2016-12-01

Mr. Speaker, thousands of Canadians struggle to get access to a family doctor. Seniors, cancer patients, expectant moms, and people living in rural and remote communities suffer when they are unable to access timely medical care.The Liberals are making it more difficult for Canada's most vulnerable to access care. Canadians doctors have warned that thousands of medical specialists could leave for the United States due to the Liberals' new tax hikes.Can the minister not see that his plans to suck more money into Ottawa's coffers will come at the expense of our most vulnerable Canadians, who need help the most?

Mr. Speaker, I am not sure why the Liberal caucus would stand up and applaud the waste of $261 million of Canadian taxpayer funds. These are not fun coupons. These are people's hard-earned taxpayer dollars. He is going to be wasting it on deporting bogus Mexican refugees when his department officials told him this. Why does the minster even have a job?

Mr. Speaker, today the minister's ill-advised and weak-willed decision on lifting the visa requirement for Mexicans without a formal review will come into effect. However, yesterday we learned exactly how much this will cost Canadians. The minister's own officials say that it will cost Canadian taxpayers over $261 million above any benefits we might receive, mostly for processing and deporting bogus Mexican refugees. Can the minister explain to the House why he made this unsafe and politicized decision, when he knew the cost?

Mr. Speaker, the public works minister has misled Canadians on the scope and cost of the Phoenix pay fiasco every step of the way. Now she is adding her personal touches to the jet fighter program by placing a lifetime gag order on over 200 public servants and is manufacturing evidence to support a fake capability gap. She has even told the House that it would be foolhardy to negotiate pricing before committing to the sole-source purchase. With this track record, how can Canadians possibly trust the minister to buy the right jet at the right price for our air force?

Mr. Speaker, it is clear that when someone wants something from the Liberal government, all one has to do is pay the entry fee to one of its consultations. Its friends at Canada 2020 and Bluesky Strategy Group know it. Their friends at Apotex know it, Chinese billionaire bankers know it, and their pot friends know it too. Everyone can see it. The Liberals are only fooling themselves. When will the Prime Minister finally do the right thing and put an end to his cash for access fundraisers?

Mr. Speaker, the minister should get on with it.Canadians were shocked by recent headlines that carried appalling news of a man charged with murder, whose trial was stayed for unreasonable delay. Now today he is a free man who lives and works amongst our families, children, and law-abiding Canadians. There are hundreds of cases that could face the same fate across this country. Canadian confidence in our criminal justice system is fading.When will the minister finally make victims of crime a priority?

Mr. Speaker, if the Minister of Environment and Climate Change had done absolutely nothing, the people of Ottawa would now be on their way to building a big, beautiful hospital right across the street from the existing one.However, she blocked it for research that her department says will be done before hospital construction even begins, not to mention that half the land is either a helicopter pad or salted and therefore useless for research.Knowing these facts now, will she finally get out of the way and let us build a hospital?

Mr. Speaker, we know three things for sure.First, the Minister of Procurement does not know how much Super Hornet fighters cost. Second, in negotiations with Boeing and the United States, the Liberals put their cards on the table before the game even started. Third, the process to replace our fighter jets will not be done before the 2019 election.Obviously, either the Liberals are totally incompetent, or they have a hidden agenda.Can the minister tell us which is true?

Mr. Speaker, another subject is very important. Some provinces are having difficulty bringing criminals to justice. Canadians are watching the Minister of Justice and wondering what she can do to improve the system. Some criminal trials may not go ahead.What will the minister do to ensure that justice is served in Canada?

Mr. Speaker, World AIDS Day is when we show our support for those living with HIV and AIDS. But the Prime Minister is planning to cut funding to many community-based organizations, including the Canadian AIDS Society and the All Nations Hope Network, the only aboriginal AIDS network in Saskatchewan. It is on the front lines fighting against HIV/AIDS, and it may be forced to close its doors.Instead of just raising flags on World AIDS Day, will the Prime Minister commit to stable, long-term funding for these important organizations?

Mr. Speaker, the insults just keep coming from the other side of the House. Every opposition party worked together, worked hard, and came to a consensus. The problem here is that the Prime Minister does not want to listen to Canadians and he does not want to listen to the other parties, just like he will not have a referendum because he thinks that Canadians are not smart enough, that they are not as smart as he is to pick the kind of system that we are to rely on. The Prime Minister is wrong. Canadians are smart enough to cast a vote.

Mr. Speaker, when people commit crimes, they do so at the expense of others—the victims.Today, victims are looking to the current Government of Canada to see how their rights will be defended and how criminals will be brought before the courts so justice can be served.What will the minister do?

Mr. Speaker, if it looks like, if it smells like, it should be.What part of “proportional” does the minister not understand? The minister responsible for democratic reform launched an online consultation that included questions like, “Do you like to take risks, or better the devil you know?”Does this not undermine the colossal consultation work the committee has done over the past six months? Is the government going to listen to the recommendations of the committee and to the hopes—

Mr. Speaker, the question was about Standing Rock and the aggression that people are seeing, including Canadian citizens.Let us talk about inequality, which is growing in our country. More and more Canadians are facing precarious work, as was shown in the CIBC report. We know that more and more young Canadians are stuck in low-wage work, and an alarming 61% of Canadians are earning less than the average yearly income. The response of the Prime Minister and the finance minister: too bad, get used to it, with platitudes about the middle class—while that dream slips away from more and more people. Why is the government catering to its billionaire and Bay Street friends instead of standing up for Canadians?

Mr. Speaker, this is unbelievable. The multi-party committee spoke and it was clear, and Canadians have also spoken, that a referendum needs to be held. The only thing that we are hearing from the other side is that the Prime Minister thinks he is smarter than Canadians and that only he can decide how we vote and what our vote means. That is an insult to every Canadian in this country. If he wants to change the way we vote, he has to have a referendum.

Mr. Speaker, one thing I can reassure the member on is that the government is about tax fairness for all Canadians and making sure that Canadians pay their fair share of taxes.What we have said, and the member knows it very well, is that for one small business or corporation, there will be one small business tax deduction. One corporation, one deduction. Canadians get it. This is about tax fairness, and that is why we are going to stand on that.

Mr. Speaker, the Youth Unity Journey for Sacred Waters grew from Stanley Mission, in my riding, and is walking to Standing Rock. They stand in solidarity with peaceful protesters who are facing state violence. Some have been severely injured.We need to support indigenous people in their right to protect their land and resources. Will the government take a stand with us and condemn the violence against peaceful protesters, and stand with the people of Standing Rock?

Mr. Speaker, this week the Liberal government betrayed the people of Vancouver Island. The Prime Minister says he is a grandson of British Columbia, so maybe he can understand. Our economy is tied to our ocean. Our culture is rooted to the sea. The health of the coast is the health of our environment, and it is the health of our communities. After promising to put the Kinder Morgan pipeline through a new assessment process, why is this government now putting at risk everything we hold so dear? Why is it betraying Vancouver Islanders?

Mr. Speaker, addressing HIV and AIDS in Canada is a significant priority for our government. I was pleased to meet with the Canadian AIDS Society today. This year, our government is investing almost $76 million across the country to tackle HIV and other related infections in Canada.In terms of the community action fund, we remain steady at $26.4 million, and we have asked our department to assist impacted organizations by working with them to extend transitional funding for another year.

Mr. Speaker, what we will not do is what the previous government did, and that was put up figures that were totally irresponsible. In fact, they put up so many figures when it came to procurement for DND that they kept having to change them because they were so unrealistic. We will not do this. We will be responsible with Canadian taxpayers' money, and we will get the best deal we can for the men and women of our Armed Forces.

Mr. Speaker, former Liberal Party CFO and big marijuana kingpin Chuck Rifici and the justice minister would have us believe that there is nothing here to see. They claim that the pot surge is because of the American election a week earlier, but Canadian companies cannot ship pot across the border, and guess what? No American pot companies saw their stock surge like the Liberal-connected companies here in Canada.Will the Prime Minister and minister tell us if an investigation has been launched into this potential leak?

Mr. Speaker, once again, I would like to remind the member opposite that the committee did not offer a specific alternative to first past the post, that the NDP and the Green Party, in their dissenting reports, undermined and contradicted their position on a referendum.Therefore, we will continue this conversation with Canadians before arriving at a final outcome.

Mr. Speaker, it is a point of order to point to the rules that say that no member shall speak disrespectfully of other members in this place. I believe the entire membership of the electoral reform committee was disrespected by the Minister of Democratic Institutions.

Mr. Speaker, under our Conservative government, we had a judicial appointments system that served Canadians and the justice system well. It worked. Under the Liberal government, the system that worked so well was changed, and now we are faced with unreasonable delays in the Canadian criminal justice system. It is a fact that the current system employed by the Liberals is broken. Why did they go and fix something that was not broken?

Mr. Speaker, what does Bill C-29 do?Hidden bank fees are currently outlawed in Quebec. That will disappear. A consumer who has a contract can cancel it if he or she is being shafted. That will disappear. A bank cannot charge new fees without the client's consent. That will disappear. There are fines for misleading advertising. That will disappear. We have a neutral tribunal that examines all complaints. That too will disappear. The minister of high finance is supposed to protect the people from banks. Why is he instead protecting the banks from the people?

Mr. Speaker, I will get up again and address this somewhat absurd line of questioning. There is no evidence that this report has been leaked. I, to be clear, have not seen the report, nor has anyone. I will see the report once it is translated, along with every member in the House, in order to have a discussion, in order to move forward with our government's commitment to legalize and strictly regulate and restrict access to marijuana. I value the work the task force has undertaken and the commitment the task force members have made to providing recommendations so we can proceed in a manner that is consistent on this--

Mr. Speaker, after the Prime Minister announced a 20% increase in Canada's contribution to the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, we learned that organizations here in Canada are going to have their funding cut. Some of them will lose up to 70% of their funding, which will jeopardize their very existence.How can the government justify increasing international funding while cutting funding for Canadian organizations? Can the Liberals hold off on this new process and maintain the status quo?

Mr. Speaker, $1,500 for appetizers and access to ministers and a $1-million donation from a wealthy Chinese businessman suggest that the Liberal government's friends will now be entitled to kickbacks.The work of the marijuana task force constitutes privileged information that could influence the markets. Can the Minister of Justice assure the House that an official investigation has been launched into the possible information leak?

Mr. Speaker, on World AIDS Day, it is unfortunate to note that the Public Health Agency of Canada has cut funding to dozens of HIV/AIDS organizations, many of which have received support for decades.If the Liberal government does not reverse these cuts, there will be serious gaps in critical services for communities across Canada. This means cuts to services for first nations and Inuit, inmates in corrections, and vulnerable Canadians in rural and urban Canada.In 2003, Liberals pledged to increase HIV/AIDS support. Will this Liberal minister follow through and invest these critical funds?

Mr. Speaker, Canadians believe that there should be no changes to the way they vote without a referendum first, and an Angus Reid poll showed that 75% of Canadians feel this way. Now the special committee has agreed that a referendum is required. What has been the Liberal government's response? Some vague notion of citizen engagement and some postcard about values.There is no other form of citizenship engagement that is a replacement for a referendum, so will the Liberals finally acknowledge that they cannot change Canadians' voting system without giving them a direct say in a referendum?

Mr. Speaker, there is another channel. It sounds like they are trying to change the channel.What a day. I would like to start by thanking all the members of the committee for their incredible work. We managed to do something that has never been done before. Skeptics said that it would all fall apart, that there was simply no way forward to finding agreement among all of these parties, and yet Canadians defied the cynics and told us, in overwhelming numbers, that they wanted a proportional voting system. That is a good day for Canada.Can the minister tell us when the government will announce a clear plan and timetable to implement all of the committee's recommendations?

