2017-05-01

Mr. Speaker, since becoming a politician, the Minister of National Defence has been misleading the House and resorting to “alternative facts”. He quickly became like one of those fake soldiers who puts on a uniform and pretends to be a soldier.His most recent feat was to take credit for being the brains behind Operation Medusa, when in fact he merely carried out orders. For this kind of offence, he would be guilty of violating section 129 of the Code of Service Discipline.When will he do the honourable thing and just tell the truth?

Mr. Speaker, the Liberal government's reluctance to demand better of the United Nations is unacceptable. Whether funding terror incitement in UNRWA schools, concealing votes for human rights abusers to the Human Rights Council, ignoring the anti-Semitic denial of Jerusalem's history by UNESCO, or now downplaying the election of Saudi Arabia to the status of women, all of this makes Canada complicit in the UN's dysfunction. Is there no end to the Prime Minister's willingness to pander to rights abusers in his indecent pursuit of a Security Council seat?

Mr. Speaker, last week the Prime Minister told a group of young Canadians that his father had used his connections to ensure that possession charges against his brother would “go away”. Now that the Prime Minister has had a chance to ensure that the arrests and criminal records stop for all families, he refuses to do so. The Prime Minister himself has admitted to smoking pot while he was a member of Parliament, so why the double standard? Why is there one set of rules for the Trudeau family and another for thousands of young and racialized Canadians who are still receiving criminal records for pot possession in Canada?

Mr. Speaker, most people learn that it is important to tell the truth before they turn 50. I am sure that many parents would like to wipe out their children's criminal record, like the Trudeau family did. However, most Canadians are not as well-heeled or connected as the Trudeau family. The Prime Minister could have offered pardons in his bill, but he did not. He could have decriminalized marijuana, but he refused. Why the double standard? Why is there one system for rich, well-heeled, well-connected families, and another for regular families?

Mr. Speaker, the United Nations' well-tarnished reputation has been sullied yet again by the election of Saudi Arabia to the UN Commission on the Status of Women. Gender segregation forces Saudi women to submit to male guardianship for their entire lives. Women are banned from driving. Those who defy Saudi Arabia's second-class laws go to prison. Women can be stoned to death for adultery. There have been expressions of disgust and protest around the world, but Canada's self-proclaimed feminist Prime Minister has not uttered a peep. Might he be willing to explain why today?

Mr. Speaker, how many times has the minister said that fib over the last two years? Veterans are disgusted that the minister took credit for his role in the battlefield that involved hundreds of soldiers. That is valour stolen. The defence minister is now a laughingstock. His reputation is damaged beyond repair. Canadians do not believe him. The military does not trust him, and our allies are not going to take him seriously.How can the Prime Minister still have confidence in the defence minister?

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister's mandate letter to the Minister of National Defence uses the word “honesty” at least eight times. Within the letter, it reads: Canadians expect us, in our work, to reflect the values we all embrace:...honesty.... ...Canadians need to have faith in their government's honesty.... We have committed to an...honest government that is accountable to Canadians.... ...you must uphold the highest standards of honesty.... ...it is important that your behaviour and decisions meet Canadians' well-founded expectations.... Will the Prime Minister admit that the Minister of National Defence has not lived up to the well-founded expectations of Canadians and remove him from office?

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is today in this House breaching parliamentary tradition by refusing to answer questions. Stephen Harper took all questions every day during the Senate scandal. The Prime Minister wants to change the fundamental rules of Parliament in order to help himself. Why all of this? Well, because he says he values question period and accountability. That is why he wants to scrap it. If that is true, why does he not stand and start asking Canadians to listen to answers to some of our questions for once, instead of his usual platitudes or non-answers?

Mr. Speaker, it has come to light that the Minister of National Defence has misled Canadians once again, and this time it is a big one. He has not just embarrassed himself and the Prime Minister: he has violated a code of honour and ethics with the men and women in uniform he once served with. He has dishonoured himself, and in doing that, he has dishonoured them.Does the Prime Minister still have confidence in his Minister of National Defence?

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals say they wanted to have a supposed discussion on the Standing Orders, but it turns out that it was just a Trojan Horse for what they really wanted, for the Prime Minister to only have to show up once a week. Now they are trying to ram through changes to the House that they could make without amending the Standing Orders. Even the Liberal member for Malpeque said, “I strongly believe that you have to have at least consensus from the main parties to change the rules of the House.”If the Prime Minister will not listen to common sense on this side of the House, will he at least listen to reason from one of his own Liberal MPs?

Mr. Speaker, this Liberal government is demonstrating an arrogance that has never before been seen in this House.For the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, discussing means imposing. Discussing means crushing the opposition. In order to show that the Liberals are all-powerful and allow the Prime Minister to show up in the House only once a week, she is once again proposing to unilaterally impose new rules.Is it because she herself no longer has any confidence in her own government that the leader wants to change rules that should not be changed without the unanimous consent of all members of the House?

Mr. Speaker, I am owning up to my mistake to be able to continue to learn from it. I did retract that description. I in no way intended to diminish the great work our men and women in the Canadian Armed Forces have done. I hope to learn from that mistake so I can continue to serve the women and men of the Canadian Armed Forces.

Mr. Speaker, as I stated, I have acknowledged my mistake. I am not here to make any excuses for it. I am owning it. I am learning from it. I will continue to work, learn from those lessons, and continue to work and serve the Canadian Armed Forces, the men and women who serve us.

Mr. Speaker, I have apologized for my mistake. I will be learning from this, owning the mistake, and not making any excuses for the mistake.

Mr. Speaker, the minister makes it sound like Canadians are not generous if they simply stand up for their right to have our border integrity secured. Recent media reports have said that over half the illegal border crossers have serious criminal records. This puts the safety of the CBSA, RCMP, and community members in the area at risk. My question is very clear. There is a way we can stop this, and it is by closing the loophole in the safe third country agreement. Why has the minister failed to act?

Was that about admitting and apologizing when an individual breaks a promise and they do not tell the truth, Mr. Speaker? In reality, the Prime Minister can answer all the questions he wants, when he wants, even though what he really wants is to have an excuse for being absent from the House of Commons. He is going to change the fundamental rules of Parliament just so he can have that excuse. How incredibly arrogant. It is contemptuous.Does the Prime Minister realize that, when he uses his majority to unilaterally impose changes to help himself, he is just Stephen Harper with a smile?

Mr. Speaker, when we make a mistake, Canadians expect us to apologize and to acknowledge that mistake. That is exactly what we did. That is why the Minister of National Defence continues to have my full confidence.

Mr. Speaker, I will answer the opposition member in the same manner.I am not here to make excuses. I am here to acknowledge my mistake, to be able to learn from it so I can continue to serve.

Mr. Speaker, the defence minister knows that there are consequences for being dishonest and untrustworthy under the military's code of conduct and ethics, and the defence minister understands that as a veteran. The minister's apology does not repair the damage he created. Canadians do not believe him. Our military does not trust him. How can the Prime Minister have any confidence in the minister?

Mr. Speaker, it is not just the military who find the Minister of National Defence's yarn about his fictional role in Afghanistan to be an embarrassment.We all know that the Liberals like to reference social media as a way to consult with Canadians. Well, Twitter was in a flurry over the weekend with the #[Minister of National Defence] Battles, mocking him relentlessly on his personal involvement in everything from the War of 1812 right up to the destruction of the Death Star.After hearing this kind of feedback from Canadians, would the Prime Minister not agree that the minister has lost all credibility?

Mr. Speaker, I am not here to make excuses or to give reasons. I am here to acknowledge my mistake, to be able to own it directly, to be able to learn from it and carry on and continue to serve the Canadian Armed Forces.

Mr. Speaker, I made a mistake in describing my role. I wish to be able to retract that. In no way did I intend to diminish the great work of the Canadian Armed Forces during Operation Medusa or any other operation. I am owning that mistake. I will be learning from it so I can continue to serve.

Mr. Speaker, how about the selling of those arms to Saudi Arabia? How is that helping women?The Prime Minister made a personal commitment to fix the Phoenix pay system fiasco. Tens of thousands of people are still waiting, and he is responsible for this file. There are mothers who have been waiting for their maternity benefits for months. Retirees are facing inhumane delays. Many people are receiving only a portion of their salaries. It is shameful.The Prime Minister said he would personally take care of it. Why is he refusing to take action?

Mr. Speaker, it has been revealed that the Minister of National Defence misled Canadians once again.Not only did he embarrass himself and the Prime Minister, but he also breached the code of honour and ethics of the men and women in uniform with whom he served. He disgraced himself and dishonoured them. Does the Prime Minister still have confidence in his Minister of National Defence?

Mr. Speaker, when someone makes a mistake, Canadians expect that they admit it and that they apologize for it. That is exactly what the minister did in this case. This minister continues to serve his country, as he has throughout his career, whether as a police officer, as a soldier, or now as Minister of National Defence, with an extraordinary capacity. This minister has, and will continue to have, my full confidence.

Mr. Speaker, no one will ever take away from the Minister of National Defence's actual service record, but people in the military have a name for what he did. It is called “stolen valour” when someone takes credit for the brave actions of another. What he did was wrong. Now he has lost the confidence of our men and women in uniform. They need to have confidence in their leaders, especially when they are putting their lives on the line.Will the Prime Minister remove the Minister of National Defence?

Mr. Speaker, Manitoba has started to use a facility that is supposed to hold Canadian seniors as an emergency measure to deal with the huge influx of illegal border crossers. The community of Gretna, and the entire province, is furious, because the Liberal government is doing nothing to stop this problem.Given that the Manitoba government is now requesting millions of tax dollars to deal with this situation, will the Prime Minister close the loophole in the safe third country agreement, stop this problem, and ensure that asylum seekers enter Canada through legal means?

