker, if the member opposite and her party support public dollars for public infrastructure, they will support our budget. That is exactly what we are doing. We are investing $180 billion of public money into public infrastructure to help communities build public transit, more affordable housing, recreational and cultural facilities, as well as to invest into green infrastructure to reduce the impact of greenhouse gas emissions, and to make our communities more resilient and sustainable.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Prime Minister, a self-described feminist, defended the disturbing decision of an Ontario judge to throw out a mandatory sentence for sexual interference involving a 15-year-old girl.Does the Minister of Justice support the position of the Prime Minister, or is she finally prepared to stand up for victims, and assure Canadians that the government will not roll back mandatory sentences for child sexual predators, yes or no?

Their principles are interim, Mr. Speaker.During the election campaign, the Prime Minister promised to put an end to Stephen Harper's approach to energy project development, but now that he is in office, the Prime Minister is not only taking Stephen Harper's approach, he is also using exactly the same process for approving pipeline projects.My question is for the Minister of Environment.Does she seriously think that our ecosystems will be better protected if the exact same approval is given by the Liberals instead of the Conservatives? Is that what she thinks?

Mr. Speaker, our colleagues seem to find it funny that the foundation is independent.Perhaps they should ask former MP Chuck Strahl or former NDP member Megan Leslie about it, since they both sit on the board of the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation.

Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition knows full well that, at all times, our party follows the fundraising rules applicable.She also knows that only Canadians can contribute to Canadian political fundraising efforts. She also knows that the names of every individual who attends these very routine fundraisers is disclosed publicly, as the law requires.The Liberal Party has had a considerable record of following the fundraising rules, something that her party cannot say.

Mr. Speaker, talk about pumping up their rhetoric.We are all Canadians. The member should know that it is Canadians who donate to political parties, at least that is a part of the law. The law is important to recognize here, because, in fact, the Liberal Party has been following the law. This is why there is no conflict of interest.At the end of the day, we have a government that is open to all Canadians, and that has been demonstrated in a very historic fashion. Never before have I witnessed, in my 25 years, a government that has been so aggressively progressive in reaching out, connecting with Canadians, and delivering on the policies that are important to Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, I like the fact that the member opposite is asking this question. When this issue came to fruition, I reached out to her and her office and she was very reluctant to get involved. Therefore, we took leadership. I had the opportunity to work with my colleagues from Manitoba who showed leadership on this file. That is why we invested $4.6 million in Churchill. That is why I personally went to Churchill and met with the northern delegation. We are committed to finding a solution there. We are committed to creating jobs. That funding will help with Arctic research. That funding will help with tourism. That funding will help the community. That is leadership.

Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition knows that when ministers, members of Parliament, and the Prime Minister attend partisan fundraisers, it is done to raise money for election campaign preparedness. Every single party in this House does exactly the same thing.When we go to those fundraisers, we talk to Canadians about a whole range of issues, as we do in thousands and thousands of open public events across the country, something her government never did.

Mr. Speaker, according to the hon. member for Québec, it will cost no less than $400 million to repaint the Quebec Bridge, which is covered in rust. During the election campaign, the Liberals promised to take action if a solution was not found by June 30, 2016. Five months later, there is still no agreement in sight with CN.Is the Quebec Bridge an indication of the kinds of projects that might be funded by an infrastructure bank, where citizens, and not CN, will foot the bill through user fees?

Mr. Speaker, the previous government decided to risk manage the capability gap. Our government is not willing to take this risk. We are going to be investing in the Canadian Armed Forces. That is why we are going to have an interim fleet of new aircraft to fill this gap, making sure we can meet all our obligations to NORAD, NATO, and any unforseen situations.If anybody thinks we are not going to have any unforseen situations, then think about 9/11, when we had to put every single fighter up in the air.

Mr. Speaker, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms is the pride of all Canadians, and our government is committed to ensuring our legislation is constitutional and ensures the highest standards that Canadians expect.As with all legislation that I have introduced as minister, I was very pleased last week to introduce a charter statement on Bill C-32, an act related to the repeal of section 159 of the Criminal Code, and in tabling a charter statement, ensuring that we invite the public and parliamentarians into the thinking and the review I have undertaken to ensure our legislation is constitutional.

Mr. Speaker, they are buying a bunch of flying white elephants.The Prime Minister is risking Canadian jobs, taxpayers' money, and the well-being of our pilots. The former head of procurement for National Defence, Alan Williams, said that we do not tell a company we intend on buying its product, and then try to negotiate a price. That is like me walking into a car dealership, telling the salesman that I will buy a car in the showroom, and then try to sit down to negotiate a price. Everybody knows that is ridiculous. The Liberals have bungled this file completely.Will the Prime Minister reverse this irresponsible decision and immediately launch a fair competition?