Mr. Speaker, I certainly recognize that we are working in a concerted manner, in concert with the provinces and territories because we share jurisdiction over the criminal justice system with them, to ensure that we can improve the efficiencies and the effectiveness of the justice system, while recognizing that there are court delays. We are working in a coordinated manner to ensure that we address the many realities of what leads to court delays, and I look forward to continuing this work.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday I asked if the Liberals would ensure Canadians could trade freely between provinces. It is unfathomable that Mr. Comeau was charged for buying beer. Unfortunately the Liberals said they would only support freer trade in Canada. I have to remind them that free trade in Canada is a constitutional right. An agreement between provinces with dozens of exclusions, including beer and wine, and government interference is not free trade.Will the Liberals commit to protecting Canadians' constitutional rights and ensure we have full free trade across Canada?

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member. He too served quite a bit of time on the committee and contributed to the final report.The final report, while it does not outline a specific alternative to first past the post, does raise some good points: that we need to ensure that those Canadians who belong to marginalized communities are better heard and reflected in our elections; that the conversation about electoral reform has to be a value-based one.To that end, we will be reaching out to Canadians through a new digital initiative starting next week.

Mr. Speaker, again yesterday, I asked the government a very simple question that seems to have fallen on deaf ears.The softwood lumber industry is on the brink of another major crisis. The Minister of International Trade is congratulating her government, but more and more people are calling for a loan guarantee to support the industry. Thousands of jobs are at stake here, and an important piece of the puzzle, a plan B, is missing.Can the minister assure workers right now that the government has a plan B ready?

Mr. Speaker, looking comprehensively at reform to the criminal justice system is a priority of mine, as instructed by the Prime Minister. I have been engaging across the country with my colleagues in the provinces and territories, and I will continue to do so to ensure that we find effectiveness and efficiencies in the criminal justice system.The administration of justice is a shared responsibility. There are innovative approaches. The Province of Ontario recently introduced—today, actually—some suggestions in terms of advancing and dealing with court delays.We are going to continue to do that in a collaborative manner, something that we have not seen in the last 10 years.

Mr. Speaker, on November 3, the Minister of Democratic Institutions told The Huffington Post that she wanted the Special Committee on Electoral Reform to “help us understand and answer this question. When we come up with a reform, how do we figure out if it has that legitimacy, that is has that broad support? Is it through a referendum? Or is there another way?”The answer for the minister from the committee is this: it is a referendum. There is no other way.Therefore, will the minister commit to not change the way Canadians vote unless she first gets their consent in a referendum?

Mr. Speaker, the best way to have a conversation with Canadians is to hold a referendum. The best way to determine what Canadians think of the electoral system is to hold a referendum. The best way to take politicians out of the equation and to give the power to Canadians is to hold a referendum.When will the government see reason? When will the government agree with the Minister of Foreign Affairs who said, not so long ago, that they had to hold a referendum? The best way to know what people want is to hold a referendum. The government must hold a referendum and it will find out.

Mr. Speaker, some members of the House believe the answer is the Leap Manifesto, and the only choice for the future is to leave it in the ground. Others believe that the NDP should stand with Canadians trying to get back to work. These projects will create thousands of well-paying, middle-class jobs. There is not a country in the world that would find 200 billion barrels of oil and leave it in the ground while there are markets for it.Our decisions on major projects reflect a balanced approach that will create prosperity while we seek to protect the environment we cherish.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member opposite for his passion and the committee for the time it spent studying alternatives to first past the post. When we made the commitment to introduce a new option, we did so based on the understanding that a committee would come together and recommend alternatives to first past the post, that it would help us answer the difficult questions. Instead, what members across the aisle and the NDP critic have suggested is that we choose our own adventure. If we were going to choose our own adventure, why did we put together a committee to study electoral reform?

Mr. Speaker, I want to say that I appreciate the feedback, but the committee worked together. The committee worked across party lines. The committee reflected back what it heard from Canadians. That may be a bit of a radical notion for some of my Liberal colleagues, but that was the work of the committee, and the work of the minister is to fulfill the promise of the Prime Minister when he stood in front of Canadians on multiple occasions and said that 2015 was going to be the last election under first past the post.The minister's job is to work with the rest of us and work with Canadians to achieve that goal, rather than throwing on skepticism, rather than heaping on false notions of broad support. We wonder where the Liberals' broad support was when they declared war and announced pipeline recommendations. Let us get the job done for Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, the multi-party committee on electoral reform presented its report, and its recommendation is clear: if the Prime Minister wants to change the rules of democracy, Canadians must have their say in a referendum. This is a major victory for democracy.Will the Prime Minister heed the committee's recommendation and commit to holding a referendum if he plans to change the voting system?

Mr. Speaker, the softwood lumber agreement expired under the previous government.We are working closely with producers, workers, and the provinces and territories, and we will continue to work with them. Canada is prepared for any eventuality, and our government will vigorously defend the interests of Canadian workers and producers. We do not want to reach just any old deal. We want a good deal for Canada.

Mr. Speaker, I am not sure how many times I need to rise in the House to remind the member that in Canada we have some of the strictest rules when it comes to fundraising. The member knows very well that only Canadians can donate to Canadian political parties. Even the Chief Electoral Officer has stated that the rules are some of the strictest in the world. The member needs to listen to the answer and get real and do the work Canadians expect us to do to respond to the very real challenges--

Mr. Speaker, after six months of hard work, the electoral reform committee is proposing a proportional system. This is a great victory for all Canadians who are fed up with our outdated and unfair system.Yesterday, the Prime Minister promised to put an end to the current system.Can we count on the Liberal government to act on the committee's recommendations to implement a proportional system?

Mr. Speaker, the government recently announced the oceans protection plan. The House should know that investing in marine safety not only benefits coastal communities but watershed communities, like my riding of Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge. Could the minister tell the House about the measures the OPP takes with regard to improving marine safety?

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member opposite for his work on the special committee and his commitment to a healthier democracy.However, what he has recommended as part of the committee's report is a referendum on an incomprehensible formula. In the dissenting reports that the NDP and the Green Party have provided, they have contradicted and undermined a referendum.I thank the committee for its work. We will continue this conversation with Canadians before introducing legislation in this House.

Why do I not have a job? I think I do have job.Mr. Speaker, as I just said, there are many benefits coming from this accord. As in any undertaking, there are risks. We are working very carefully and strongly with the Government of Mexico to manage those risks in a responsible way.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the committee for its hard work. We will be reviewing the committee's report and I urge all members to do the same.Complementary to the work of the committee, to the outreach that my parliamentary secretary and I have done, we committed to introducing another channel to hear from Canadians. This new digital initiative, which the member opposite has not yet even seen, so I am not sure what he is referring to in his question, will include an invitation to every Canadian. Canadians can expect their invitations in the mail this Monday.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the minister for the incomprehensibility of that response.A month ago, the minister also said, “if the committee comes back—and this is how much respect I have for this committee’s work—if the committee comes back and says a referendum is the only way to legitimize this process, then I have to take that very seriously.” The minister did in fact say in this majority report, from which only the Liberals dissented, that a referendum is the only way to legitimize changing the voting system.Therefore, will the minister commit to not change the system unless she has the consent of the Canadian people in a—

Mr. Speaker, as I said, our government is deeply committed to addressing HIV/AIDS and hepatitis C in Canada, with community-based organizations being central to this.The funding we provide through the Canada action fund remains steady at $26.4 million annually. While 124 organizations were successful in the application process, some were not, which is why the Minister of Health has asked the Public Health Agency of Canada to assist these impacted organizations by working with them to extend transitional funding for another year.

Mr. Speaker, the $1.5 billion oceans protection plan will indeed seriously improve marine safety. It will make us more quickly aware of any marine incidents. It will help us respond more effectively and more rapidly. It will involve our coastal first nations, who will be trained and equipped and given the authority to respond to local marine incidents. It will improve our hydrographic services for better navigation. It will ensure that certain critical fish habitats are protected, as well as marine species. We want to make sure that our coasts are safe, clean, and healthy for generations to come.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to point out again that there was no specific system advocated for on behalf of the committee. The only thing there was consensus on in that regard was that there was no consensus on a specific system to first past the post. That said, we take this seriously. We are not done hearing from Canadians. We will be reaching out to them through an invitation they will receive in their mailboxes as soon as next week, and we are looking forward to hearing from as many voices as possible before making introductory legislation in this House.

Mr. Speaker, Ladies Learning Code is a wonderful organization that teaches Canadians digital skills. I was privileged to sit in on a class on National Learn to Code Day. We are working hard to create a culture where young people, particularly young girls, are excited about science and technology.Each year, NSERC provides funding to organizations that get our youth excited about science.

Mr. Speaker, Canadians are smart, reasonable people and we are doing this for them. The committee did not offer a specific alternative to first past the post. Instead, it offered us the Gallagher index. So the hon. member wants us to have a referendum on the following: Would Canadians like to take the square root of the sum of the squares of the difference between the percentage of the seats for each party and the percentage of the votes passed?

Mr. Speaker, while the minister continues to deny that CETA will increase prescription drug costs for Canadians, it is clear that she has something to hide. Last year the parliamentary budget officer wrote to at least four federal departments trying to track down the figures. We know that the information exists, because Health Canada handed over its data. Why is the minister hiding the facts from Canadians? When will she reveal just how much CETA will increase the cost of medicines, and for once, will she answer a direct question?

Mr. Speaker, the government is deeply committed to addressing HIV/AIDS and hepatitis C in Canada, with community-based organizations being central to this. The funding we provide through the community action fund remains steady at $26.4 million annually. While 124 organizations were successful in the application process, some were not, which is why the Minister of Health has asked the Public Health Agency to assist these impacted organizations by working with them to extend transitional funding for another year.

Mr. Speaker, I am particularly grateful to my colleague for her question today, because it gives me the opportunity to announce the very good news that it is today that we are lifting the Mexico visa. This is good news for the Canadian tourist industry. It will create many jobs. It is definitely good news for our beef farmers who will be able to export their wonderful product to Mexico.

Mr. Speaker, I have been tasked by the Prime Minister to do a comprehensive review of the criminal justice system. I am committed to doing that in partnership with the provinces and territories, recognizing the need for public safety, recognizing the need to support victims of crime, recognizing the need to ensure that we are compliant with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and ensuring that we look at all sources for innovative solutions to improve the effectiveness of the criminal justice system, including looking at the interim report that was just released by the Senate committee.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to make it very clear that neither I nor my ministerial colleagues have seen this report. This was confirmed by the chair of the task force yesterday. The report was not available.The member should know that capital markets are strictly regulated, and any investigation into this matter in terms of irregularities is the responsibility of the Ontario Securities Commission.

Mr. Speaker, let me confirm for my colleague once again that the government is committed to an open and transparent process to make sure that the men and women in uniform get the equipment they need to do the job expected of them.With respect to the interim, it is really important for us to fill the capability gap that has been identified. We will do that, working with Boeing, but nowhere would anyone commit to a figure before the negotiations actually take place.

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Democratic Institutions does not like the majority report tabled by the Special Committee on Electoral Reform, and she really does not like its recommendations, which are in favour of a referendum on the voting system and a more proportional voting system that does not weaken Quebec's political weight.What are the chances that the minister will try to discredit the report today or that the Liberals will not support proportional representation precisely because they are only interested in an electoral reform that will keep them in power forever?

Mr. Speaker, any irregularities in the market, the member should know, are monitored and regulated by the Ontario Securities Commission. I want to reiterate once again that I have not seen this report. There is no evidence that this report has been leaked. My ministerial colleagues and every member in the House and the public will see the report at the same time I do, in the middle of December.