Mr. Speaker, last week was a dark week for the over one million Canadians who are supported by Canada's forestry industry. The minister said that the U.S. trade action did not come as a surprise and that job losses are to be expected. Stories of work curtailment and mill closures are being heard right across our country. One small mill owner in my riding today is writing a cheque in the millions. He is not sure how much longer he can keep the doors open. The minister did not have answers last week, so I am asking the Prime Minister. Will he stand today and tell the hard-working forestry families what his plan is now that they are facing uncertain times?

Mr. Speaker, yes, we will have to agree to wait.I wanted to ask the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development if he planned to evaluate the sale of Canam to American Industrial Partners, but I already got my answer. In fact, he will not be able to evaluate it, because the government changed the law.Basically, because the Liberals were sick of being harassed about the sale of leading Quebec companies, they decided to change the law, so there is no longer any problem; it is settled.Now we are stuck with the Canadian government's laissez-faire economic policies, which are dangerous for our economy.How many more flagship companies do we have to lose before the minister will admit that he made a big mistake by increasing the threshold—

Mr. Speaker, the minister was caught claiming to be the architect of Operation Medusa. It was not a slip-up. It was intentional, because he got caught repeating the story. Canadians deserve to know. Why did the minister concoct this story, and how are Canadians supposed to trust this minister?

Mr. Speaker, the current approach to cannabis is simply not working. We are moving forward to ensure that we keep the profits out of the hands of criminals and cannabis out of the hands of young people. That is why we have moved forward and introduced Bill C-45 to legalize cannabis and strictly regulate and restrict access. We have had the benefit of speaking to many people in this regard, including the task force. We look forward to moving this piece of legislation forward. Simply decriminalizing will not achieve these objectives.

Mr. Speaker, I am not here to make any excuses. I intend to own my mistake, apologize for it, learn from it, and continue to serve.

Mr. Speaker, it is without ambiguity that this government is committed, via the measures announced by the Prime Minister, via the creation of a ministerial working group, and via the deployment of all of the resources necessary and required to correct this very important problem, a problem that remains unacceptable for our public servants. What we will not do, like the previous government, is book $70 million in savings and fire 700 people to get a phony surplus for Canadians.

Amidst all this talk of growth and improvement, Mr. Speaker, we are dealing with yet another softwood lumber crisis, the fifth in 35 years.This is going to be really devastating for Quebec, our regions, our families, and our communities. Forestry workers know that they cannot count on the 40 Liberal MPs from Quebec, who have said nothing. How many sawmills will have to close their doors before the government wakes up?For the fifth time, is Ottawa going to abandon Quebec's forestry sector, or will it at the very least provide loan guarantees to help it get through this crisis?

Mr. Speaker, as I stated, I am not here standing up to make any excuses for it. I am here to be able to acknowledge my mistake, to be able to apologize for it, and to be able to learn from it so I can continue to serve the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces.

Mr. Speaker, the defence minister's defence of this is that it was a mistake, except that does not hold water, and the reason why it does not hold water is because he repeated it more than once. That is not a mistake. That is a fabrication. Now he refuses to accept the accountability and the consequences of the fabrication he told.How can Canadians, how can the military, how can the Prime Minister trust the defence minister? If he is going to mislead on something this important, what else is he going to be misleading--

Mr. Speaker, it was the former Conservative government that allowed the agreement to expire. We are now dealing with the fifth softwood lumber dispute. Our workers and producers have never been found guilty. We strongly oppose the decision by the U.S. Department of Commerce to impose an unfair and punitive tax. The charges are unfounded. We will continue to raise this issue with the United States. I want to point out that we want a good agreement for Canada, not just any agreement.

Mr. Speaker, it is beyond an apology at this point.No one has questioned the defence minister's bravery as a soldier. This problem happened when the defence minister himself intentionally misled Canadians about his own service record as a soldier, not once but twice, in 2015 and again two weeks ago. He is a senior member of the government and of cabinet. How can the Prime Minister allow him to remain as Minister of National Defence when he continually misstates the facts?

Mr. Speaker, the minister made a mistake. He has admitted it and he has apologize for it. That is what Canadians expect from their leaders. It is what we expect from each other. That is exactly why I continue to have confidence in this minister, who has served this country in exemplary fashions as a police officer, as a soldier, and now as our Minister of National Defence.

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister dragged his feet on the softwood lumber file, which affects 200,000 families in our communities. He has no plan to compensate people for job losses. He has no plan to make Donald Trump back down. Instead, he has been trying to butter him up. Here is my question for the Prime Minister. Now that he has paid court to the U.S. president instead of standing up to him, does he think his approach to dealing with Donald Trump worked?

Mr. Speaker, my focus is always going to be to continue to serve the Canadian Armed Forces, the men and women who serve. I will always do that.I acknowledge my mistake. I will be learning from it. As I stated, I in no way intended to diminish the great work of our Canadian Armed Forces members who served during that time.

Mr. Speaker, the U.S. government just announced new tariffs to the tune of 20% on Canadian softwood lumber imports. The Prime Minister promised on March 10, 2016, that a new agreement would replace the one reached by the Harper government and that it would be concluded within 100 days. It has now been more than 400 days.The Liberals still do not have an agreement, jeopardizing the 370,000 direct and indirect jobs in Canada's forestry sector.Why is the government waiting and why did it wait to do something about this?

A committee? Well, the problem must be solved, Mr. Speaker.It is interesting that the longer the Phoenix fiasco drags on, the fewer answers the government can give about when it is supposed to be resolved. Maybe that is because this broken system is actually making new victims every pay. If the Prime Minister cannot tell us when all the current cases will be resolved, can the Prime Minister at least tell us when it will stop creating new ones?

Mr. Speaker, our men and women in uniform deserve a leader who does not waver from telling the truth, whose word is his bond. They deserve a leader who can be trusted every time, always. The minister has failed, so I ask him: does he really believe that our men and women in uniform deserve a defence minister who is willing to fabricate the truth in order to bolster his own record?

Mr. Speaker, in heavy-handed tactics, last week President Trump signed an executive order imposing a massive, illegal, punitive tariff on Canadian softwood lumber. This action seemed to take the government and the Prime Minister completely by surprise, but if they were properly conducting diplomatic relations, they could have and should have seen this coming.My question for the Prime Minister is very specific. Did he personally raise this specific issue of softwood lumber when he met with Trump in Washington in February, yes or no? Did he talk about softwood?

Mr. Speaker, let me clarify UN procedure. The United Nations Economic and Social Council chooses the members of its Commission on the Status of Women. Canada is presently not a member of this council and could not vote in this election. Saudi Arabia's regional candidacy was uncontested. Our government's position is clear. We will never hesitate to defend human rights, very much including women's rights.

Mr. Speaker, let us look at the facts. The Minister of National Defence said that our allies were okay with pulling our jets out of the fight against ISIS, and that was not true. He said our air force does not have enough planes to do its job, but the air force commander said that was not true. Also, he misrepresented his military service. He took full credit and named himself the architect of the largest NATO operation since the Korean War, and that was not true.How much more does the Prime Minister need to hear before he understands why our men and women in uniform have lost confidence in the—

Mr. Speaker, the Government of Canada disagrees with the decision by the U.S. Department of Commerce to impose unfair and punitive tariffs on Canadian softwood lumber.Earlier this year, I created a federal-provincial working group to support the forestry industry in this difficult period. We will continue to work with producers, workers, their families, and the provinces. Canadian workers can count on us.

Mr. Speaker, it is well noted that the Prime Minister is refusing to respond to a party leader. This is a breach of parliamentary protocol and tradition. It is what happens when there is no possible answer to a Minister of National Defence who has told a whopper about his record. That is not something one would apologize for. It is something one has to step down for.

Mr. Speaker, thank you for the opportunity to apologize for my mistake in describing my role. I retract that description and I am truly sorry for it. I in no way intended to diminish the great work that our men and women in the Canadian Armed Forces have done, and their superiors, and I am truly sorry for it.

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister took decisive action. The Prime Minister took decisive action in creating a committee of ministers to resolve the situation. We took decisive action by allocating the resources required to solve this thorny problem. It is unacceptable that public servants are going through this. We are going to fix the problem.

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of National Defence concocted a tall tale. He fancies himself the architect of one of the most important battles of the entire war in Afghanistan. The quandary for the Liberal government is that the minister played no such role.Can the Prime Minister tell us whether he has called on his minister to explain this trumped up story? We want to know whether the Prime Minister has talked to him about this.

Mr. Speaker, the minister made a very important statement. He said he was the creator, the architect, of Operation Medusa, the largest military operation since the Korean War.Is the Prime Minister comfortable having a defence minister who uses such elastic ethics to enhance his own prestige? If he keeps him in cabinet, we will know the answer is yes.

Mr. Speaker, what we are doing is improving the way the House works. I am very pleased that all members of the House are participating in this discussion. We know that there are different ways of doing things to better serve Canadians and to better represent our constituents and the interests of Canadians across the country. That is why we are so happy to initiate and continue this discussion and to put forward practical measures that will improve the way the House works.

Mr. Speaker, during the election campaign, we committed to bringing real change to the way that this government will govern. This government committed to Canadians to listen and to engage them in the very real challenges they are facing. We will continue to do that. What is clear is that this place needs modernization. We can improve the way that we work together in the House of Commons. We know that is exactly what Canadians expect. I encourage all members to be part of that conversation and to really bring this place into the 21st century.

Mr. Speaker, the minister made a mistake. He acknowledged his responsibility and apologized for it. That is what Canadians expect when one makes a mistake. We own up to our mistake; we apologize for it. That is what Canadians expect from one another. The minister has served his country in many capacities, as a police officer, as a soldier, and now as minister. He continues to have my full confidence.