Mr. Speaker, it is really too bad that the Prime Minister will not answer these questions himself. But the member of Parliament refers to all parties, but only one party is the government and can make that sort of decision.We are talking about a $1-million donation to the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation after a dinner that was attended by the Prime Minister. Why are the Liberals not following their own rules?I hope they will not answer once again: “We have the strictest rules in the country.”

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Liberals announced that they would be taking billions of dollars from Canadians to cover the Prime Minister's backside. The decision to purchase an interim aircraft makes no sense.According to the commander of the Royal Canadian Air Force, the current fleet of CF-18s will be operational until 2025, which means there is time to move forward with a competitive process now. The government is still going to purchase the F-18 Super Hornet as an interim aircraft at a cost of $335 million each, the price Kuwait just paid, to fill a gap that does not exist. How much is this useless acquisition going to cost Canadians?

Mr. Speaker, as the member for Surrey Centre well knows, we are facing a growing and serious public health crisis in our country as it relates to opioids. We are determined to make sure that we proceed actively on a drug policy that is collaborative, comprehensive, compassionate, and evidence-based. It is for this reason that last week I co-hosted a conference and summit in Ottawa, where we brought together people with lived experiences, their families, health care professionals, and every level of government. We had educators and regulators there, and we all worked together on a plan to address this crisis.We will work in partnership to find immediate solutions to address the problem—

Mr. Speaker, when he is not busy calling his detractors stupid, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister sometimes makes sense. On Twitter, he conceded that there are times when it costs more to do things faster. Eureka! Well done. That is exactly what we have been speaking out against. We want the government to invest in infrastructure as promised. We do not want the privatization of revenue in the form of tolls and user fees.Will the Liberals scrap their infrastructure privatization bank, or will they keep listening to their friends and Bay Street and Wall Street interests?

Mr. Speaker, if that were the case, why did they vote against letting the Conflict of Interest Commissioner take a look at this in the first place?The Prime Minister continues to stand in this place and defend his unethical and shady behaviour. The Prime Minister's open and accountable government document spells out in his words, his rules, his promise, yet the Prime Minister himself hosted a cash for access event with Chinese billionaires. Two of those billionaires then made a $1 million donation to the Trudeau Foundation a week later.We are not talking about fundraising laws. Why did the Prime Minister break his word, break his rules, and break his promise?

Mr. Speaker, we keep seeing how the government puts a priority on its Bay Street friends instead of on everyday Canadians. We have a minister who will not stand up to the billionaire to whom the Liberals sold the Port of Churchill, and a Prime Minister who is busy going to cash for access fundraisers, yet has not visited Churchill or the Arctic since the election.Manitoba municipalities are calling for federal action to reopen the port in 2017. When will the Liberals stop catering to their billionaire friends and stand up for Canada by saving the Port of Churchill?

Mr. Speaker, the only thing predictable is that Liberals will never stand up for Canadian energy workers. These pipeline projects are waiting for a green light. If built, they will create tens of thousands of well-paying jobs for Canadians from coast to coast. While middle-class energy workers are hurting, the Liberal government has done nothing to help them. When will the minister start to do his job, stand up for Canadian energy workers, and help get these projects built?

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I would like to read to you from a document, which states: Ministers and Parliamentary Secretaries must avoid conflict of interest, the appearance of conflict of interest and situations that have the potential to involve conflicts of interest.... There should be no preferential access to government, or appearance of preferential access, accorded to individuals—

Mr. Speaker, that is embarrassing. One hundred thousand energy workers have lost their jobs since the government took office, and the Liberals are making things worse. The energy east pipeline is stalled as National Energy Board hearings are on an indefinite hold. The northern gateway pipeline is in limbo as the Liberals have refused to respond to a recent court ruling. The Kinder Morgan pipeline decision has been delayed by six months due to additional Liberal red tape.Middle-class energy workers are hurting in our country. When will the minister start doing his job, stand up for energy workers, and make sure these job-creating energy projects get built?

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to answer this question again.Child sexual assault is incredibly serious, and our government will take every step that we can in order to protect children, in part doing a broad review of the criminal justice system to ensure that we look at it broadly, including sentencing reform, including mandatory minimum penalties, to ensure that we provide the necessary discretion to judges to ensure that we have foremost in our minds public safety, as well as ensuring that we are compliant with the Constitution of the country.

Mr. Speaker, let us be very clear that we have in Canada some of the strictest rules in the country. There are many ways in which other jurisdictions raise money. Let us be very clear that there have been no laws broken, and if there have been no laws broken, there is no conflict of interest.No matter how often the Conservatives and the NDP repeat it, the bottom line is there is no conflict of interest. It is as simple as that.

Mr. Speaker, I am somewhat disappointed. The truth will kind of set us free.I must say that the opposition members do seem to be confused about how donations to charities actually work. If they need a lesson on how independent charities and donations work, perhaps they should ask the member for Chilliwack—Hope to call his father. His father is a former Conservative MP who actually sits on the board of directors, so it might be worth making that telephone call.It should be clear that the Prime Minister has absolutely no involvement in this charity.