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member has a point. There were some good recommendations in the report. For example, the best way to have a conversation with Canadians about their electoral system is through a values-based approach.To that end, we will be continuing this conversation with Canadians through a digital initiative. Members of the House are expected to allow their constituents to know that it is happening and ensure that their voices are heard. We will be introducing recommendations to the House based on all the feedback we receive.

Mr. Speaker, I would ask that she would commit to more consideration of the budget bill on her watch.With that in mind, would the government House leader advise the House what the business will be for the remainder of this week and for the next week?

Mr. Speaker, we know that on November 16, stock trading on the TSX was halted for Canopy Growth after its stock doubled for no apparent reason. There are serious allegations that insider information was used to influence stock trades. Can the Minister of Justice confirm that an investigation has been launched into a possible leak and insider trading? Yes or no.

To the contrary, Mr. Speaker, our Prime Minister asked that we bring together a special committee to study the options available to us and to recommend a specific system as an alternative to first past the post. We asked the committee to help answer very difficult questions for us. It did not do that. We now have to make those hard changes, and I am looking forward to continuing this conversation with Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has said that: ...one of the great things about Canada is people are more than free to express their opinions, to express their disappointment with governments in peaceful ways and we expect them and encourage them to [do so]. There are passionate voices on all sides of these decisions. Some people want everything built, some want nothing built. Our government is committed to making decisions based on facts and evidence. We believe the decisions that we took this week are in the best interests of Canada and indeed in the best interests of Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, the report of the multi-party committee on democratic reform is in, and the recommendation is clear: If the Prime Minister wants to change the rules of democracy, then Canadians get to have a say in a referendum. This is a huge victory for democracy and a huge victory for Canadians.Will the Prime Minister actually respect the recommendations in this report, and commit to holding a referendum if he wants to change the way we vote?

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. critic for his work on committee. The committee spent a lot of time and effort on this work. Having travelled the country, I know that this is a complex question. The challenge that we asked the committee to come back to us on was quite a big one. While the committee offered areas on which we do agree and understand, it did not offer a specific alternative to first past the post. We thank the committee members for their hard work. We will continue to review the report and hear from Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, in Toronto and across Canada the organization Ladies Learning Code is working to promote digital literacy and technology skills, like writing computer codes, specifically for Canadian women and girls. Ladies Learning Code wants more women leaders in the tech industry. Could the Minister of Science advise the House what steps her department is taking to promote science, technology, engineering, and math in Canada among girls and boys?

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the members of the special committee for their time and effort in studying this. We have received the report. I am going to review it carefully and I urge every member of the House to do the same. I know this was a challenging process, and the report shows just how challenging electoral reform can be, because the only consensus that the committee found was that there is no consensus on electoral reform. In the coming days, we will be taking specific actions to continue this conversation with Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. If you review the Thursday questions in the past 20 years, which I have done, and I have done so academically, you will find that the hon. opposition House leader is perfectly within her right to have this preamble.

Mr. Speaker, this gives me the opportunity to talk about the good work this government is doing to address the serious challenges of the industrial revolution 4.0 that is facing every single country in the world. It is our goal to ensure that young people have a chance to be successful. This is exactly why we appointed the expert panel on youth employment, and we are looking forward to its interim report at the beginning of December.

Mr. Speaker, December 3 will be the International Day of Persons with Disabilities.Since 1992, this day is celebrated every year on December 3 all around the world. We know how important it is to educate people about the realities people with disabilities face.Can the parliamentary secretary inform the House on this important journey and the actions taken by the government to ensure progress for persons with disabilities across the country?

Mr. Speaker, I would like thank the NDP critic for his work on the committee and his continued commitment to strengthening our democratic institutions.I have to admit that I am a little disappointed, because what we had hoped the committee would provide us with was a specific alternative system to first past the post. Instead, it provided us with the Gallagher index. While it did not complete the hard work we had expected it to, this is consistent with what we heard from Canadians. We will continue—

Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned, we have received the report, and we encourage all members of the House to do the same. My first impressions are that there are some good ideas in there. For example, the only way that we can engage Canadians on their preference for an alternative to first past the post is through a values-based conversation. But on the main question and the hard choices that we asked the committee to make, the members of the committee took a pass. The NDP critic said, choose your own adventure. I thank the committee members for their time, and we will continue this conversation—

Mr. Speaker, we certainly do hope there will be a withdrawal of that comment.Before I ask the usual question, I would like to ask the House leader if she would consider an idea, and that would be to be more generous with allocating debate for Bill C-29, the budget implementation bill, than she was with Bill C-26, which she well knows was allocated the minimum amount of time possible. Worth noting is the House leader's predecessor committed five sitting days to the same stages of the budget implementation bill on this watch. Since she was appointed—

Mr. Speaker, today we are continuing with opposition day. Tomorrow the House will consider the report stage of Bill C-29, the second budget bill, and it will continue studying that bill Monday and Tuesday of next week.For the remainder of the week, we plan to call the following bills: Bill S-4, the tax conventions legislation, and Bill S-3, the Indian tax amendment, provided we get these two bills from the Senate; Bill C-25, the business frameworks bill; and Bill C-30 concerning CETA. All these bills are at second reading. It is my hope that parties will be able to negotiate on how to proceed in advancing these very important initiatives. Something I have committed to is working well with other parties, and I will continue to do that.

Mr. Speaker, our government is already working to include the affordability of and access to prescription drugs. We joined provinces and territories as a member of the pan-Canadian Pharmaceutical Alliance, which negotiates lower drug prices on behalf of public drug plans. To date, the pCPA has completed more than 95 brand drug negotiations and has achieved price regulations on 18 generic drugs, resulting in annual savings of more than $712 million. In the coming months, the Minister of Health will continue to work with provincial and territorial counterparts to identify--

Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind the member that our government, me included, has been very clear in advocating to liberalize the trade of alcohol within Canada. This is an issue that I raised with my provincial and territorial counterparts when we were pursuing the Canada free trade agreement. I will make sure that we continue to advance this issue as well as reduce barriers and harmonize regulations.We are very committed to the fact that we want to see an environment where we create good opportunities for businesses to grow and better choices for consumers.

Mr. Speaker, I am very proud of the reorganization and the new process that we put in place, not only for the Supreme Court of Canada, but with respect to the appointments of superior court justices. I was very proud as well to appoint 39 superior court judges across the country. I am working to reconstitute the judicial advisory committee with the intent of supporting and promoting diversity, so that our benches reflect the diversity of the country, and ensuring that we have the highest quality of jurists that I can appoint to the superior courts across this country. I look forward to doing another round of appointments.

Mr. Speaker, I have received the report from the National Capital Commission.The NCC has provided a space for the public to express their priorities in finding a new site for the hospital. I want to thank them. All levels of government need to be involved in order to achieve a final decision.We look forward to further discussions with the city, the province, and the hospital itself in order to find a consensus.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his question, which gives me a chance to remind him of the history behind this.The Marcotte decision called on the federal government to clarify its position on consumer protection with respect to financial institutions. That is exactly what we did. We modernized and simplified the rules in order to protect Canadian consumers. Provisions on access to basic services, provisions on business practices, and provisions for greater clarity, that is exactly what consumers in Quebec and across the country asked for, and that is exactly what we gave them.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Brampton Centre for his question.This year, we mark the 10th anniversary of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Canada is proud to be one of the first countries to sign the convention.This year the theme of the international day is achieving 17 goals for the future we want. In line with these goals, we have had consultations across the country for establishing a new law on accessibility.This would ensure that all Canadians are able to participate equally in their communities and workplaces, and make a better Canada.

Mr. Speaker, today during question period, the Minister of Democratic Institutions said about the electoral reform committee that it did not complete the hard work that we had expected it to. This committee met throughout the summer and since the House—

Mr. Speaker, I am not sure why the Liberal caucus would stand up and applaud the waste of $261 million of Canadian taxpayer funds. These are not fun coupons. These are people's hard-earned taxpayer dollars. He is going to be wasting it on deporting bogus Mexican refugees when his department officials told him this. Why does the minster even have a job?

Mr. Speaker, under our Conservative government, we had a judicial appointments system that served Canadians and the justice system well. It worked. Under the Liberal government, the system that worked so well was changed, and now we are faced with unreasonable delays in the Canadian criminal justice system. It is a fact that the current system employed by the Liberals is broken. Why did they go and fix something that was not broken?

Mr. Speaker, the minister should get on with it.Canadians were shocked by recent headlines that carried appalling news of a man charged with murder, whose trial was stayed for unreasonable delay. Now today he is a free man who lives and works amongst our families, children, and law-abiding Canadians. There are hundreds of cases that could face the same fate across this country. Canadian confidence in our criminal justice system is fading.When will the minister finally make victims of crime a priority?

Mr. Speaker, today during question period, the Minister of Democratic Institutions said about the electoral reform committee that it did not complete the hard work that we had expected it to. This committee met throughout the summer and since the House—

Mr. Speaker, I would like thank the NDP critic for his work on the committee and his continued commitment to strengthening our democratic institutions.I have to admit that I am a little disappointed, because what we had hoped the committee would provide us with was a specific alternative system to first past the post. Instead, it provided us with the Gallagher index. While it did not complete the hard work we had expected it to, this is consistent with what we heard from Canadians. We will continue—

Mr. Speaker, we know that on November 16, stock trading on the TSX was halted for Canopy Growth after its stock doubled for no apparent reason. There are serious allegations that insider information was used to influence stock trades. Can the Minister of Justice confirm that an investigation has been launched into a possible leak and insider trading? Yes or no.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. critic for his work on committee. The committee spent a lot of time and effort on this work. Having travelled the country, I know that this is a complex question. The challenge that we asked the committee to come back to us on was quite a big one. While the committee offered areas on which we do agree and understand, it did not offer a specific alternative to first past the post. We thank the committee members for their hard work. We will continue to review the report and hear from Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the committee for its hard work. We will be reviewing the committee's report and I urge all members to do the same.Complementary to the work of the committee, to the outreach that my parliamentary secretary and I have done, we committed to introducing another channel to hear from Canadians. This new digital initiative, which the member opposite has not yet even seen, so I am not sure what he is referring to in his question, will include an invitation to every Canadian. Canadians can expect their invitations in the mail this Monday.

Mr. Speaker, after six months of hard work, the electoral reform committee is proposing a proportional system. This is a great victory for all Canadians who are fed up with our outdated and unfair system.Yesterday, the Prime Minister promised to put an end to the current system.Can we count on the Liberal government to act on the committee's recommendations to implement a proportional system?

Mr. Speaker, I have been tasked by the Prime Minister to do a comprehensive review of the criminal justice system. I am committed to doing that in partnership with the provinces and territories, recognizing the need for public safety, recognizing the need to support victims of crime, recognizing the need to ensure that we are compliant with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and ensuring that we look at all sources for innovative solutions to improve the effectiveness of the criminal justice system, including looking at the interim report that was just released by the Senate committee.

Mr. Speaker, it is a point of order to point to the rules that say that no member shall speak disrespectfully of other members in this place. I believe the entire membership of the electoral reform committee was disrespected by the Minister of Democratic Institutions.

Mr. Speaker, on World AIDS Day, it is unfortunate to note that the Public Health Agency of Canada has cut funding to dozens of HIV/AIDS organizations, many of which have received support for decades.If the Liberal government does not reverse these cuts, there will be serious gaps in critical services for communities across Canada. This means cuts to services for first nations and Inuit, inmates in corrections, and vulnerable Canadians in rural and urban Canada.In 2003, Liberals pledged to increase HIV/AIDS support. Will this Liberal minister follow through and invest these critical funds?