Mr. Speaker, Canadians deserve to know how political parties are funded. The Minister of Democratic Institutions is leading our government's efforts to bring a new level of openness and transparency to political fundraising. Could the Minister of Democratic Institutions update the House on the efforts to shed light on political funding?

Mr. Speaker, the minister made a mistake. He acknowledged his responsibility and apologized for it. That is what Canadians expect when one makes a mistake. We own up to our mistake and we apologize for it. That is exactly what he did. This minister has served his country in many capacities as a police officer, as a soldier, and now as a minister, and he has my full confidence.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Liberals announced that they will use a government order to ram through changes to the Standing Orders by the end of June. According to the House leader, these Standing Order changes will “make the House of Commons more efficient”. I think I am stating the obvious when I say that pushing the changes through the House of Commons in June will not help to make the House of Commons more efficient during the three-month summer break.Therefore, why not send the proposals to the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs for the summer, let it look at these things, and return to the House in the autumn for a vote here then?

Mr. Speaker, I am not here to talk about my service record. I am here to be able to own up to my mistake, to learn from it, and to be able to continue to serve.

Mr. Speaker, every time I have sat down with the American president, whether this one or the previous one, I would bring up the issues that matter to Canadians, including softwood lumber.This is an issue that has been going on for many decades, and we work very hard to ensure that we can come to an agreement that will help both workers and Canadians right across the country and our trade relationship with the United States and the world.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in the House and correct the record, because when it comes to the ideas that we have shared with Canadians, when it comes to a prime minister's question period, that day would be in addition to the other days that the Prime Minister is in the House. This would hold the government to greater account. It would allow not just leaders of the opposition, but for private members to ask the Prime Minister questions directly. We have shown that this can work. It is not just about holding this government to account, it is about holding future governments to account. Let us be more open and more transparent, just like we committed to Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, the minister has admitted to concocting stories about his service record. Now he says he is sorry, but only after he got caught. When did the minister decide it was acceptable to start making up stories about his service record? Why did he think it was acceptable to take credit for the work of others, and how are the military and Canadians supposed to have confidence in anything this minister says?

Mr. Speaker, for weeks the Prime Minister has claimed that the proposed changes to help Parliament work were just part of a discussion. The Liberals have just announced, as we predicted, that they will be unilaterally forcing through changes in order to help themselves. So much for discussion. The Prime Minister will try to defend this unprecedented, self-serving scheme by saying that they had no choice because it was in their electoral platform. On that basis, will 2015 be the last election under first past the post?

Mr. Speaker, the Government of Canada committed to developing a Canadian poverty reduction strategy. A consultation process was launched in February to give people the opportunity to discuss key poverty-related issues online and in person. My colleagues from Laval and I will be holding a public consultation to hear what our constituents have to say.Would the Minister of Families, Children and Social Development tell us what the deadline is for holding consultations?

Mr. Speaker, the member for Thornhill has asked what it means for our government to be a feminist government and have a feminist foreign policy. Let me say what it means. I was so proud of the Prime Minister and the Minister of International Development on March 8, International Women's Day, when we announced $650 million for women's and girls' sexual and reproductive health, including access to safe abortions. That is feminism in the world.

Mr. Speaker, the government has embarked on a major transformational change in the law that will do a far better job than the old law in protecting our kids and keeping the proceeds of crime out of the hands of organized crime. That is a major undertaking. It is a process that will take time. We intend to reach that objective by the summer of next year. In the meantime, it is important for Canadians to respect the existing law, and we will examine every possible way to ensure that this transition is fair.

Mr. Speaker, we already know that the United States has decided to slap a new 20% countervailing duty on softwood lumber. On day 1, Quebec announced that it will provide loan guarantees to the companies affected. However, Ottawa is still refusing to support our forestry industry, which means that it is knowingly putting the industry at risk. Besides trying to develop a market in China and announcing programs that already exist, is Ottawa coming up with more appropriate solutions, such as providing loan guarantees, as Quebec has unanimously requested?

Mr. Speaker, I have quoted from the agreement numerous times, but I will now quote the head of the UNHCR in Canada, who said, “I really think that the conditions which prevailed at the time of the drafting and adoption of the safe third country agreement in 2004 are the same as [they are today], and...it will be difficult to change the policy...[that is] seen as a good co-operation, a good responsibility-sharing between two...systems [that have] the same values and the same procedural guarantees.” [...] “As far as the asylum system is concerned in the United States, legally speaking, we have not seen a change.”That is the UNHCR representative in Canada.

Mr. Speaker, I am not here to talk about my service record. I am here to apologize for my mistake and to be able to learn from it. As I also stated earlier, I in no way intended to diminish the great work of my former superiors and our soldiers.I want to be able to learn from my mistake and to continue to serve, as I have always done and will continue to do every day as long as I am the minister of defence.

Mr. Speaker, our government disagrees strongly with the punitive measures that were taken by the American government last week, and we understand that our first responsibility is to protect the workers and the producers and the communities that will be affected. We are having conversations with our provincial counterparts from every region of this country, to make sure that all governments work together to ensure that those who need protection will get it from us and our provincial counterparts.

Mr. Speaker, Canada's refugee system has been lauded around the world for being one of the most compassionate and efficient. We laud the generosity of Canadians in border communities as they assist these asylum seekers.We have an independent board, the Immigration and Refugee Board, that assesses each and every case on its merits, and if those people do not have a good case, they will be removed, as per the law. We are committed to our international obligation to give each and every one who claims asylum due process and a fair hearing.

Mr. Speaker, Canadians deserve more open and transparent information about political fundraising. We will be bringing forward legislation to give Canadians information about fundraisers involving cabinet ministers, party leaders, and leadership contestants. Canadians will know about the events in advance, where they are being held, the cost to attend, and they will know who attended them.I note that the Liberal Party of Canada chose on its own to bring in open, transparent fundraising rules. I encourage all parties to be open and transparent when it comes to political fundraisers.

Mr. Speaker, the discussion paper that was offered to the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs to broaden the scope of this study was exactly that, to hear ideas and really bring this place into the 21st century. During the election campaign, we made commitments to Canadians. We are committed to delivering on those commitments. We will ensure that we modernize this place.

Mr. Speaker, Canadians expect two things from their Prime Minister. They expect him to stand up for the interests of Canadians, which I am doing, and for Canada's industry, workers, and economy. They also expect their Prime Minister to maintain a good working relationship with our neighbours to the south. That is exactly what I am doing. I spoke directly to the president several times last week about the importance of a positive relationship between our two countries and what we can do to make things better for the middle class and workers in both of our countries in the years to come.

Mr. Speaker, during the election, we promised to bring real change to Parliament, and our objective has always been to make Parliament more effective, open, and transparent.We made specific commitments regarding the use of prorogation, the inappropriate use of omnibus bills, the strengthening of committees, the improvement of financial oversight, and greater accountability during question period. We are going to implement the promises that we made to Canadians. I encourage all members to take part in the conversation—

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Marc-Aurèle-Fortin for the leadership he has shown in his community and for his work with the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities.National consultations will inform our country's first-ever poverty reduction strategy and help us build a fairer and more inclusive society. I encourage all members to contribute to creating our first poverty reduction strategy by holding consultations between now and June 30 so we can give all Canadians a real and fair chance to achieve their potential.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his question.We are obviously aware of the situation involving Canam, and we are watching it closely. What I can say is that we are creating a positive environment for investment and economic growth in Quebec and across Canada, in order to create good jobs. We will continue to do everything we can to improve the Canadian economy.

Mr. Speaker, as you know, during the election campaign we made commitments to Canadians. We made a commitment to modernize the way that this place works and to bring it into the 21st century. The discussion paper that I released was exactly that, a desire to have a discussion, a conversation, as to how we can make—

Mr. Speaker, we got elected on an ambitious platform to bring real change forward to Canadians. It included respecting Parliament and improving the way our institutions function. That is exactly what we are working hard to do by offering to take more questions every week as Prime Minister or by improving the accountability of this House by ensuring that we are lessening the use of prorogation and omnibus bills. We are making sure that nobody can do what Stephen Harper tried to do to Canadians for 10 years.The fact is that we are improving this democracy and we are glad to accept recommendations and suggestions from all members in this House.

Mr. Speaker, we are in close collaboration with all of our provincial counterparts, including the Government of Quebec. We understand together that our first responsibility is to do what we can for the producers, for the workers, and for the communities affected by these punitive and unconscionable tariffs. We will continue to work co-operatively, because we believe that together we will come up with the solution that is in the best interests of workers, communities, and producers.

Mr. Speaker, our government is proud of Canada's energy industry, and we will promote its successes at every opportunity around the world. I was pleased to represent our government at the Bloomberg Future of Energy Summit in New York to reiterate the importance of energy trade, investment, and infrastructure between Canada and the United States. Our government supports greener ways to develop traditional sources of energy while at the same time increasing investments in clean technology. Our country will lead the energy conversation in the world now and in the years to come.

Mr. Speaker, during the campaign, we committed to—

Mr. Speaker, Canada and the U.S. enjoy the closest energy relationship in the world and the largest trading partnership of any two countries. Canada's Minister of Natural Resources participated in Bloomberg's Future of Energy Summit in New York recently and met with key U.S. representatives, industry and business leaders, and officials from leading American investment firms to promote Canada's energy sector. Could the minister please update the House on the outcome of that visit?

Mr. Speaker, the Government of Canada disagrees with the decision by the U.S. Department of Commerce to impose unfair and punitive tariffs on Canadian softwood lumber.Earlier this year, I created a federal-provincial working group to support the forestry industry in this difficult period. We will continue to work with producers, workers, their families, and the provinces. Canadian workers can count on us.

Amidst all this talk of growth and improvement, Mr. Speaker, we are dealing with yet another softwood lumber crisis, the fifth in 35 years.This is going to be really devastating for Quebec, our regions, our families, and our communities. Forestry workers know that they cannot count on the 40 Liberal MPs from Quebec, who have said nothing. How many sawmills will have to close their doors before the government wakes up?For the fifth time, is Ottawa going to abandon Quebec's forestry sector, or will it at the very least provide loan guarantees to help it get through this crisis?