It is clear, Mr. Speaker, that the government members do not understand the question being asked. This is not about following the rules. The Liberals have an ethical problem following their own rules that the Prime Minister has set out for himself. He set the bar here for his government's ethical behaviour. We are not talking about the election financing laws. We are talking about the bar that was set here. He has failed miserably to come close to even meeting that standard. This is about his rules, about his word, about his promise to the House and to Canadians.When will the Prime Minister put a stop to these shady shenanigans?

Mr. Speaker, 10 times I stood in the House last week and asked if the government would fix its flawed CPP legislation, Bill C-26. Ten times I received non answers. Today, I will be introducing my amendment at committee to fix this Liberal flaw that would have serious consequences on the well-being of Canadian women and people living with disabilities. I have a very simple question for the minister. Will he fix the flaw in the bill by supporting my amendment, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, the member obviously is on a fishing trip. What she is trying to do is to stitch together a whole series of things which, when taken together, have absolutely no basis in reality.One thing I can tell her is that instead of ripping up an artificial piece of paper, one thing we did not do is leave fundraising events in leg irons in a sheriff's van, or be like Peter Penashue and resign in disgrace for not following the fundraising rules.

Mr. Speaker, I am committed to standing up and following-through with the mandate that the Prime Minister gave me to do a comprehensive review of the criminal justice system, including sentencing reform. That includes looking at mandatory minimum penalties to ensure the laws we have in place are meeting their objectives.This is what I am going to undertake. Certainly, with respect to child sexual assault, that is wrong. We are going to ensure that we work with the judiciary, and work with all the actors in the criminal justice system to ensure we are achieving the ends of the legislation we have in place.

Mr. Speaker, we have shown certainty where before there was only uncertainty. We have a very specific set of timelines that are predictable. They are predictable to proponents. They are predictable for those who want to offer their opinion on all of these projects.The member has mentioned four or five projects. What they share is that there is predictability, there is a timeline, and there is a process, none of which was the case when we took power.

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has instructed the justice minister to gut the laws that punish criminals and protect victims of crime. These are the laws that the previous Conservative government supported.First, the victims surcharge got chopped, and now mandatory jail times are under threat. Why is it that the Liberals have a problem with a 50-year-old man molesting a 15-year-old girl not being subject to mandatory imprisonment? What is their problem with that? Let us hear it.

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are taking $15 billion away from communities to set up their new bank.We repeatedly warned that small and rural communities would be left out of the funding opportunities. Instead of listening, the Liberals called Canadians stupid and irresponsible for raising concerns.Yesterday, the finance minister was forced to admit that small communities will in fact be left out. When will the Liberals stop betraying rural communities, and start working to get infrastructure built in every part of the country?

Mr. Speaker, the problem is that all the projects he just listed are not part of the infrastructure bank, since it has not yet been created.The government is creating a new infrastructure bank for that party's cronies. It is taking back $15 billion that had been allocated to the regions, and reallocating it through that bank. Yesterday the Minister of Finance said himself that small municipalities are unlikely to benefit from this infrastructure bank.Can the Minister of Infrastructure and Communities explain to Canadians, and to the mayors in the House today, why he has been denying this fact for at least a month now?

Mr. Speaker, as I said, we are conducting a broad review of the criminal justice system, including sentencing reform, including a comprehensive review of the mandatory minimum penalties that are contained within the Criminal Code, with an eye to ensuring that we provide the necessary discretion to our judiciary across the country; ensure that we uphold public safety; ensure that we provide efficiencies, effectiveness, and fairness in the criminal justice system; and fundamentally ensure that we are in compliance with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Constitution.

Mr. Speaker, in his answer today, the Minister of Fisheries actually referred to this document as artificial. It is the “Open and Accountable Government” document.I would like to seek unanimous consent to table this document in the House.

Mr. Speaker, the government has announced a coal plan that will drive up electricity costs across Canada. We have seen the story before. In Ontario, Gerald Butts orchestrated the infamous green energy plan, where electricity rates skyrocketed to the highest in North America. The policy was such a disaster that Premier Wynne had to publicly apologize. Now Mr. Butts has convinced the Prime Minister to adopt the same crazy plan.Why are the Liberals so intent on driving seniors out of their homes and businesses out of our country, and why will the Prime Minister not stop this insanity before he also has to apologize?

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals' decision to sole-source the Super Hornet is very dangerous, and is another broken promise. It is dangerous for taxpayers since there was no price announced yesterday. It is dangerous for Canadian jobs since all F-18s are made in Missouri, and it is dangerous to our air force which will now be flying obsolete fighter jets.Do the Liberals even have a clue how much a Super Hornet is going to cost Canadian taxpayers, and how many jobs are going to be lost in Canada's aerospace industry?

Mr. Speaker, our approach is based on science and facts. We are listening to Canadians, and we are working hard to restore their confidence in our environmental processes.That is how we do things, and that is how we will make our decisions.