Mr. Speaker, after the Prime Minister announced a 20% increase in Canada's contribution to the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, we learned that organizations here in Canada are going to have their funding cut. Some of them will lose up to 70% of their funding, which will jeopardize their very existence.How can the government justify increasing international funding while cutting funding for Canadian organizations? Can the Liberals hold off on this new process and maintain the status quo?

Mr. Speaker, I will get up again and address this somewhat absurd line of questioning. There is no evidence that this report has been leaked. I, to be clear, have not seen the report, nor has anyone. I will see the report once it is translated, along with every member in the House, in order to have a discussion, in order to move forward with our government's commitment to legalize and strictly regulate and restrict access to marijuana. I value the work the task force has undertaken and the commitment the task force members have made to providing recommendations so we can proceed in a manner that is consistent on this--

Mr. Speaker, I thank the minister for the incomprehensibility of that response.A month ago, the minister also said, “if the committee comes back—and this is how much respect I have for this committee’s work—if the committee comes back and says a referendum is the only way to legitimize this process, then I have to take that very seriously.” The minister did in fact say in this majority report, from which only the Liberals dissented, that a referendum is the only way to legitimize changing the voting system.Therefore, will the minister commit to not change the system unless she has the consent of the Canadian people in a—

Mr. Speaker, I want to say that I appreciate the feedback, but the committee worked together. The committee worked across party lines. The committee reflected back what it heard from Canadians. That may be a bit of a radical notion for some of my Liberal colleagues, but that was the work of the committee, and the work of the minister is to fulfill the promise of the Prime Minister when he stood in front of Canadians on multiple occasions and said that 2015 was going to be the last election under first past the post.The minister's job is to work with the rest of us and work with Canadians to achieve that goal, rather than throwing on skepticism, rather than heaping on false notions of broad support. We wonder where the Liberals' broad support was when they declared war and announced pipeline recommendations. Let us get the job done for Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, once again, I would like to remind the member opposite that the committee did not offer a specific alternative to first past the post, that the NDP and the Green Party, in their dissenting reports, undermined and contradicted their position on a referendum.Therefore, we will continue this conversation with Canadians before arriving at a final outcome.

Mr. Speaker, we know three things for sure.First, the Minister of Procurement does not know how much Super Hornet fighters cost. Second, in negotiations with Boeing and the United States, the Liberals put their cards on the table before the game even started. Third, the process to replace our fighter jets will not be done before the 2019 election.Obviously, either the Liberals are totally incompetent, or they have a hidden agenda.Can the minister tell us which is true?

To the contrary, Mr. Speaker, our Prime Minister asked that we bring together a special committee to study the options available to us and to recommend a specific system as an alternative to first past the post. We asked the committee to help answer very difficult questions for us. It did not do that. We now have to make those hard changes, and I am looking forward to continuing this conversation with Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, another subject is very important. Some provinces are having difficulty bringing criminals to justice. Canadians are watching the Minister of Justice and wondering what she can do to improve the system. Some criminal trials may not go ahead.What will the minister do to ensure that justice is served in Canada?

Mr. Speaker, this is unbelievable. The multi-party committee spoke and it was clear, and Canadians have also spoken, that a referendum needs to be held. The only thing that we are hearing from the other side is that the Prime Minister thinks he is smarter than Canadians and that only he can decide how we vote and what our vote means. That is an insult to every Canadian in this country. If he wants to change the way we vote, he has to have a referendum.

Mr. Speaker, the insults just keep coming from the other side of the House. Every opposition party worked together, worked hard, and came to a consensus. The problem here is that the Prime Minister does not want to listen to Canadians and he does not want to listen to the other parties, just like he will not have a referendum because he thinks that Canadians are not smart enough, that they are not as smart as he is to pick the kind of system that we are to rely on. The Prime Minister is wrong. Canadians are smart enough to cast a vote.

Mr. Speaker, while the minister continues to deny that CETA will increase prescription drug costs for Canadians, it is clear that she has something to hide. Last year the parliamentary budget officer wrote to at least four federal departments trying to track down the figures. We know that the information exists, because Health Canada handed over its data. Why is the minister hiding the facts from Canadians? When will she reveal just how much CETA will increase the cost of medicines, and for once, will she answer a direct question?

Mr. Speaker, when people commit crimes, they do so at the expense of others—the victims.Today, victims are looking to the current Government of Canada to see how their rights will be defended and how criminals will be brought before the courts so justice can be served.What will the minister do?

Mr. Speaker, former Liberal Party CFO and big marijuana kingpin Chuck Rifici and the justice minister would have us believe that there is nothing here to see. They claim that the pot surge is because of the American election a week earlier, but Canadian companies cannot ship pot across the border, and guess what? No American pot companies saw their stock surge like the Liberal-connected companies here in Canada.Will the Prime Minister and minister tell us if an investigation has been launched into this potential leak?

Mr. Speaker, any irregularities in the market, the member should know, are monitored and regulated by the Ontario Securities Commission. I want to reiterate once again that I have not seen this report. There is no evidence that this report has been leaked. My ministerial colleagues and every member in the House and the public will see the report at the same time I do, in the middle of December.

Mr. Speaker, the government recently announced the oceans protection plan. The House should know that investing in marine safety not only benefits coastal communities but watershed communities, like my riding of Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge. Could the minister tell the House about the measures the OPP takes with regard to improving marine safety?

Mr. Speaker, the public works minister has misled Canadians on the scope and cost of the Phoenix pay fiasco every step of the way. Now she is adding her personal touches to the jet fighter program by placing a lifetime gag order on over 200 public servants and is manufacturing evidence to support a fake capability gap. She has even told the House that it would be foolhardy to negotiate pricing before committing to the sole-source purchase. With this track record, how can Canadians possibly trust the minister to buy the right jet at the right price for our air force?

Mr. Speaker, some members of the House believe the answer is the Leap Manifesto, and the only choice for the future is to leave it in the ground. Others believe that the NDP should stand with Canadians trying to get back to work. These projects will create thousands of well-paying, middle-class jobs. There is not a country in the world that would find 200 billion barrels of oil and leave it in the ground while there are markets for it.Our decisions on major projects reflect a balanced approach that will create prosperity while we seek to protect the environment we cherish.

Mr. Speaker, looking comprehensively at reform to the criminal justice system is a priority of mine, as instructed by the Prime Minister. I have been engaging across the country with my colleagues in the provinces and territories, and I will continue to do so to ensure that we find effectiveness and efficiencies in the criminal justice system.The administration of justice is a shared responsibility. There are innovative approaches. The Province of Ontario recently introduced—today, actually—some suggestions in terms of advancing and dealing with court delays.We are going to continue to do that in a collaborative manner, something that we have not seen in the last 10 years.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to point out again that there was no specific system advocated for on behalf of the committee. The only thing there was consensus on in that regard was that there was no consensus on a specific system to first past the post. That said, we take this seriously. We are not done hearing from Canadians. We will be reaching out to them through an invitation they will receive in their mailboxes as soon as next week, and we are looking forward to hearing from as many voices as possible before making introductory legislation in this House.

Mr. Speaker, thousands of Canadians struggle to get access to a family doctor. Seniors, cancer patients, expectant moms, and people living in rural and remote communities suffer when they are unable to access timely medical care.The Liberals are making it more difficult for Canada's most vulnerable to access care. Canadians doctors have warned that thousands of medical specialists could leave for the United States due to the Liberals' new tax hikes.Can the minister not see that his plans to suck more money into Ottawa's coffers will come at the expense of our most vulnerable Canadians, who need help the most?

Mr. Speaker, I have received the report from the National Capital Commission.The NCC has provided a space for the public to express their priorities in finding a new site for the hospital. I want to thank them. All levels of government need to be involved in order to achieve a final decision.We look forward to further discussions with the city, the province, and the hospital itself in order to find a consensus.

Mr. Speaker, Canadians believe that there should be no changes to the way they vote without a referendum first, and an Angus Reid poll showed that 75% of Canadians feel this way. Now the special committee has agreed that a referendum is required. What has been the Liberal government's response? Some vague notion of citizen engagement and some postcard about values.There is no other form of citizenship engagement that is a replacement for a referendum, so will the Liberals finally acknowledge that they cannot change Canadians' voting system without giving them a direct say in a referendum?

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member opposite for his work on the special committee and his commitment to a healthier democracy.However, what he has recommended as part of the committee's report is a referendum on an incomprehensible formula. In the dissenting reports that the NDP and the Green Party have provided, they have contradicted and undermined a referendum.I thank the committee for its work. We will continue this conversation with Canadians before introducing legislation in this House.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member opposite for his passion and the committee for the time it spent studying alternatives to first past the post. When we made the commitment to introduce a new option, we did so based on the understanding that a committee would come together and recommend alternatives to first past the post, that it would help us answer the difficult questions. Instead, what members across the aisle and the NDP critic have suggested is that we choose our own adventure. If we were going to choose our own adventure, why did we put together a committee to study electoral reform?

Mr. Speaker, Canadians are smart, reasonable people and we are doing this for them. The committee did not offer a specific alternative to first past the post. Instead, it offered us the Gallagher index. So the hon. member wants us to have a referendum on the following: Would Canadians like to take the square root of the sum of the squares of the difference between the percentage of the seats for each party and the percentage of the votes passed?

Mr. Speaker, if the Minister of Environment and Climate Change had done absolutely nothing, the people of Ottawa would now be on their way to building a big, beautiful hospital right across the street from the existing one.However, she blocked it for research that her department says will be done before hospital construction even begins, not to mention that half the land is either a helicopter pad or salted and therefore useless for research.Knowing these facts now, will she finally get out of the way and let us build a hospital?

Mr. Speaker, it is clear that when someone wants something from the Liberal government, all one has to do is pay the entry fee to one of its consultations. Its friends at Canada 2020 and Bluesky Strategy Group know it. Their friends at Apotex know it, Chinese billionaire bankers know it, and their pot friends know it too. Everyone can see it. The Liberals are only fooling themselves. When will the Prime Minister finally do the right thing and put an end to his cash for access fundraisers?

Mr. Speaker, what does Bill C-29 do?Hidden bank fees are currently outlawed in Quebec. That will disappear. A consumer who has a contract can cancel it if he or she is being shafted. That will disappear. A bank cannot charge new fees without the client's consent. That will disappear. There are fines for misleading advertising. That will disappear. We have a neutral tribunal that examines all complaints. That too will disappear. The minister of high finance is supposed to protect the people from banks. Why is he instead protecting the banks from the people?

Mr. Speaker, I certainly recognize that we are working in a concerted manner, in concert with the provinces and territories because we share jurisdiction over the criminal justice system with them, to ensure that we can improve the efficiencies and the effectiveness of the justice system, while recognizing that there are court delays. We are working in a coordinated manner to ensure that we address the many realities of what leads to court delays, and I look forward to continuing this work.

Mr. Speaker, this week the Liberal government betrayed the people of Vancouver Island. The Prime Minister says he is a grandson of British Columbia, so maybe he can understand. Our economy is tied to our ocean. Our culture is rooted to the sea. The health of the coast is the health of our environment, and it is the health of our communities. After promising to put the Kinder Morgan pipeline through a new assessment process, why is this government now putting at risk everything we hold so dear? Why is it betraying Vancouver Islanders?

Mr. Speaker, the multi-party committee on electoral reform presented its report, and its recommendation is clear: if the Prime Minister wants to change the rules of democracy, Canadians must have their say in a referendum. This is a major victory for democracy.Will the Prime Minister heed the committee's recommendation and commit to holding a referendum if he plans to change the voting system?