Mr. Speaker, the minister has admitted to concocting stories about his service record. Now he says he is sorry, but only after he got caught. When did the minister decide it was acceptable to start making up stories about his service record? Why did he think it was acceptable to take credit for the work of others, and how are the military and Canadians supposed to have confidence in anything this minister says?

Mr. Speaker, how many times has the minister said that fib over the last two years? Veterans are disgusted that the minister took credit for his role in the battlefield that involved hundreds of soldiers. That is valour stolen. The defence minister is now a laughingstock. His reputation is damaged beyond repair. Canadians do not believe him. The military does not trust him, and our allies are not going to take him seriously.How can the Prime Minister still have confidence in the defence minister?

Mr. Speaker, the defence minister knows that there are consequences for being dishonest and untrustworthy under the military's code of conduct and ethics, and the defence minister understands that as a veteran. The minister's apology does not repair the damage he created. Canadians do not believe him. Our military does not trust him. How can the Prime Minister have any confidence in the minister?

Mr. Speaker, last week the Prime Minister told a group of young Canadians that his father had used his connections to ensure that possession charges against his brother would “go away”. Now that the Prime Minister has had a chance to ensure that the arrests and criminal records stop for all families, he refuses to do so. The Prime Minister himself has admitted to smoking pot while he was a member of Parliament, so why the double standard? Why is there one set of rules for the Trudeau family and another for thousands of young and racialized Canadians who are still receiving criminal records for pot possession in Canada?

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister dragged his feet on the softwood lumber file, which affects 200,000 families in our communities. He has no plan to compensate people for job losses. He has no plan to make Donald Trump back down. Instead, he has been trying to butter him up. Here is my question for the Prime Minister. Now that he has paid court to the U.S. president instead of standing up to him, does he think his approach to dealing with Donald Trump worked?

Mr. Speaker, it is well noted that the Prime Minister is refusing to respond to a party leader. This is a breach of parliamentary protocol and tradition. It is what happens when there is no possible answer to a Minister of National Defence who has told a whopper about his record. That is not something one would apologize for. It is something one has to step down for.

Mr. Speaker, thank you for the opportunity to apologize for my mistake in describing my role. I retract that description and I am truly sorry for it. I in no way intended to diminish the great work that our men and women in the Canadian Armed Forces have done, and their superiors, and I am truly sorry for it.

Mr. Speaker, the minister makes it sound like Canadians are not generous if they simply stand up for their right to have our border integrity secured. Recent media reports have said that over half the illegal border crossers have serious criminal records. This puts the safety of the CBSA, RCMP, and community members in the area at risk. My question is very clear. There is a way we can stop this, and it is by closing the loophole in the safe third country agreement. Why has the minister failed to act?

Mr. Speaker, in heavy-handed tactics, last week President Trump signed an executive order imposing a massive, illegal, punitive tariff on Canadian softwood lumber. This action seemed to take the government and the Prime Minister completely by surprise, but if they were properly conducting diplomatic relations, they could have and should have seen this coming.My question for the Prime Minister is very specific. Did he personally raise this specific issue of softwood lumber when he met with Trump in Washington in February, yes or no? Did he talk about softwood?

Mr. Speaker, last week was a dark week for the over one million Canadians who are supported by Canada's forestry industry. The minister said that the U.S. trade action did not come as a surprise and that job losses are to be expected. Stories of work curtailment and mill closures are being heard right across our country. One small mill owner in my riding today is writing a cheque in the millions. He is not sure how much longer he can keep the doors open. The minister did not have answers last week, so I am asking the Prime Minister. Will he stand today and tell the hard-working forestry families what his plan is now that they are facing uncertain times?

Mr. Speaker, how about the selling of those arms to Saudi Arabia? How is that helping women?The Prime Minister made a personal commitment to fix the Phoenix pay system fiasco. Tens of thousands of people are still waiting, and he is responsible for this file. There are mothers who have been waiting for their maternity benefits for months. Retirees are facing inhumane delays. Many people are receiving only a portion of their salaries. It is shameful.The Prime Minister said he would personally take care of it. Why is he refusing to take action?

Mr. Speaker, since becoming a politician, the Minister of National Defence has been misleading the House and resorting to “alternative facts”. He quickly became like one of those fake soldiers who puts on a uniform and pretends to be a soldier.His most recent feat was to take credit for being the brains behind Operation Medusa, when in fact he merely carried out orders. For this kind of offence, he would be guilty of violating section 129 of the Code of Service Discipline.When will he do the honourable thing and just tell the truth?

Mr. Speaker, it has been revealed that the Minister of National Defence misled Canadians once again.Not only did he embarrass himself and the Prime Minister, but he also breached the code of honour and ethics of the men and women in uniform with whom he served. He disgraced himself and dishonoured them. Does the Prime Minister still have confidence in his Minister of National Defence?

Mr. Speaker, the minister was caught claiming to be the architect of Operation Medusa. It was not a slip-up. It was intentional, because he got caught repeating the story. Canadians deserve to know. Why did the minister concoct this story, and how are Canadians supposed to trust this minister?

Mr. Speaker, as I stated, I have acknowledged my mistake. I am not here to make any excuses for it. I am owning it. I am learning from it. I will continue to work, learn from those lessons, and continue to work and serve the Canadian Armed Forces, the men and women who serve us.

Mr. Speaker, I have apologized for my mistake. I will be learning from this, owning the mistake, and not making any excuses for the mistake.

Mr. Speaker, during the campaign, we committed to—

A committee? Well, the problem must be solved, Mr. Speaker.It is interesting that the longer the Phoenix fiasco drags on, the fewer answers the government can give about when it is supposed to be resolved. Maybe that is because this broken system is actually making new victims every pay. If the Prime Minister cannot tell us when all the current cases will be resolved, can the Prime Minister at least tell us when it will stop creating new ones?

Mr. Speaker, the Government of Canada committed to developing a Canadian poverty reduction strategy. A consultation process was launched in February to give people the opportunity to discuss key poverty-related issues online and in person. My colleagues from Laval and I will be holding a public consultation to hear what our constituents have to say.Would the Minister of Families, Children and Social Development tell us what the deadline is for holding consultations?

Mr. Speaker, every time I have sat down with the American president, whether this one or the previous one, I would bring up the issues that matter to Canadians, including softwood lumber.This is an issue that has been going on for many decades, and we work very hard to ensure that we can come to an agreement that will help both workers and Canadians right across the country and our trade relationship with the United States and the world.

Mr. Speaker, it was the former Conservative government that allowed the agreement to expire. We are now dealing with the fifth softwood lumber dispute. Our workers and producers have never been found guilty. We strongly oppose the decision by the U.S. Department of Commerce to impose an unfair and punitive tax. The charges are unfounded. We will continue to raise this issue with the United States. I want to point out that we want a good agreement for Canada, not just any agreement.

Mr. Speaker, no one will ever take away from the Minister of National Defence's actual service record, but people in the military have a name for what he did. It is called “stolen valour” when someone takes credit for the brave actions of another. What he did was wrong. Now he has lost the confidence of our men and women in uniform. They need to have confidence in their leaders, especially when they are putting their lives on the line.Will the Prime Minister remove the Minister of National Defence?

Mr. Speaker, for weeks the Prime Minister has claimed that the proposed changes to help Parliament work were just part of a discussion. The Liberals have just announced, as we predicted, that they will be unilaterally forcing through changes in order to help themselves. So much for discussion. The Prime Minister will try to defend this unprecedented, self-serving scheme by saying that they had no choice because it was in their electoral platform. On that basis, will 2015 be the last election under first past the post?

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister's mandate letter to the Minister of National Defence uses the word “honesty” at least eight times. Within the letter, it reads: Canadians expect us, in our work, to reflect the values we all embrace:...honesty.... ...Canadians need to have faith in their government's honesty.... We have committed to an...honest government that is accountable to Canadians.... ...you must uphold the highest standards of honesty.... ...it is important that your behaviour and decisions meet Canadians' well-founded expectations.... Will the Prime Minister admit that the Minister of National Defence has not lived up to the well-founded expectations of Canadians and remove him from office?

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is today in this House breaching parliamentary tradition by refusing to answer questions. Stephen Harper took all questions every day during the Senate scandal. The Prime Minister wants to change the fundamental rules of Parliament in order to help himself. Why all of this? Well, because he says he values question period and accountability. That is why he wants to scrap it. If that is true, why does he not stand and start asking Canadians to listen to answers to some of our questions for once, instead of his usual platitudes or non-answers?

Mr. Speaker, the minister made a mistake. He has admitted it and he has apologize for it. That is what Canadians expect from their leaders. It is what we expect from each other. That is exactly why I continue to have confidence in this minister, who has served this country in exemplary fashions as a police officer, as a soldier, and now as our Minister of National Defence.

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals say they wanted to have a supposed discussion on the Standing Orders, but it turns out that it was just a Trojan Horse for what they really wanted, for the Prime Minister to only have to show up once a week. Now they are trying to ram through changes to the House that they could make without amending the Standing Orders. Even the Liberal member for Malpeque said, “I strongly believe that you have to have at least consensus from the main parties to change the rules of the House.”If the Prime Minister will not listen to common sense on this side of the House, will he at least listen to reason from one of his own Liberal MPs?

Mr. Speaker, yes, we will have to agree to wait.I wanted to ask the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development if he planned to evaluate the sale of Canam to American Industrial Partners, but I already got my answer. In fact, he will not be able to evaluate it, because the government changed the law.Basically, because the Liberals were sick of being harassed about the sale of leading Quebec companies, they decided to change the law, so there is no longer any problem; it is settled.Now we are stuck with the Canadian government's laissez-faire economic policies, which are dangerous for our economy.How many more flagship companies do we have to lose before the minister will admit that he made a big mistake by increasing the threshold—

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister took decisive action. The Prime Minister took decisive action in creating a committee of ministers to resolve the situation. We took decisive action by allocating the resources required to solve this thorny problem. It is unacceptable that public servants are going through this. We are going to fix the problem.

Mr. Speaker, the United Nations' well-tarnished reputation has been sullied yet again by the election of Saudi Arabia to the UN Commission on the Status of Women. Gender segregation forces Saudi women to submit to male guardianship for their entire lives. Women are banned from driving. Those who defy Saudi Arabia's second-class laws go to prison. Women can be stoned to death for adultery. There have been expressions of disgust and protest around the world, but Canada's self-proclaimed feminist Prime Minister has not uttered a peep. Might he be willing to explain why today?

Mr. Speaker, it is without ambiguity that this government is committed, via the measures announced by the Prime Minister, via the creation of a ministerial working group, and via the deployment of all of the resources necessary and required to correct this very important problem, a problem that remains unacceptable for our public servants. What we will not do, like the previous government, is book $70 million in savings and fire 700 people to get a phony surplus for Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, Canada and the U.S. enjoy the closest energy relationship in the world and the largest trading partnership of any two countries. Canada's Minister of Natural Resources participated in Bloomberg's Future of Energy Summit in New York recently and met with key U.S. representatives, industry and business leaders, and officials from leading American investment firms to promote Canada's energy sector. Could the minister please update the House on the outcome of that visit?

Mr. Speaker, let me clarify UN procedure. The United Nations Economic and Social Council chooses the members of its Commission on the Status of Women. Canada is presently not a member of this council and could not vote in this election. Saudi Arabia's regional candidacy was uncontested. Our government's position is clear. We will never hesitate to defend human rights, very much including women's rights.

Mr. Speaker, Manitoba has started to use a facility that is supposed to hold Canadian seniors as an emergency measure to deal with the huge influx of illegal border crossers. The community of Gretna, and the entire province, is furious, because the Liberal government is doing nothing to stop this problem.Given that the Manitoba government is now requesting millions of tax dollars to deal with this situation, will the Prime Minister close the loophole in the safe third country agreement, stop this problem, and ensure that asylum seekers enter Canada through legal means?

Mr. Speaker, it is not just the military who find the Minister of National Defence's yarn about his fictional role in Afghanistan to be an embarrassment.We all know that the Liberals like to reference social media as a way to consult with Canadians. Well, Twitter was in a flurry over the weekend with the #[Minister of National Defence] Battles, mocking him relentlessly on his personal involvement in everything from the War of 1812 right up to the destruction of the Death Star.After hearing this kind of feedback from Canadians, would the Prime Minister not agree that the minister has lost all credibility?

Mr. Speaker, Canadians deserve to know how political parties are funded. The Minister of Democratic Institutions is leading our government's efforts to bring a new level of openness and transparency to political fundraising. Could the Minister of Democratic Institutions update the House on the efforts to shed light on political funding?

Mr. Speaker, the current approach to cannabis is simply not working. We are moving forward to ensure that we keep the profits out of the hands of criminals and cannabis out of the hands of young people. That is why we have moved forward and introduced Bill C-45 to legalize cannabis and strictly regulate and restrict access. We have had the benefit of speaking to many people in this regard, including the task force. We look forward to moving this piece of legislation forward. Simply decriminalizing will not achieve these objectives.

Mr. Speaker, as you know, during the election campaign we made commitments to Canadians. We made a commitment to modernize the way that this place works and to bring it into the 21st century. The discussion paper that I released was exactly that, a desire to have a discussion, a conversation, as to how we can make—

Mr. Speaker, let us look at the facts. The Minister of National Defence said that our allies were okay with pulling our jets out of the fight against ISIS, and that was not true. He said our air force does not have enough planes to do its job, but the air force commander said that was not true. Also, he misrepresented his military service. He took full credit and named himself the architect of the largest NATO operation since the Korean War, and that was not true.How much more does the Prime Minister need to hear before he understands why our men and women in uniform have lost confidence in the—

Was that about admitting and apologizing when an individual breaks a promise and they do not tell the truth, Mr. Speaker? In reality, the Prime Minister can answer all the questions he wants, when he wants, even though what he really wants is to have an excuse for being absent from the House of Commons. He is going to change the fundamental rules of Parliament just so he can have that excuse. How incredibly arrogant. It is contemptuous.Does the Prime Minister realize that, when he uses his majority to unilaterally impose changes to help himself, he is just Stephen Harper with a smile?

Mr. Speaker, our men and women in uniform deserve a leader who does not waver from telling the truth, whose word is his bond. They deserve a leader who can be trusted every time, always. The minister has failed, so I ask him: does he really believe that our men and women in uniform deserve a defence minister who is willing to fabricate the truth in order to bolster his own record?

Mr. Speaker, this Liberal government is demonstrating an arrogance that has never before been seen in this House.For the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, discussing means imposing. Discussing means crushing the opposition. In order to show that the Liberals are all-powerful and allow the Prime Minister to show up in the House only once a week, she is once again proposing to unilaterally impose new rules.Is it because she herself no longer has any confidence in her own government that the leader wants to change rules that should not be changed without the unanimous consent of all members of the House?

Mr. Speaker, the discussion paper that was offered to the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs to broaden the scope of this study was exactly that, to hear ideas and really bring this place into the 21st century. During the election campaign, we made commitments to Canadians. We are committed to delivering on those commitments. We will ensure that we modernize this place.

Mr. Speaker, Canadians deserve more open and transparent information about political fundraising. We will be bringing forward legislation to give Canadians information about fundraisers involving cabinet ministers, party leaders, and leadership contestants. Canadians will know about the events in advance, where they are being held, the cost to attend, and they will know who attended them.I note that the Liberal Party of Canada chose on its own to bring in open, transparent fundraising rules. I encourage all parties to be open and transparent when it comes to political fundraisers.

Mr. Speaker, I have quoted from the agreement numerous times, but I will now quote the head of the UNHCR in Canada, who said, “I really think that the conditions which prevailed at the time of the drafting and adoption of the safe third country agreement in 2004 are the same as [they are today], and...it will be difficult to change the policy...[that is] seen as a good co-operation, a good responsibility-sharing between two...systems [that have] the same values and the same procedural guarantees.” [...] “As far as the asylum system is concerned in the United States, legally speaking, we have not seen a change.”That is the UNHCR representative in Canada.

Mr. Speaker, the Liberal government's reluctance to demand better of the United Nations is unacceptable. Whether funding terror incitement in UNRWA schools, concealing votes for human rights abusers to the Human Rights Council, ignoring the anti-Semitic denial of Jerusalem's history by UNESCO, or now downplaying the election of Saudi Arabia to the status of women, all of this makes Canada complicit in the UN's dysfunction. Is there no end to the Prime Minister's willingness to pander to rights abusers in his indecent pursuit of a Security Council seat?

Mr. Speaker, during the election campaign, we committed to bringing real change to the way that this government will govern. This government committed to Canadians to listen and to engage them in the very real challenges they are facing. We will continue to do that. What is clear is that this place needs modernization. We can improve the way that we work together in the House of Commons. We know that is exactly what Canadians expect. I encourage all members to be part of that conversation and to really bring this place into the 21st century.

Mr. Speaker, the government has embarked on a major transformational change in the law that will do a far better job than the old law in protecting our kids and keeping the proceeds of crime out of the hands of organized crime. That is a major undertaking. It is a process that will take time. We intend to reach that objective by the summer of next year. In the meantime, it is important for Canadians to respect the existing law, and we will examine every possible way to ensure that this transition is fair.

Mr. Speaker, it has come to light that the Minister of National Defence has misled Canadians once again, and this time it is a big one. He has not just embarrassed himself and the Prime Minister: he has violated a code of honour and ethics with the men and women in uniform he once served with. He has dishonoured himself, and in doing that, he has dishonoured them.Does the Prime Minister still have confidence in his Minister of National Defence?

Mr. Speaker, the U.S. government just announced new tariffs to the tune of 20% on Canadian softwood lumber imports. The Prime Minister promised on March 10, 2016, that a new agreement would replace the one reached by the Harper government and that it would be concluded within 100 days. It has now been more than 400 days.The Liberals still do not have an agreement, jeopardizing the 370,000 direct and indirect jobs in Canada's forestry sector.Why is the government waiting and why did it wait to do something about this?

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in the House and correct the record, because when it comes to the ideas that we have shared with Canadians, when it comes to a prime minister's question period, that day would be in addition to the other days that the Prime Minister is in the House. This would hold the government to greater account. It would allow not just leaders of the opposition, but for private members to ask the Prime Minister questions directly. We have shown that this can work. It is not just about holding this government to account, it is about holding future governments to account. Let us be more open and more transparent, just like we committed to Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, Canadians expect two things from their Prime Minister. They expect him to stand up for the interests of Canadians, which I am doing, and for Canada's industry, workers, and economy. They also expect their Prime Minister to maintain a good working relationship with our neighbours to the south. That is exactly what I am doing. I spoke directly to the president several times last week about the importance of a positive relationship between our two countries and what we can do to make things better for the middle class and workers in both of our countries in the years to come.

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of National Defence concocted a tall tale. He fancies himself the architect of one of the most important battles of the entire war in Afghanistan. The quandary for the Liberal government is that the minister played no such role.Can the Prime Minister tell us whether he has called on his minister to explain this trumped up story? We want to know whether the Prime Minister has talked to him about this.