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his question, which gives me a chance to remind him of the history behind this.The Marcotte decision called on the federal government to clarify its position on consumer protection with respect to financial institutions. That is exactly what we did. We modernized and simplified the rules in order to protect Canadian consumers. Provisions on access to basic services, provisions on business practices, and provisions for greater clarity, that is exactly what consumers in Quebec and across the country asked for, and that is exactly what we gave them.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member. He too served quite a bit of time on the committee and contributed to the final report.The final report, while it does not outline a specific alternative to first past the post, does raise some good points: that we need to ensure that those Canadians who belong to marginalized communities are better heard and reflected in our elections; that the conversation about electoral reform has to be a value-based one.To that end, we will be reaching out to Canadians through a new digital initiative starting next week.

Mr. Speaker, we certainly do hope there will be a withdrawal of that comment.Before I ask the usual question, I would like to ask the House leader if she would consider an idea, and that would be to be more generous with allocating debate for Bill C-29, the budget implementation bill, than she was with Bill C-26, which she well knows was allocated the minimum amount of time possible. Worth noting is the House leader's predecessor committed five sitting days to the same stages of the budget implementation bill on this watch. Since she was appointed—

Mr. Speaker, today we are continuing with opposition day. Tomorrow the House will consider the report stage of Bill C-29, the second budget bill, and it will continue studying that bill Monday and Tuesday of next week.For the remainder of the week, we plan to call the following bills: Bill S-4, the tax conventions legislation, and Bill S-3, the Indian tax amendment, provided we get these two bills from the Senate; Bill C-25, the business frameworks bill; and Bill C-30 concerning CETA. All these bills are at second reading. It is my hope that parties will be able to negotiate on how to proceed in advancing these very important initiatives. Something I have committed to is working well with other parties, and I will continue to do that.

Mr. Speaker, I am not sure how many times I need to rise in the House to remind the member that in Canada we have some of the strictest rules when it comes to fundraising. The member knows very well that only Canadians can donate to Canadian political parties. Even the Chief Electoral Officer has stated that the rules are some of the strictest in the world. The member needs to listen to the answer and get real and do the work Canadians expect us to do to respond to the very real challenges--

Mr. Speaker, the question was about Standing Rock and the aggression that people are seeing, including Canadian citizens.Let us talk about inequality, which is growing in our country. More and more Canadians are facing precarious work, as was shown in the CIBC report. We know that more and more young Canadians are stuck in low-wage work, and an alarming 61% of Canadians are earning less than the average yearly income. The response of the Prime Minister and the finance minister: too bad, get used to it, with platitudes about the middle class—while that dream slips away from more and more people. Why is the government catering to its billionaire and Bay Street friends instead of standing up for Canadians?

Mr. Speaker, yesterday I asked if the Liberals would ensure Canadians could trade freely between provinces. It is unfathomable that Mr. Comeau was charged for buying beer. Unfortunately the Liberals said they would only support freer trade in Canada. I have to remind them that free trade in Canada is a constitutional right. An agreement between provinces with dozens of exclusions, including beer and wine, and government interference is not free trade.Will the Liberals commit to protecting Canadians' constitutional rights and ensure we have full free trade across Canada?

Mr. Speaker, World AIDS Day is when we show our support for those living with HIV and AIDS. But the Prime Minister is planning to cut funding to many community-based organizations, including the Canadian AIDS Society and the All Nations Hope Network, the only aboriginal AIDS network in Saskatchewan. It is on the front lines fighting against HIV/AIDS, and it may be forced to close its doors.Instead of just raising flags on World AIDS Day, will the Prime Minister commit to stable, long-term funding for these important organizations?

Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned, we have received the report, and we encourage all members of the House to do the same. My first impressions are that there are some good ideas in there. For example, the only way that we can engage Canadians on their preference for an alternative to first past the post is through a values-based conversation. But on the main question and the hard choices that we asked the committee to make, the members of the committee took a pass. The NDP critic said, choose your own adventure. I thank the committee members for their time, and we will continue this conversation—

Mr. Speaker, let me confirm for my colleague once again that the government is committed to an open and transparent process to make sure that the men and women in uniform get the equipment they need to do the job expected of them.With respect to the interim, it is really important for us to fill the capability gap that has been identified. We will do that, working with Boeing, but nowhere would anyone commit to a figure before the negotiations actually take place.

Mr. Speaker, $1,500 for appetizers and access to ministers and a $1-million donation from a wealthy Chinese businessman suggest that the Liberal government's friends will now be entitled to kickbacks.The work of the marijuana task force constitutes privileged information that could influence the markets. Can the Minister of Justice assure the House that an official investigation has been launched into the possible information leak?

Mr. Speaker, the government is deeply committed to addressing HIV/AIDS and hepatitis C in Canada, with community-based organizations being central to this. The funding we provide through the community action fund remains steady at $26.4 million annually. While 124 organizations were successful in the application process, some were not, which is why the Minister of Health has asked the Public Health Agency to assist these impacted organizations by working with them to extend transitional funding for another year.

Mr. Speaker, addressing HIV and AIDS in Canada is a significant priority for our government. I was pleased to meet with the Canadian AIDS Society today. This year, our government is investing almost $76 million across the country to tackle HIV and other related infections in Canada.In terms of the community action fund, we remain steady at $26.4 million, and we have asked our department to assist impacted organizations by working with them to extend transitional funding for another year.

Mr. Speaker, as I said, our government is deeply committed to addressing HIV/AIDS and hepatitis C in Canada, with community-based organizations being central to this.The funding we provide through the Canada action fund remains steady at $26.4 million annually. While 124 organizations were successful in the application process, some were not, which is why the Minister of Health has asked the Public Health Agency of Canada to assist these impacted organizations by working with them to extend transitional funding for another year.

Mr. Speaker, what we will not do is what the previous government did, and that was put up figures that were totally irresponsible. In fact, they put up so many figures when it came to procurement for DND that they kept having to change them because they were so unrealistic. We will not do this. We will be responsible with Canadian taxpayers' money, and we will get the best deal we can for the men and women of our Armed Forces.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the members of the special committee for their time and effort in studying this. We have received the report. I am going to review it carefully and I urge every member of the House to do the same. I know this was a challenging process, and the report shows just how challenging electoral reform can be, because the only consensus that the committee found was that there is no consensus on electoral reform. In the coming days, we will be taking specific actions to continue this conversation with Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, one thing I can reassure the member on is that the government is about tax fairness for all Canadians and making sure that Canadians pay their fair share of taxes.What we have said, and the member knows it very well, is that for one small business or corporation, there will be one small business tax deduction. One corporation, one deduction. Canadians get it. This is about tax fairness, and that is why we are going to stand on that.

Mr. Speaker, on November 3, the Minister of Democratic Institutions told The Huffington Post that she wanted the Special Committee on Electoral Reform to “help us understand and answer this question. When we come up with a reform, how do we figure out if it has that legitimacy, that is has that broad support? Is it through a referendum? Or is there another way?”The answer for the minister from the committee is this: it is a referendum. There is no other way.Therefore, will the minister commit to not change the way Canadians vote unless she first gets their consent in a referendum?

Mr. Speaker, if it looks like, if it smells like, it should be.What part of “proportional” does the minister not understand? The minister responsible for democratic reform launched an online consultation that included questions like, “Do you like to take risks, or better the devil you know?”Does this not undermine the colossal consultation work the committee has done over the past six months? Is the government going to listen to the recommendations of the committee and to the hopes—

Mr. Speaker, the softwood lumber agreement expired under the previous government.We are working closely with producers, workers, and the provinces and territories, and we will continue to work with them. Canada is prepared for any eventuality, and our government will vigorously defend the interests of Canadian workers and producers. We do not want to reach just any old deal. We want a good deal for Canada.

Mr. Speaker, the report of the multi-party committee on democratic reform is in, and the recommendation is clear: If the Prime Minister wants to change the rules of democracy, then Canadians get to have a say in a referendum. This is a huge victory for democracy and a huge victory for Canadians.Will the Prime Minister actually respect the recommendations in this report, and commit to holding a referendum if he wants to change the way we vote?

Mr. Speaker, this gives me the opportunity to talk about the good work this government is doing to address the serious challenges of the industrial revolution 4.0 that is facing every single country in the world. It is our goal to ensure that young people have a chance to be successful. This is exactly why we appointed the expert panel on youth employment, and we are looking forward to its interim report at the beginning of December.

Mr. Speaker, in Toronto and across Canada the organization Ladies Learning Code is working to promote digital literacy and technology skills, like writing computer codes, specifically for Canadian women and girls. Ladies Learning Code wants more women leaders in the tech industry. Could the Minister of Science advise the House what steps her department is taking to promote science, technology, engineering, and math in Canada among girls and boys?

Mr. Speaker, Ladies Learning Code is a wonderful organization that teaches Canadians digital skills. I was privileged to sit in on a class on National Learn to Code Day. We are working hard to create a culture where young people, particularly young girls, are excited about science and technology.Each year, NSERC provides funding to organizations that get our youth excited about science.

Mr. Speaker, again yesterday, I asked the government a very simple question that seems to have fallen on deaf ears.The softwood lumber industry is on the brink of another major crisis. The Minister of International Trade is congratulating her government, but more and more people are calling for a loan guarantee to support the industry. Thousands of jobs are at stake here, and an important piece of the puzzle, a plan B, is missing.Can the minister assure workers right now that the government has a plan B ready?

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Democratic Institutions does not like the majority report tabled by the Special Committee on Electoral Reform, and she really does not like its recommendations, which are in favour of a referendum on the voting system and a more proportional voting system that does not weaken Quebec's political weight.What are the chances that the minister will try to discredit the report today or that the Liberals will not support proportional representation precisely because they are only interested in an electoral reform that will keep them in power forever?

Mr. Speaker, our government is already working to include the affordability of and access to prescription drugs. We joined provinces and territories as a member of the pan-Canadian Pharmaceutical Alliance, which negotiates lower drug prices on behalf of public drug plans. To date, the pCPA has completed more than 95 brand drug negotiations and has achieved price regulations on 18 generic drugs, resulting in annual savings of more than $712 million. In the coming months, the Minister of Health will continue to work with provincial and territorial counterparts to identify--

Mr. Speaker, I would ask that she would commit to more consideration of the budget bill on her watch.With that in mind, would the government House leader advise the House what the business will be for the remainder of this week and for the next week?

Why do I not have a job? I think I do have job.Mr. Speaker, as I just said, there are many benefits coming from this accord. As in any undertaking, there are risks. We are working very carefully and strongly with the Government of Mexico to manage those risks in a responsible way.

Mr. Speaker, today the minister's ill-advised and weak-willed decision on lifting the visa requirement for Mexicans without a formal review will come into effect. However, yesterday we learned exactly how much this will cost Canadians. The minister's own officials say that it will cost Canadian taxpayers over $261 million above any benefits we might receive, mostly for processing and deporting bogus Mexican refugees. Can the minister explain to the House why he made this unsafe and politicized decision, when he knew the cost?

Mr. Speaker, the Youth Unity Journey for Sacred Waters grew from Stanley Mission, in my riding, and is walking to Standing Rock. They stand in solidarity with peaceful protesters who are facing state violence. Some have been severely injured.We need to support indigenous people in their right to protect their land and resources. Will the government take a stand with us and condemn the violence against peaceful protesters, and stand with the people of Standing Rock?

Mr. Speaker, I would like to make it very clear that neither I nor my ministerial colleagues have seen this report. This was confirmed by the chair of the task force yesterday. The report was not available.The member should know that capital markets are strictly regulated, and any investigation into this matter in terms of irregularities is the responsibility of the Ontario Securities Commission.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Brampton Centre for his question.This year, we mark the 10th anniversary of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Canada is proud to be one of the first countries to sign the convention.This year the theme of the international day is achieving 17 goals for the future we want. In line with these goals, we have had consultations across the country for establishing a new law on accessibility.This would ensure that all Canadians are able to participate equally in their communities and workplaces, and make a better Canada.