Mr. Speaker, during the election, we promised to bring real change to Parliament, and our objective has always been to make Parliament more effective, open, and transparent.We made specific commitments regarding the use of prorogation, the inappropriate use of omnibus bills, the strengthening of committees, the improvement of financial oversight, and greater accountability during question period. We are going to implement the promises that we made to Canadians. I encourage all members to take part in the conversation—

Mr. Speaker, our government disagrees strongly with the punitive measures that were taken by the American government last week, and we understand that our first responsibility is to protect the workers and the producers and the communities that will be affected. We are having conversations with our provincial counterparts from every region of this country, to make sure that all governments work together to ensure that those who need protection will get it from us and our provincial counterparts.

Mr. Speaker, most people learn that it is important to tell the truth before they turn 50. I am sure that many parents would like to wipe out their children's criminal record, like the Trudeau family did. However, most Canadians are not as well-heeled or connected as the Trudeau family. The Prime Minister could have offered pardons in his bill, but he did not. He could have decriminalized marijuana, but he refused. Why the double standard? Why is there one system for rich, well-heeled, well-connected families, and another for regular families?

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Marc-Aurèle-Fortin for the leadership he has shown in his community and for his work with the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities.National consultations will inform our country's first-ever poverty reduction strategy and help us build a fairer and more inclusive society. I encourage all members to contribute to creating our first poverty reduction strategy by holding consultations between now and June 30 so we can give all Canadians a real and fair chance to achieve their potential.

Mr. Speaker, I will answer the opposition member in the same manner.I am not here to make excuses. I am here to acknowledge my mistake, to be able to learn from it so I can continue to serve.

Mr. Speaker, our government is proud of Canada's energy industry, and we will promote its successes at every opportunity around the world. I was pleased to represent our government at the Bloomberg Future of Energy Summit in New York to reiterate the importance of energy trade, investment, and infrastructure between Canada and the United States. Our government supports greener ways to develop traditional sources of energy while at the same time increasing investments in clean technology. Our country will lead the energy conversation in the world now and in the years to come.

Mr. Speaker, the defence minister's defence of this is that it was a mistake, except that does not hold water, and the reason why it does not hold water is because he repeated it more than once. That is not a mistake. That is a fabrication. Now he refuses to accept the accountability and the consequences of the fabrication he told.How can Canadians, how can the military, how can the Prime Minister trust the defence minister? If he is going to mislead on something this important, what else is he going to be misleading--

Mr. Speaker, we got elected on an ambitious platform to bring real change forward to Canadians. It included respecting Parliament and improving the way our institutions function. That is exactly what we are working hard to do by offering to take more questions every week as Prime Minister or by improving the accountability of this House by ensuring that we are lessening the use of prorogation and omnibus bills. We are making sure that nobody can do what Stephen Harper tried to do to Canadians for 10 years.The fact is that we are improving this democracy and we are glad to accept recommendations and suggestions from all members in this House.

Mr. Speaker, the member for Thornhill has asked what it means for our government to be a feminist government and have a feminist foreign policy. Let me say what it means. I was so proud of the Prime Minister and the Minister of International Development on March 8, International Women's Day, when we announced $650 million for women's and girls' sexual and reproductive health, including access to safe abortions. That is feminism in the world.

Mr. Speaker, the minister made a very important statement. He said he was the creator, the architect, of Operation Medusa, the largest military operation since the Korean War.Is the Prime Minister comfortable having a defence minister who uses such elastic ethics to enhance his own prestige? If he keeps him in cabinet, we will know the answer is yes.

Mr. Speaker, we already know that the United States has decided to slap a new 20% countervailing duty on softwood lumber. On day 1, Quebec announced that it will provide loan guarantees to the companies affected. However, Ottawa is still refusing to support our forestry industry, which means that it is knowingly putting the industry at risk. Besides trying to develop a market in China and announcing programs that already exist, is Ottawa coming up with more appropriate solutions, such as providing loan guarantees, as Quebec has unanimously requested?

Mr. Speaker, I am not here to talk about my service record. I am here to apologize for my mistake and to be able to learn from it. As I also stated earlier, I in no way intended to diminish the great work of my former superiors and our soldiers.I want to be able to learn from my mistake and to continue to serve, as I have always done and will continue to do every day as long as I am the minister of defence.

Mr. Speaker, Canada's refugee system has been lauded around the world for being one of the most compassionate and efficient. We laud the generosity of Canadians in border communities as they assist these asylum seekers.We have an independent board, the Immigration and Refugee Board, that assesses each and every case on its merits, and if those people do not have a good case, they will be removed, as per the law. We are committed to our international obligation to give each and every one who claims asylum due process and a fair hearing.

Mr. Speaker, when we make a mistake, Canadians expect us to apologize and to acknowledge that mistake. That is exactly what we did. That is why the Minister of National Defence continues to have my full confidence.

Mr. Speaker, when someone makes a mistake, Canadians expect that they admit it and that they apologize for it. That is exactly what the minister did in this case. This minister continues to serve his country, as he has throughout his career, whether as a police officer, as a soldier, or now as Minister of National Defence, with an extraordinary capacity. This minister has, and will continue to have, my full confidence.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Liberals announced that they will use a government order to ram through changes to the Standing Orders by the end of June. According to the House leader, these Standing Order changes will “make the House of Commons more efficient”. I think I am stating the obvious when I say that pushing the changes through the House of Commons in June will not help to make the House of Commons more efficient during the three-month summer break.Therefore, why not send the proposals to the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs for the summer, let it look at these things, and return to the House in the autumn for a vote here then?

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his question.We are obviously aware of the situation involving Canam, and we are watching it closely. What I can say is that we are creating a positive environment for investment and economic growth in Quebec and across Canada, in order to create good jobs. We will continue to do everything we can to improve the Canadian economy.

Mr. Speaker, I made a mistake in describing my role. I wish to be able to retract that. In no way did I intend to diminish the great work of the Canadian Armed Forces during Operation Medusa or any other operation. I am owning that mistake. I will be learning from it so I can continue to serve.

Mr. Speaker, the minister made a mistake. He acknowledged his responsibility and apologized for it. That is what Canadians expect when one makes a mistake. We own up to our mistake and we apologize for it. That is exactly what he did. This minister has served his country in many capacities as a police officer, as a soldier, and now as a minister, and he has my full confidence.

Mr. Speaker, the minister made a mistake. He acknowledged his responsibility and apologized for it. That is what Canadians expect when one makes a mistake. We own up to our mistake; we apologize for it. That is what Canadians expect from one another. The minister has served his country in many capacities, as a police officer, as a soldier, and now as minister. He continues to have my full confidence.

Mr. Speaker, what we are doing is improving the way the House works. I am very pleased that all members of the House are participating in this discussion. We know that there are different ways of doing things to better serve Canadians and to better represent our constituents and the interests of Canadians across the country. That is why we are so happy to initiate and continue this discussion and to put forward practical measures that will improve the way the House works.

Mr. Speaker, as I stated, I am not here standing up to make any excuses for it. I am here to be able to acknowledge my mistake, to be able to apologize for it, and to be able to learn from it so I can continue to serve the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces.

Mr. Speaker, I am not here to talk about my service record. I am here to be able to own up to my mistake, to learn from it, and to be able to continue to serve.

Mr. Speaker, I am not here to make excuses or to give reasons. I am here to acknowledge my mistake, to be able to own it directly, to be able to learn from it and carry on and continue to serve the Canadian Armed Forces.

Mr. Speaker, it is beyond an apology at this point.No one has questioned the defence minister's bravery as a soldier. This problem happened when the defence minister himself intentionally misled Canadians about his own service record as a soldier, not once but twice, in 2015 and again two weeks ago. He is a senior member of the government and of cabinet. How can the Prime Minister allow him to remain as Minister of National Defence when he continually misstates the facts?

Mr. Speaker, I am not here to make any excuses. I intend to own my mistake, apologize for it, learn from it, and continue to serve.

Mr. Speaker, we are in close collaboration with all of our provincial counterparts, including the Government of Quebec. We understand together that our first responsibility is to do what we can for the producers, for the workers, and for the communities affected by these punitive and unconscionable tariffs. We will continue to work co-operatively, because we believe that together we will come up with the solution that is in the best interests of workers, communities, and producers.

Mr. Speaker, I am owning up to my mistake to be able to continue to learn from it. I did retract that description. I in no way intended to diminish the great work our men and women in the Canadian Armed Forces have done. I hope to learn from that mistake so I can continue to serve the women and men of the Canadian Armed Forces.

Mr. Speaker, my focus is always going to be to continue to serve the Canadian Armed Forces, the men and women who serve. I will always do that.I acknowledge my mistake. I will be learning from it. As I stated, I in no way intended to diminish the great work of our Canadian Armed Forces members who served during that time.

Mr. Speaker, my focus is always going to be to continue to serve the Canadian Armed Forces, the men and women who serve. I will always do that.I acknowledge my mistake. I will be learning from it. As I stated, I in no way intended to diminish the great work of our Canadian Armed Forces members who served during that time.

Mr. Speaker, I am owning up to my mistake to be able to continue to learn from it. I did retract that description. I in no way intended to diminish the great work our men and women in the Canadian Armed Forces have done. I hope to learn from that mistake so I can continue to serve the women and men of the Canadian Armed Forces.

Mr. Speaker, we are in close collaboration with all of our provincial counterparts, including the Government of Quebec. We understand together that our first responsibility is to do what we can for the producers, for the workers, and for the communities affected by these punitive and unconscionable tariffs. We will continue to work co-operatively, because we believe that together we will come up with the solution that is in the best interests of workers, communities, and producers.

Mr. Speaker, it is beyond an apology at this point.No one has questioned the defence minister's bravery as a soldier. This problem happened when the defence minister himself intentionally misled Canadians about his own service record as a soldier, not once but twice, in 2015 and again two weeks ago. He is a senior member of the government and of cabinet. How can the Prime Minister allow him to remain as Minister of National Defence when he continually misstates the facts?

Mr. Speaker, I am not here to make any excuses. I intend to own my mistake, apologize for it, learn from it, and continue to serve.

Mr. Speaker, I am not here to talk about my service record. I am here to be able to own up to my mistake, to learn from it, and to be able to continue to serve.

Mr. Speaker, I am not here to make excuses or to give reasons. I am here to acknowledge my mistake, to be able to own it directly, to be able to learn from it and carry on and continue to serve the Canadian Armed Forces.

Mr. Speaker, as I stated, I am not here standing up to make any excuses for it. I am here to be able to acknowledge my mistake, to be able to apologize for it, and to be able to learn from it so I can continue to serve the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces.

Mr. Speaker, what we are doing is improving the way the House works. I am very pleased that all members of the House are participating in this discussion. We know that there are different ways of doing things to better serve Canadians and to better represent our constituents and the interests of Canadians across the country. That is why we are so happy to initiate and continue this discussion and to put forward practical measures that will improve the way the House works.

Mr. Speaker, the minister made a mistake. He acknowledged his responsibility and apologized for it. That is what Canadians expect when one makes a mistake. We own up to our mistake; we apologize for it. That is what Canadians expect from one another. The minister has served his country in many capacities, as a police officer, as a soldier, and now as minister. He continues to have my full confidence.

Mr. Speaker, the minister made a mistake. He acknowledged his responsibility and apologized for it. That is what Canadians expect when one makes a mistake. We own up to our mistake and we apologize for it. That is exactly what he did. This minister has served his country in many capacities as a police officer, as a soldier, and now as a minister, and he has my full confidence.

Mr. Speaker, I made a mistake in describing my role. I wish to be able to retract that. In no way did I intend to diminish the great work of the Canadian Armed Forces during Operation Medusa or any other operation. I am owning that mistake. I will be learning from it so I can continue to serve.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his question.We are obviously aware of the situation involving Canam, and we are watching it closely. What I can say is that we are creating a positive environment for investment and economic growth in Quebec and across Canada, in order to create good jobs. We will continue to do everything we can to improve the Canadian economy.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Liberals announced that they will use a government order to ram through changes to the Standing Orders by the end of June. According to the House leader, these Standing Order changes will “make the House of Commons more efficient”. I think I am stating the obvious when I say that pushing the changes through the House of Commons in June will not help to make the House of Commons more efficient during the three-month summer break.Therefore, why not send the proposals to the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs for the summer, let it look at these things, and return to the House in the autumn for a vote here then?

Mr. Speaker, when someone makes a mistake, Canadians expect that they admit it and that they apologize for it. That is exactly what the minister did in this case. This minister continues to serve his country, as he has throughout his career, whether as a police officer, as a soldier, or now as Minister of National Defence, with an extraordinary capacity. This minister has, and will continue to have, my full confidence.

Mr. Speaker, when we make a mistake, Canadians expect us to apologize and to acknowledge that mistake. That is exactly what we did. That is why the Minister of National Defence continues to have my full confidence.

Mr. Speaker, Canada's refugee system has been lauded around the world for being one of the most compassionate and efficient. We laud the generosity of Canadians in border communities as they assist these asylum seekers.We have an independent board, the Immigration and Refugee Board, that assesses each and every case on its merits, and if those people do not have a good case, they will be removed, as per the law. We are committed to our international obligation to give each and every one who claims asylum due process and a fair hearing.

Mr. Speaker, I am not here to talk about my service record. I am here to apologize for my mistake and to be able to learn from it. As I also stated earlier, I in no way intended to diminish the great work of my former superiors and our soldiers.I want to be able to learn from my mistake and to continue to serve, as I have always done and will continue to do every day as long as I am the minister of defence.

Mr. Speaker, we already know that the United States has decided to slap a new 20% countervailing duty on softwood lumber. On day 1, Quebec announced that it will provide loan guarantees to the companies affected. However, Ottawa is still refusing to support our forestry industry, which means that it is knowingly putting the industry at risk. Besides trying to develop a market in China and announcing programs that already exist, is Ottawa coming up with more appropriate solutions, such as providing loan guarantees, as Quebec has unanimously requested?

Mr. Speaker, the minister made a very important statement. He said he was the creator, the architect, of Operation Medusa, the largest military operation since the Korean War.Is the Prime Minister comfortable having a defence minister who uses such elastic ethics to enhance his own prestige? If he keeps him in cabinet, we will know the answer is yes.

Mr. Speaker, the member for Thornhill has asked what it means for our government to be a feminist government and have a feminist foreign policy. Let me say what it means. I was so proud of the Prime Minister and the Minister of International Development on March 8, International Women's Day, when we announced $650 million for women's and girls' sexual and reproductive health, including access to safe abortions. That is feminism in the world.

Mr. Speaker, we got elected on an ambitious platform to bring real change forward to Canadians. It included respecting Parliament and improving the way our institutions function. That is exactly what we are working hard to do by offering to take more questions every week as Prime Minister or by improving the accountability of this House by ensuring that we are lessening the use of prorogation and omnibus bills. We are making sure that nobody can do what Stephen Harper tried to do to Canadians for 10 years.The fact is that we are improving this democracy and we are glad to accept recommendations and suggestions from all members in this House.

Mr. Speaker, the defence minister's defence of this is that it was a mistake, except that does not hold water, and the reason why it does not hold water is because he repeated it more than once. That is not a mistake. That is a fabrication. Now he refuses to accept the accountability and the consequences of the fabrication he told.How can Canadians, how can the military, how can the Prime Minister trust the defence minister? If he is going to mislead on something this important, what else is he going to be misleading--

Mr. Speaker, our government is proud of Canada's energy industry, and we will promote its successes at every opportunity around the world. I was pleased to represent our government at the Bloomberg Future of Energy Summit in New York to reiterate the importance of energy trade, investment, and infrastructure between Canada and the United States. Our government supports greener ways to develop traditional sources of energy while at the same time increasing investments in clean technology. Our country will lead the energy conversation in the world now and in the years to come.

Mr. Speaker, I will answer the opposition member in the same manner.I am not here to make excuses. I am here to acknowledge my mistake, to be able to learn from it so I can continue to serve.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Marc-Aurèle-Fortin for the leadership he has shown in his community and for his work with the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities.National consultations will inform our country's first-ever poverty reduction strategy and help us build a fairer and more inclusive society. I encourage all members to contribute to creating our first poverty reduction strategy by holding consultations between now and June 30 so we can give all Canadians a real and fair chance to achieve their potential.

Mr. Speaker, most people learn that it is important to tell the truth before they turn 50. I am sure that many parents would like to wipe out their children's criminal record, like the Trudeau family did. However, most Canadians are not as well-heeled or connected as the Trudeau family. The Prime Minister could have offered pardons in his bill, but he did not. He could have decriminalized marijuana, but he refused. Why the double standard? Why is there one system for rich, well-heeled, well-connected families, and another for regular families?

Mr. Speaker, our government disagrees strongly with the punitive measures that were taken by the American government last week, and we understand that our first responsibility is to protect the workers and the producers and the communities that will be affected. We are having conversations with our provincial counterparts from every region of this country, to make sure that all governments work together to ensure that those who need protection will get it from us and our provincial counterparts.

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of National Defence concocted a tall tale. He fancies himself the architect of one of the most important battles of the entire war in Afghanistan. The quandary for the Liberal government is that the minister played no such role.Can the Prime Minister tell us whether he has called on his minister to explain this trumped up story? We want to know whether the Prime Minister has talked to him about this.

Mr. Speaker, during the election, we promised to bring real change to Parliament, and our objective has always been to make Parliament more effective, open, and transparent.We made specific commitments regarding the use of prorogation, the inappropriate use of omnibus bills, the strengthening of committees, the improvement of financial oversight, and greater accountability during question period. We are going to implement the promises that we made to Canadians. I encourage all members to take part in the conversation—

Mr. Speaker, Canadians expect two things from their Prime Minister. They expect him to stand up for the interests of Canadians, which I am doing, and for Canada's industry, workers, and economy. They also expect their Prime Minister to maintain a good working relationship with our neighbours to the south. That is exactly what I am doing. I spoke directly to the president several times last week about the importance of a positive relationship between our two countries and what we can do to make things better for the middle class and workers in both of our countries in the years to come.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in the House and correct the record, because when it comes to the ideas that we have shared with Canadians, when it comes to a prime minister's question period, that day would be in addition to the other days that the Prime Minister is in the House. This would hold the government to greater account. It would allow not just leaders of the opposition, but for private members to ask the Prime Minister questions directly. We have shown that this can work. It is not just about holding this government to account, it is about holding future governments to account. Let us be more open and more transparent, just like we committed to Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, the U.S. government just announced new tariffs to the tune of 20% on Canadian softwood lumber imports. The Prime Minister promised on March 10, 2016, that a new agreement would replace the one reached by the Harper government and that it would be concluded within 100 days. It has now been more than 400 days.The Liberals still do not have an agreement, jeopardizing the 370,000 direct and indirect jobs in Canada's forestry sector.Why is the government waiting and why did it wait to do something about this?

Mr. Speaker, it has come to light that the Minister of National Defence has misled Canadians once again, and this time it is a big one. He has not just embarrassed himself and the Prime Minister: he has violated a code of honour and ethics with the men and women in uniform he once served with. He has dishonoured himself, and in doing that, he has dishonoured them.Does the Prime Minister still have confidence in his Minister of National Defence?

Mr. Speaker, the government has embarked on a major transformational change in the law that will do a far better job than the old law in protecting our kids and keeping the proceeds of crime out of the hands of organized crime. That is a major undertaking. It is a process that will take time. We intend to reach that objective by the summer of next year. In the meantime, it is important for Canadians to respect the existing law, and we will examine every possible way to ensure that this transition is fair.