Mr. Speaker, December 3 will be the International Day of Persons with Disabilities.Since 1992, this day is celebrated every year on December 3 all around the world. We know how important it is to educate people about the realities people with disabilities face.Can the parliamentary secretary inform the House on this important journey and the actions taken by the government to ensure progress for persons with disabilities across the country?

Mr. Speaker, the $1.5 billion oceans protection plan will indeed seriously improve marine safety. It will make us more quickly aware of any marine incidents. It will help us respond more effectively and more rapidly. It will involve our coastal first nations, who will be trained and equipped and given the authority to respond to local marine incidents. It will improve our hydrographic services for better navigation. It will ensure that certain critical fish habitats are protected, as well as marine species. We want to make sure that our coasts are safe, clean, and healthy for generations to come.

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. If you review the Thursday questions in the past 20 years, which I have done, and I have done so academically, you will find that the hon. opposition House leader is perfectly within her right to have this preamble.

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member has a point. There were some good recommendations in the report. For example, the best way to have a conversation with Canadians about their electoral system is through a values-based approach.To that end, we will be continuing this conversation with Canadians through a digital initiative. Members of the House are expected to allow their constituents to know that it is happening and ensure that their voices are heard. We will be introducing recommendations to the House based on all the feedback we receive.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind the member that our government, me included, has been very clear in advocating to liberalize the trade of alcohol within Canada. This is an issue that I raised with my provincial and territorial counterparts when we were pursuing the Canada free trade agreement. I will make sure that we continue to advance this issue as well as reduce barriers and harmonize regulations.We are very committed to the fact that we want to see an environment where we create good opportunities for businesses to grow and better choices for consumers.

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has said that: ...one of the great things about Canada is people are more than free to express their opinions, to express their disappointment with governments in peaceful ways and we expect them and encourage them to [do so]. There are passionate voices on all sides of these decisions. Some people want everything built, some want nothing built. Our government is committed to making decisions based on facts and evidence. We believe the decisions that we took this week are in the best interests of Canada and indeed in the best interests of Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, there is another channel. It sounds like they are trying to change the channel.What a day. I would like to start by thanking all the members of the committee for their incredible work. We managed to do something that has never been done before. Skeptics said that it would all fall apart, that there was simply no way forward to finding agreement among all of these parties, and yet Canadians defied the cynics and told us, in overwhelming numbers, that they wanted a proportional voting system. That is a good day for Canada.Can the minister tell us when the government will announce a clear plan and timetable to implement all of the committee's recommendations?

Mr. Speaker, I am very proud of the reorganization and the new process that we put in place, not only for the Supreme Court of Canada, but with respect to the appointments of superior court justices. I was very proud as well to appoint 39 superior court judges across the country. I am working to reconstitute the judicial advisory committee with the intent of supporting and promoting diversity, so that our benches reflect the diversity of the country, and ensuring that we have the highest quality of jurists that I can appoint to the superior courts across this country. I look forward to doing another round of appointments.

Mr. Speaker, the best way to have a conversation with Canadians is to hold a referendum. The best way to determine what Canadians think of the electoral system is to hold a referendum. The best way to take politicians out of the equation and to give the power to Canadians is to hold a referendum.When will the government see reason? When will the government agree with the Minister of Foreign Affairs who said, not so long ago, that they had to hold a referendum? The best way to know what people want is to hold a referendum. The government must hold a referendum and it will find out.

Mr. Speaker, I am particularly grateful to my colleague for her question today, because it gives me the opportunity to announce the very good news that it is today that we are lifting the Mexico visa. This is good news for the Canadian tourist industry. It will create many jobs. It is definitely good news for our beef farmers who will be able to export their wonderful product to Mexico.

Mr. Speaker, I am particularly grateful to my colleague for her question today, because it gives me the opportunity to announce the very good news that it is today that we are lifting the Mexico visa. This is good news for the Canadian tourist industry. It will create many jobs. It is definitely good news for our beef farmers who will be able to export their wonderful product to Mexico.

Mr. Speaker, the best way to have a conversation with Canadians is to hold a referendum. The best way to determine what Canadians think of the electoral system is to hold a referendum. The best way to take politicians out of the equation and to give the power to Canadians is to hold a referendum.When will the government see reason? When will the government agree with the Minister of Foreign Affairs who said, not so long ago, that they had to hold a referendum? The best way to know what people want is to hold a referendum. The government must hold a referendum and it will find out.

Mr. Speaker, I am very proud of the reorganization and the new process that we put in place, not only for the Supreme Court of Canada, but with respect to the appointments of superior court justices. I was very proud as well to appoint 39 superior court judges across the country. I am working to reconstitute the judicial advisory committee with the intent of supporting and promoting diversity, so that our benches reflect the diversity of the country, and ensuring that we have the highest quality of jurists that I can appoint to the superior courts across this country. I look forward to doing another round of appointments.

Mr. Speaker, there is another channel. It sounds like they are trying to change the channel.What a day. I would like to start by thanking all the members of the committee for their incredible work. We managed to do something that has never been done before. Skeptics said that it would all fall apart, that there was simply no way forward to finding agreement among all of these parties, and yet Canadians defied the cynics and told us, in overwhelming numbers, that they wanted a proportional voting system. That is a good day for Canada.Can the minister tell us when the government will announce a clear plan and timetable to implement all of the committee's recommendations?

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has said that: ...one of the great things about Canada is people are more than free to express their opinions, to express their disappointment with governments in peaceful ways and we expect them and encourage them to [do so]. There are passionate voices on all sides of these decisions. Some people want everything built, some want nothing built. Our government is committed to making decisions based on facts and evidence. We believe the decisions that we took this week are in the best interests of Canada and indeed in the best interests of Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind the member that our government, me included, has been very clear in advocating to liberalize the trade of alcohol within Canada. This is an issue that I raised with my provincial and territorial counterparts when we were pursuing the Canada free trade agreement. I will make sure that we continue to advance this issue as well as reduce barriers and harmonize regulations.We are very committed to the fact that we want to see an environment where we create good opportunities for businesses to grow and better choices for consumers.

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member has a point. There were some good recommendations in the report. For example, the best way to have a conversation with Canadians about their electoral system is through a values-based approach.To that end, we will be continuing this conversation with Canadians through a digital initiative. Members of the House are expected to allow their constituents to know that it is happening and ensure that their voices are heard. We will be introducing recommendations to the House based on all the feedback we receive.

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. If you review the Thursday questions in the past 20 years, which I have done, and I have done so academically, you will find that the hon. opposition House leader is perfectly within her right to have this preamble.

Mr. Speaker, the $1.5 billion oceans protection plan will indeed seriously improve marine safety. It will make us more quickly aware of any marine incidents. It will help us respond more effectively and more rapidly. It will involve our coastal first nations, who will be trained and equipped and given the authority to respond to local marine incidents. It will improve our hydrographic services for better navigation. It will ensure that certain critical fish habitats are protected, as well as marine species. We want to make sure that our coasts are safe, clean, and healthy for generations to come.

Mr. Speaker, December 3 will be the International Day of Persons with Disabilities.Since 1992, this day is celebrated every year on December 3 all around the world. We know how important it is to educate people about the realities people with disabilities face.Can the parliamentary secretary inform the House on this important journey and the actions taken by the government to ensure progress for persons with disabilities across the country?

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Brampton Centre for his question.This year, we mark the 10th anniversary of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Canada is proud to be one of the first countries to sign the convention.This year the theme of the international day is achieving 17 goals for the future we want. In line with these goals, we have had consultations across the country for establishing a new law on accessibility.This would ensure that all Canadians are able to participate equally in their communities and workplaces, and make a better Canada.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to make it very clear that neither I nor my ministerial colleagues have seen this report. This was confirmed by the chair of the task force yesterday. The report was not available.The member should know that capital markets are strictly regulated, and any investigation into this matter in terms of irregularities is the responsibility of the Ontario Securities Commission.

Mr. Speaker, the Youth Unity Journey for Sacred Waters grew from Stanley Mission, in my riding, and is walking to Standing Rock. They stand in solidarity with peaceful protesters who are facing state violence. Some have been severely injured.We need to support indigenous people in their right to protect their land and resources. Will the government take a stand with us and condemn the violence against peaceful protesters, and stand with the people of Standing Rock?

Mr. Speaker, today the minister's ill-advised and weak-willed decision on lifting the visa requirement for Mexicans without a formal review will come into effect. However, yesterday we learned exactly how much this will cost Canadians. The minister's own officials say that it will cost Canadian taxpayers over $261 million above any benefits we might receive, mostly for processing and deporting bogus Mexican refugees. Can the minister explain to the House why he made this unsafe and politicized decision, when he knew the cost?

Why do I not have a job? I think I do have job.Mr. Speaker, as I just said, there are many benefits coming from this accord. As in any undertaking, there are risks. We are working very carefully and strongly with the Government of Mexico to manage those risks in a responsible way.

Mr. Speaker, our government is already working to include the affordability of and access to prescription drugs. We joined provinces and territories as a member of the pan-Canadian Pharmaceutical Alliance, which negotiates lower drug prices on behalf of public drug plans. To date, the pCPA has completed more than 95 brand drug negotiations and has achieved price regulations on 18 generic drugs, resulting in annual savings of more than $712 million. In the coming months, the Minister of Health will continue to work with provincial and territorial counterparts to identify--

Mr. Speaker, I would ask that she would commit to more consideration of the budget bill on her watch.With that in mind, would the government House leader advise the House what the business will be for the remainder of this week and for the next week?

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Democratic Institutions does not like the majority report tabled by the Special Committee on Electoral Reform, and she really does not like its recommendations, which are in favour of a referendum on the voting system and a more proportional voting system that does not weaken Quebec's political weight.What are the chances that the minister will try to discredit the report today or that the Liberals will not support proportional representation precisely because they are only interested in an electoral reform that will keep them in power forever?

Mr. Speaker, again yesterday, I asked the government a very simple question that seems to have fallen on deaf ears.The softwood lumber industry is on the brink of another major crisis. The Minister of International Trade is congratulating her government, but more and more people are calling for a loan guarantee to support the industry. Thousands of jobs are at stake here, and an important piece of the puzzle, a plan B, is missing.Can the minister assure workers right now that the government has a plan B ready?

Mr. Speaker, Ladies Learning Code is a wonderful organization that teaches Canadians digital skills. I was privileged to sit in on a class on National Learn to Code Day. We are working hard to create a culture where young people, particularly young girls, are excited about science and technology.Each year, NSERC provides funding to organizations that get our youth excited about science.

Mr. Speaker, in Toronto and across Canada the organization Ladies Learning Code is working to promote digital literacy and technology skills, like writing computer codes, specifically for Canadian women and girls. Ladies Learning Code wants more women leaders in the tech industry. Could the Minister of Science advise the House what steps her department is taking to promote science, technology, engineering, and math in Canada among girls and boys?

Mr. Speaker, this gives me the opportunity to talk about the good work this government is doing to address the serious challenges of the industrial revolution 4.0 that is facing every single country in the world. It is our goal to ensure that young people have a chance to be successful. This is exactly why we appointed the expert panel on youth employment, and we are looking forward to its interim report at the beginning of December.

Mr. Speaker, the report of the multi-party committee on democratic reform is in, and the recommendation is clear: If the Prime Minister wants to change the rules of democracy, then Canadians get to have a say in a referendum. This is a huge victory for democracy and a huge victory for Canadians.Will the Prime Minister actually respect the recommendations in this report, and commit to holding a referendum if he wants to change the way we vote?

Mr. Speaker, the softwood lumber agreement expired under the previous government.We are working closely with producers, workers, and the provinces and territories, and we will continue to work with them. Canada is prepared for any eventuality, and our government will vigorously defend the interests of Canadian workers and producers. We do not want to reach just any old deal. We want a good deal for Canada.

Mr. Speaker, if it looks like, if it smells like, it should be.What part of “proportional” does the minister not understand? The minister responsible for democratic reform launched an online consultation that included questions like, “Do you like to take risks, or better the devil you know?”Does this not undermine the colossal consultation work the committee has done over the past six months? Is the government going to listen to the recommendations of the committee and to the hopes—

Mr. Speaker, on November 3, the Minister of Democratic Institutions told The Huffington Post that she wanted the Special Committee on Electoral Reform to “help us understand and answer this question. When we come up with a reform, how do we figure out if it has that legitimacy, that is has that broad support? Is it through a referendum? Or is there another way?”The answer for the minister from the committee is this: it is a referendum. There is no other way.Therefore, will the minister commit to not change the way Canadians vote unless she first gets their consent in a referendum?

Mr. Speaker, one thing I can reassure the member on is that the government is about tax fairness for all Canadians and making sure that Canadians pay their fair share of taxes.What we have said, and the member knows it very well, is that for one small business or corporation, there will be one small business tax deduction. One corporation, one deduction. Canadians get it. This is about tax fairness, and that is why we are going to stand on that.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the members of the special committee for their time and effort in studying this. We have received the report. I am going to review it carefully and I urge every member of the House to do the same. I know this was a challenging process, and the report shows just how challenging electoral reform can be, because the only consensus that the committee found was that there is no consensus on electoral reform. In the coming days, we will be taking specific actions to continue this conversation with Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, what we will not do is what the previous government did, and that was put up figures that were totally irresponsible. In fact, they put up so many figures when it came to procurement for DND that they kept having to change them because they were so unrealistic. We will not do this. We will be responsible with Canadian taxpayers' money, and we will get the best deal we can for the men and women of our Armed Forces.

Mr. Speaker, the government is deeply committed to addressing HIV/AIDS and hepatitis C in Canada, with community-based organizations being central to this. The funding we provide through the community action fund remains steady at $26.4 million annually. While 124 organizations were successful in the application process, some were not, which is why the Minister of Health has asked the Public Health Agency to assist these impacted organizations by working with them to extend transitional funding for another year.

Mr. Speaker, addressing HIV and AIDS in Canada is a significant priority for our government. I was pleased to meet with the Canadian AIDS Society today. This year, our government is investing almost $76 million across the country to tackle HIV and other related infections in Canada.In terms of the community action fund, we remain steady at $26.4 million, and we have asked our department to assist impacted organizations by working with them to extend transitional funding for another year.

Mr. Speaker, as I said, our government is deeply committed to addressing HIV/AIDS and hepatitis C in Canada, with community-based organizations being central to this.The funding we provide through the Canada action fund remains steady at $26.4 million annually. While 124 organizations were successful in the application process, some were not, which is why the Minister of Health has asked the Public Health Agency of Canada to assist these impacted organizations by working with them to extend transitional funding for another year.

Mr. Speaker, $1,500 for appetizers and access to ministers and a $1-million donation from a wealthy Chinese businessman suggest that the Liberal government's friends will now be entitled to kickbacks.The work of the marijuana task force constitutes privileged information that could influence the markets. Can the Minister of Justice assure the House that an official investigation has been launched into the possible information leak?

Mr. Speaker, let me confirm for my colleague once again that the government is committed to an open and transparent process to make sure that the men and women in uniform get the equipment they need to do the job expected of them.With respect to the interim, it is really important for us to fill the capability gap that has been identified. We will do that, working with Boeing, but nowhere would anyone commit to a figure before the negotiations actually take place.

Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned, we have received the report, and we encourage all members of the House to do the same. My first impressions are that there are some good ideas in there. For example, the only way that we can engage Canadians on their preference for an alternative to first past the post is through a values-based conversation. But on the main question and the hard choices that we asked the committee to make, the members of the committee took a pass. The NDP critic said, choose your own adventure. I thank the committee members for their time, and we will continue this conversation—

Mr. Speaker, World AIDS Day is when we show our support for those living with HIV and AIDS. But the Prime Minister is planning to cut funding to many community-based organizations, including the Canadian AIDS Society and the All Nations Hope Network, the only aboriginal AIDS network in Saskatchewan. It is on the front lines fighting against HIV/AIDS, and it may be forced to close its doors.Instead of just raising flags on World AIDS Day, will the Prime Minister commit to stable, long-term funding for these important organizations?

Mr. Speaker, yesterday I asked if the Liberals would ensure Canadians could trade freely between provinces. It is unfathomable that Mr. Comeau was charged for buying beer. Unfortunately the Liberals said they would only support freer trade in Canada. I have to remind them that free trade in Canada is a constitutional right. An agreement between provinces with dozens of exclusions, including beer and wine, and government interference is not free trade.Will the Liberals commit to protecting Canadians' constitutional rights and ensure we have full free trade across Canada?

Mr. Speaker, the question was about Standing Rock and the aggression that people are seeing, including Canadian citizens.Let us talk about inequality, which is growing in our country. More and more Canadians are facing precarious work, as was shown in the CIBC report. We know that more and more young Canadians are stuck in low-wage work, and an alarming 61% of Canadians are earning less than the average yearly income. The response of the Prime Minister and the finance minister: too bad, get used to it, with platitudes about the middle class—while that dream slips away from more and more people. Why is the government catering to its billionaire and Bay Street friends instead of standing up for Canadians?

Mr. Speaker, I am not sure how many times I need to rise in the House to remind the member that in Canada we have some of the strictest rules when it comes to fundraising. The member knows very well that only Canadians can donate to Canadian political parties. Even the Chief Electoral Officer has stated that the rules are some of the strictest in the world. The member needs to listen to the answer and get real and do the work Canadians expect us to do to respond to the very real challenges--

Mr. Speaker, today we are continuing with opposition day. Tomorrow the House will consider the report stage of Bill C-29, the second budget bill, and it will continue studying that bill Monday and Tuesday of next week.For the remainder of the week, we plan to call the following bills: Bill S-4, the tax conventions legislation, and Bill S-3, the Indian tax amendment, provided we get these two bills from the Senate; Bill C-25, the business frameworks bill; and Bill C-30 concerning CETA. All these bills are at second reading. It is my hope that parties will be able to negotiate on how to proceed in advancing these very important initiatives. Something I have committed to is working well with other parties, and I will continue to do that.

Mr. Speaker, we certainly do hope there will be a withdrawal of that comment.Before I ask the usual question, I would like to ask the House leader if she would consider an idea, and that would be to be more generous with allocating debate for Bill C-29, the budget implementation bill, than she was with Bill C-26, which she well knows was allocated the minimum amount of time possible. Worth noting is the House leader's predecessor committed five sitting days to the same stages of the budget implementation bill on this watch. Since she was appointed—

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member. He too served quite a bit of time on the committee and contributed to the final report.The final report, while it does not outline a specific alternative to first past the post, does raise some good points: that we need to ensure that those Canadians who belong to marginalized communities are better heard and reflected in our elections; that the conversation about electoral reform has to be a value-based one.To that end, we will be reaching out to Canadians through a new digital initiative starting next week.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his question, which gives me a chance to remind him of the history behind this.The Marcotte decision called on the federal government to clarify its position on consumer protection with respect to financial institutions. That is exactly what we did. We modernized and simplified the rules in order to protect Canadian consumers. Provisions on access to basic services, provisions on business practices, and provisions for greater clarity, that is exactly what consumers in Quebec and across the country asked for, and that is exactly what we gave them.

Mr. Speaker, the multi-party committee on electoral reform presented its report, and its recommendation is clear: if the Prime Minister wants to change the rules of democracy, Canadians must have their say in a referendum. This is a major victory for democracy.Will the Prime Minister heed the committee's recommendation and commit to holding a referendum if he plans to change the voting system?

Mr. Speaker, this week the Liberal government betrayed the people of Vancouver Island. The Prime Minister says he is a grandson of British Columbia, so maybe he can understand. Our economy is tied to our ocean. Our culture is rooted to the sea. The health of the coast is the health of our environment, and it is the health of our communities. After promising to put the Kinder Morgan pipeline through a new assessment process, why is this government now putting at risk everything we hold so dear? Why is it betraying Vancouver Islanders?

Mr. Speaker, I certainly recognize that we are working in a concerted manner, in concert with the provinces and territories because we share jurisdiction over the criminal justice system with them, to ensure that we can improve the efficiencies and the effectiveness of the justice system, while recognizing that there are court delays. We are working in a coordinated manner to ensure that we address the many realities of what leads to court delays, and I look forward to continuing this work.

Mr. Speaker, what does Bill C-29 do?Hidden bank fees are currently outlawed in Quebec. That will disappear. A consumer who has a contract can cancel it if he or she is being shafted. That will disappear. A bank cannot charge new fees without the client's consent. That will disappear. There are fines for misleading advertising. That will disappear. We have a neutral tribunal that examines all complaints. That too will disappear. The minister of high finance is supposed to protect the people from banks. Why is he instead protecting the banks from the people?

Mr. Speaker, it is clear that when someone wants something from the Liberal government, all one has to do is pay the entry fee to one of its consultations. Its friends at Canada 2020 and Bluesky Strategy Group know it. Their friends at Apotex know it, Chinese billionaire bankers know it, and their pot friends know it too. Everyone can see it. The Liberals are only fooling themselves. When will the Prime Minister finally do the right thing and put an end to his cash for access fundraisers?

Mr. Speaker, if the Minister of Environment and Climate Change had done absolutely nothing, the people of Ottawa would now be on their way to building a big, beautiful hospital right across the street from the existing one.However, she blocked it for research that her department says will be done before hospital construction even begins, not to mention that half the land is either a helicopter pad or salted and therefore useless for research.Knowing these facts now, will she finally get out of the way and let us build a hospital?

Mr. Speaker, Canadians are smart, reasonable people and we are doing this for them. The committee did not offer a specific alternative to first past the post. Instead, it offered us the Gallagher index. So the hon. member wants us to have a referendum on the following: Would Canadians like to take the square root of the sum of the squares of the difference between the percentage of the seats for each party and the percentage of the votes passed?

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member opposite for his passion and the committee for the time it spent studying alternatives to first past the post. When we made the commitment to introduce a new option, we did so based on the understanding that a committee would come together and recommend alternatives to first past the post, that it would help us answer the difficult questions. Instead, what members across the aisle and the NDP critic have suggested is that we choose our own adventure. If we were going to choose our own adventure, why did we put together a committee to study electoral reform?

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member opposite for his work on the special committee and his commitment to a healthier democracy.However, what he has recommended as part of the committee's report is a referendum on an incomprehensible formula. In the dissenting reports that the NDP and the Green Party have provided, they have contradicted and undermined a referendum.I thank the committee for its work. We will continue this conversation with Canadians before introducing legislation in this House.

Mr. Speaker, Canadians believe that there should be no changes to the way they vote without a referendum first, and an Angus Reid poll showed that 75% of Canadians feel this way. Now the special committee has agreed that a referendum is required. What has been the Liberal government's response? Some vague notion of citizen engagement and some postcard about values.There is no other form of citizenship engagement that is a replacement for a referendum, so will the Liberals finally acknowledge that they cannot change Canadians' voting system without giving them a direct say in a referendum?

Mr. Speaker, I have received the report from the National Capital Commission.The NCC has provided a space for the public to express their priorities in finding a new site for the hospital. I want to thank them. All levels of government need to be involved in order to achieve a final decision.We look forward to further discussions with the city, the province, and the hospital itself in order to find a consensus.

Mr. Speaker, thousands of Canadians struggle to get access to a family doctor. Seniors, cancer patients, expectant moms, and people living in rural and remote communities suffer when they are unable to access timely medical care.The Liberals are making it more difficult for Canada's most vulnerable to access care. Canadians doctors have warned that thousands of medical specialists could leave for the United States due to the Liberals' new tax hikes.Can the minister not see that his plans to suck more money into Ottawa's coffers will come at the expense of our most vulnerable Canadians, who need help the most?

Mr. Speaker, I would like to point out again that there was no specific system advocated for on behalf of the committee. The only thing there was consensus on in that regard was that there was no consensus on a specific system to first past the post. That said, we take this seriously. We are not done hearing from Canadians. We will be reaching out to them through an invitation they will receive in their mailboxes as soon as next week, and we are looking forward to hearing from as many voices as possible before making introductory legislation in this House.

Mr. Speaker, looking comprehensively at reform to the criminal justice system is a priority of mine, as instructed by the Prime Minister. I have been engaging across the country with my colleagues in the provinces and territories, and I will continue to do so to ensure that we find effectiveness and efficiencies in the criminal justice system.The administration of justice is a shared responsibility. There are innovative approaches. The Province of Ontario recently introduced—today, actually—some suggestions in terms of advancing and dealing with court delays.We are going to continue to do that in a collaborative manner, something that we have not seen in the last 10 years.

Mr. Speaker, some members of the House believe the answer is the Leap Manifesto, and the only choice for the future is to leave it in the ground. Others believe that the NDP should stand with Canadians trying to get back to work. These projects will create thousands of well-paying, middle-class jobs. There is not a country in the world that would find 200 billion barrels of oil and leave it in the ground while there are markets for it.Our decisions on major projects reflect a balanced approach that will create prosperity while we seek to protect the environment we cherish.

Mr. Speaker, the public works minister has misled Canadians on the scope and cost of the Phoenix pay fiasco every step of the way. Now she is adding her personal touches to the jet fighter program by placing a lifetime gag order on over 200 public servants and is manufacturing evidence to support a fake capability gap. She has even told the House that it would be foolhardy to negotiate pricing before committing to the sole-source purchase. With this track record, how can Canadians possibly trust the minister to buy the right jet at the right price for our air force?

Mr. Speaker, when people commit crimes, they do so at the expense of others—the victims.Today, victims are looking to the current Government of Canada to see how their rights will be defended and how criminals will be brought before the courts so justice can be served.What will the minister do?

Mr. Speaker, former Liberal Party CFO and big marijuana kingpin Chuck Rifici and the justice minister would have us believe that there is nothing here to see. They claim that the pot surge is because of the American election a week earlier, but Canadian companies cannot ship pot across the border, and guess what? No American pot companies saw their stock surge like the Liberal-connected companies here in Canada.Will the Prime Minister and minister tell us if an investigation has been launched into this potential leak?

Mr. Speaker, any irregularities in the market, the member should know, are monitored and regulated by the Ontario Securities Commission. I want to reiterate once again that I have not seen this report. There is no evidence that this report has been leaked. My ministerial colleagues and every member in the House and the public will see the report at the same time I do, in the middle of December.

Mr. Speaker, the government recently announced the oceans protection plan. The House should know that investing in marine safety not only benefits coastal communities but watershed communities, like my riding of Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge. Could the minister tell the House about the measures the OPP takes with regard to improving marine safety?

Mr. Speaker, while the minister continues to deny that CETA will increase prescription drug costs for Canadians, it is clear that she has something to hide. Last year the parliamentary budget officer wrote to at least four federal departments trying to track down the figures. We know that the information exists, because Health Canada handed over its data. Why is the minister hiding the facts from Canadians? When will she reveal just how much CETA will increase the cost of medicines, and for once, will she answer a direct question?

Mr. Speaker, the insults just keep coming from the other side of the House. Every opposition party worked together, worked hard, and came to a consensus. The problem here is that the Prime Minister does not want to listen to Canadians and he does not want to listen to the other parties, just like he will not have a referendum because he thinks that Canadians are not smart enough, that they are not as smart as he is to pick the kind of system that we are to rely on. The Prime Minister is wrong. Canadians are smart enough to cast a vote.

Mr. Speaker, this is unbelievable. The multi-party committee spoke and it was clear, and Canadians have also spoken, that a referendum needs to be held. The only thing that we are hearing from the other side is that the Prime Minister thinks he is smarter than Canadians and that only he can decide how we vote and what our vote means. That is an insult to every Canadian in this country. If he wants to change the way we vote, he has to have a referendum.

Mr. Speaker, another subject is very important. Some provinces are having difficulty bringing criminals to justice. Canadians are watching the Minister of Justice and wondering what she can do to improve the system. Some criminal trials may not go ahead.What will the minister do to ensure that justice is served in Canada?

To the contrary, Mr. Speaker, our Prime Minister asked that we bring together a special committee to study the options available to us and to recommend a specific system as an alternative to first past the post. We asked the committee to help answer very difficult questions for us. It did not do that. We now have to make those hard changes, and I am looking forward to continuing this conversation with Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, once again, I would like to remind the member opposite that the committee did not offer a specific alternative to first past the post, that the NDP and the Green Party, in their dissenting reports, undermined and contradicted their position on a referendum.Therefore, we will continue this conversation with Canadians before arriving at a final outcome.

Mr. Speaker, we know three things for sure.First, the Minister of Procurement does not know how much Super Hornet fighters cost. Second, in negotiations with Boeing and the United States, the Liberals put their cards on the table before the game even started. Third, the process to replace our fighter jets will not be done before the 2019 election.Obviously, either the Liberals are totally incompetent, or they have a hidden agenda.Can the minister tell us which is true?

Mr. Speaker, I want to say that I appreciate the feedback, but the committee worked together. The committee worked across party lines. The committee reflected back what it heard from Canadians. That may be a bit of a radical notion for some of my Liberal colleagues, but that was the work of the committee, and the work of the minister is to fulfill the promise of the Prime Minister when he stood in front of Canadians on multiple occasions and said that 2015 was going to be the last election under first past the post.The minister's job is to work with the rest of us and work with Canadians to achieve that goal, rather than throwing on skepticism, rather than heaping on false notions of broad support. We wonder where the Liberals' broad support was when they declared war and announced pipeline recommendations. Let us get the job done for Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the minister for the incomprehensibility of that response.A month ago, the minister also said, “if the committee comes back—and this is how much respect I have for this committee’s work—if the committee comes back and says a referendum is the only way to legitimize this process, then I have to take that very seriously.” The minister did in fact say in this majority report, from which only the Liberals dissented, that a referendum is the only way to legitimize changing the voting system.Therefore, will the minister commit to not change the system unless she has the consent of the Canadian people in a—

Mr. Speaker, I will get up again and address this somewhat absurd line of questioning. There is no evidence that this report has been leaked. I, to be clear, have not seen the report, nor has anyone. I will see the report once it is translated, along with every member in the House, in order to have a discussion, in order to move forward with our government's commitment to legalize and strictly regulate and restrict access to marijuana. I value the work the task force has undertaken and the commitment the task force members have made to providing recommendations so we can proceed in a manner that is consistent on this--

Mr. Speaker, after the Prime Minister announced a 20% increase in Canada's contribution to the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, we learned that organizations here in Canada are going to have their funding cut. Some of them will lose up to 70% of their funding, which will jeopardize their very existence.How can the government justify increasing international funding while cutting funding for Canadian organizations? Can the Liberals hold off on this new process and maintain the status quo?

Mr. Speaker, on World AIDS Day, it is unfortunate to note that the Public Health Agency of Canada has cut funding to dozens of HIV/AIDS organizations, many of which have received support for decades.If the Liberal government does not reverse these cuts, there will be serious gaps in critical services for communities across Canada. This means cuts to services for first nations and Inuit, inmates in corrections, and vulnerable Canadians in rural and urban Canada.In 2003, Liberals pledged to increase HIV/AIDS support. Will this Liberal minister follow through and invest these critical funds?

Mr. Speaker, it is a point of order to point to the rules that say that no member shall speak disrespectfully of other members in this place. I believe the entire membership of the electoral reform committee was disrespected by the Minister of Democratic Institutions.

Mr. Speaker, I have been tasked by the Prime Minister to do a comprehensive review of the criminal justice system. I am committed to doing that in partnership with the provinces and territories, recognizing the need for public safety, recognizing the need to support victims of crime, recognizing the need to ensure that we are compliant with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and ensuring that we look at all sources for innovative solutions to improve the effectiveness of the criminal justice system, including looking at the interim report that was just released by the Senate committee.

Mr. Speaker, after six months of hard work, the electoral reform committee is proposing a proportional system. This is a great victory for all Canadians who are fed up with our outdated and unfair system.Yesterday, the Prime Minister promised to put an end to the current system.Can we count on the Liberal government to act on the committee's recommendations to implement a proportional system?

Mr. Speaker, I thank the committee for its hard work. We will be reviewing the committee's report and I urge all members to do the same.Complementary to the work of the committee, to the outreach that my parliamentary secretary and I have done, we committed to introducing another channel to hear from Canadians. This new digital initiative, which the member opposite has not yet even seen, so I am not sure what he is referring to in his question, will include an invitation to every Canadian. Canadians can expect their invitations in the mail this Monday.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. critic for his work on committee. The committee spent a lot of time and effort on this work. Having travelled the country, I know that this is a complex question. The challenge that we asked the committee to come back to us on was quite a big one. While the committee offered areas on which we do agree and understand, it did not offer a specific alternative to first past the post. We thank the committee members for their hard work. We will continue to review the report and hear from Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, we know that on November 16, stock trading on the TSX was halted for Canopy Growth after its stock doubled for no apparent reason. There are serious allegations that insider information was used to influence stock trades. Can the Minister of Justice confirm that an investigation has been launched into a possible leak and insider trading? Yes or no.

Mr. Speaker, I would like thank the NDP critic for his work on the committee and his continued commitment to strengthening our democratic institutions.I have to admit that I am a little disappointed, because what we had hoped the committee would provide us with was a specific alternative system to first past the post. Instead, it provided us with the Gallagher index. While it did not complete the hard work we had expected it to, this is consistent with what we heard from Canadians. We will continue—

Mr. Speaker, today during question period, the Minister of Democratic Institutions said about the electoral reform committee that it did not complete the hard work that we had expected it to. This committee met throughout the summer and since the House—

Mr. Speaker, I am not sure why the Liberal caucus would stand up and applaud the waste of $261 million of Canadian taxpayer funds. These are not fun coupons. These are people's hard-earned taxpayer dollars. He is going to be wasting it on deporting bogus Mexican refugees when his department officials told him this. Why does the minster even have a job?

Mr. Speaker, under our Conservative government, we had a judicial appointments system that served Canadians and the justice system well. It worked. Under the Liberal government, the system that worked so well was changed, and now we are faced with unreasonable delays in the Canadian criminal justice system. It is a fact that the current system employed by the Liberals is broken. Why did they go and fix something that was not broken?

Mr. Speaker, the minister should get on with it.Canadians were shocked by recent headlines that carried appalling news of a man charged with murder, whose trial was stayed for unreasonable delay. Now today he is a free man who lives and works amongst our families, children, and law-abiding Canadians. There are hundreds of cases that could face the same fate across this country. Canadian confidence in our criminal justice system is fading.When will the minister finally make victims of crime a priority?