Mr. Speaker, during the election campaign, we committed to bringing real change to the way that this government will govern. This government committed to Canadians to listen and to engage them in the very real challenges they are facing. We will continue to do that. What is clear is that this place needs modernization. We can improve the way that we work together in the House of Commons. We know that is exactly what Canadians expect. I encourage all members to be part of that conversation and to really bring this place into the 21st century.

Mr. Speaker, the Liberal government's reluctance to demand better of the United Nations is unacceptable. Whether funding terror incitement in UNRWA schools, concealing votes for human rights abusers to the Human Rights Council, ignoring the anti-Semitic denial of Jerusalem's history by UNESCO, or now downplaying the election of Saudi Arabia to the status of women, all of this makes Canada complicit in the UN's dysfunction. Is there no end to the Prime Minister's willingness to pander to rights abusers in his indecent pursuit of a Security Council seat?

Mr. Speaker, I have quoted from the agreement numerous times, but I will now quote the head of the UNHCR in Canada, who said, “I really think that the conditions which prevailed at the time of the drafting and adoption of the safe third country agreement in 2004 are the same as [they are today], and...it will be difficult to change the policy...[that is] seen as a good co-operation, a good responsibility-sharing between two...systems [that have] the same values and the same procedural guarantees.” [...] “As far as the asylum system is concerned in the United States, legally speaking, we have not seen a change.”That is the UNHCR representative in Canada.

Mr. Speaker, Canadians deserve more open and transparent information about political fundraising. We will be bringing forward legislation to give Canadians information about fundraisers involving cabinet ministers, party leaders, and leadership contestants. Canadians will know about the events in advance, where they are being held, the cost to attend, and they will know who attended them.I note that the Liberal Party of Canada chose on its own to bring in open, transparent fundraising rules. I encourage all parties to be open and transparent when it comes to political fundraisers.

Mr. Speaker, the discussion paper that was offered to the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs to broaden the scope of this study was exactly that, to hear ideas and really bring this place into the 21st century. During the election campaign, we made commitments to Canadians. We are committed to delivering on those commitments. We will ensure that we modernize this place.

Mr. Speaker, this Liberal government is demonstrating an arrogance that has never before been seen in this House.For the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, discussing means imposing. Discussing means crushing the opposition. In order to show that the Liberals are all-powerful and allow the Prime Minister to show up in the House only once a week, she is once again proposing to unilaterally impose new rules.Is it because she herself no longer has any confidence in her own government that the leader wants to change rules that should not be changed without the unanimous consent of all members of the House?

Mr. Speaker, our men and women in uniform deserve a leader who does not waver from telling the truth, whose word is his bond. They deserve a leader who can be trusted every time, always. The minister has failed, so I ask him: does he really believe that our men and women in uniform deserve a defence minister who is willing to fabricate the truth in order to bolster his own record?

Was that about admitting and apologizing when an individual breaks a promise and they do not tell the truth, Mr. Speaker? In reality, the Prime Minister can answer all the questions he wants, when he wants, even though what he really wants is to have an excuse for being absent from the House of Commons. He is going to change the fundamental rules of Parliament just so he can have that excuse. How incredibly arrogant. It is contemptuous.Does the Prime Minister realize that, when he uses his majority to unilaterally impose changes to help himself, he is just Stephen Harper with a smile?

Mr. Speaker, let us look at the facts. The Minister of National Defence said that our allies were okay with pulling our jets out of the fight against ISIS, and that was not true. He said our air force does not have enough planes to do its job, but the air force commander said that was not true. Also, he misrepresented his military service. He took full credit and named himself the architect of the largest NATO operation since the Korean War, and that was not true.How much more does the Prime Minister need to hear before he understands why our men and women in uniform have lost confidence in the—

Mr. Speaker, as you know, during the election campaign we made commitments to Canadians. We made a commitment to modernize the way that this place works and to bring it into the 21st century. The discussion paper that I released was exactly that, a desire to have a discussion, a conversation, as to how we can make—

Mr. Speaker, the current approach to cannabis is simply not working. We are moving forward to ensure that we keep the profits out of the hands of criminals and cannabis out of the hands of young people. That is why we have moved forward and introduced Bill C-45 to legalize cannabis and strictly regulate and restrict access. We have had the benefit of speaking to many people in this regard, including the task force. We look forward to moving this piece of legislation forward. Simply decriminalizing will not achieve these objectives.

Mr. Speaker, Canadians deserve to know how political parties are funded. The Minister of Democratic Institutions is leading our government's efforts to bring a new level of openness and transparency to political fundraising. Could the Minister of Democratic Institutions update the House on the efforts to shed light on political funding?

Mr. Speaker, it is not just the military who find the Minister of National Defence's yarn about his fictional role in Afghanistan to be an embarrassment.We all know that the Liberals like to reference social media as a way to consult with Canadians. Well, Twitter was in a flurry over the weekend with the #[Minister of National Defence] Battles, mocking him relentlessly on his personal involvement in everything from the War of 1812 right up to the destruction of the Death Star.After hearing this kind of feedback from Canadians, would the Prime Minister not agree that the minister has lost all credibility?

Mr. Speaker, Manitoba has started to use a facility that is supposed to hold Canadian seniors as an emergency measure to deal with the huge influx of illegal border crossers. The community of Gretna, and the entire province, is furious, because the Liberal government is doing nothing to stop this problem.Given that the Manitoba government is now requesting millions of tax dollars to deal with this situation, will the Prime Minister close the loophole in the safe third country agreement, stop this problem, and ensure that asylum seekers enter Canada through legal means?

Mr. Speaker, let me clarify UN procedure. The United Nations Economic and Social Council chooses the members of its Commission on the Status of Women. Canada is presently not a member of this council and could not vote in this election. Saudi Arabia's regional candidacy was uncontested. Our government's position is clear. We will never hesitate to defend human rights, very much including women's rights.

Mr. Speaker, Canada and the U.S. enjoy the closest energy relationship in the world and the largest trading partnership of any two countries. Canada's Minister of Natural Resources participated in Bloomberg's Future of Energy Summit in New York recently and met with key U.S. representatives, industry and business leaders, and officials from leading American investment firms to promote Canada's energy sector. Could the minister please update the House on the outcome of that visit?

Mr. Speaker, it is without ambiguity that this government is committed, via the measures announced by the Prime Minister, via the creation of a ministerial working group, and via the deployment of all of the resources necessary and required to correct this very important problem, a problem that remains unacceptable for our public servants. What we will not do, like the previous government, is book $70 million in savings and fire 700 people to get a phony surplus for Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, the United Nations' well-tarnished reputation has been sullied yet again by the election of Saudi Arabia to the UN Commission on the Status of Women. Gender segregation forces Saudi women to submit to male guardianship for their entire lives. Women are banned from driving. Those who defy Saudi Arabia's second-class laws go to prison. Women can be stoned to death for adultery. There have been expressions of disgust and protest around the world, but Canada's self-proclaimed feminist Prime Minister has not uttered a peep. Might he be willing to explain why today?

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister took decisive action. The Prime Minister took decisive action in creating a committee of ministers to resolve the situation. We took decisive action by allocating the resources required to solve this thorny problem. It is unacceptable that public servants are going through this. We are going to fix the problem.

Mr. Speaker, yes, we will have to agree to wait.I wanted to ask the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development if he planned to evaluate the sale of Canam to American Industrial Partners, but I already got my answer. In fact, he will not be able to evaluate it, because the government changed the law.Basically, because the Liberals were sick of being harassed about the sale of leading Quebec companies, they decided to change the law, so there is no longer any problem; it is settled.Now we are stuck with the Canadian government's laissez-faire economic policies, which are dangerous for our economy.How many more flagship companies do we have to lose before the minister will admit that he made a big mistake by increasing the threshold—

Mr. Speaker, the minister made a mistake. He has admitted it and he has apologize for it. That is what Canadians expect from their leaders. It is what we expect from each other. That is exactly why I continue to have confidence in this minister, who has served this country in exemplary fashions as a police officer, as a soldier, and now as our Minister of National Defence.

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals say they wanted to have a supposed discussion on the Standing Orders, but it turns out that it was just a Trojan Horse for what they really wanted, for the Prime Minister to only have to show up once a week. Now they are trying to ram through changes to the House that they could make without amending the Standing Orders. Even the Liberal member for Malpeque said, “I strongly believe that you have to have at least consensus from the main parties to change the rules of the House.”If the Prime Minister will not listen to common sense on this side of the House, will he at least listen to reason from one of his own Liberal MPs?

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is today in this House breaching parliamentary tradition by refusing to answer questions. Stephen Harper took all questions every day during the Senate scandal. The Prime Minister wants to change the fundamental rules of Parliament in order to help himself. Why all of this? Well, because he says he values question period and accountability. That is why he wants to scrap it. If that is true, why does he not stand and start asking Canadians to listen to answers to some of our questions for once, instead of his usual platitudes or non-answers?

Mr. Speaker, for weeks the Prime Minister has claimed that the proposed changes to help Parliament work were just part of a discussion. The Liberals have just announced, as we predicted, that they will be unilaterally forcing through changes in order to help themselves. So much for discussion. The Prime Minister will try to defend this unprecedented, self-serving scheme by saying that they had no choice because it was in their electoral platform. On that basis, will 2015 be the last election under first past the post?

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister's mandate letter to the Minister of National Defence uses the word “honesty” at least eight times. Within the letter, it reads: Canadians expect us, in our work, to reflect the values we all embrace:...honesty.... ...Canadians need to have faith in their government's honesty.... We have committed to an...honest government that is accountable to Canadians.... ...you must uphold the highest standards of honesty.... ...it is important that your behaviour and decisions meet Canadians' well-founded expectations.... Will the Prime Minister admit that the Minister of National Defence has not lived up to the well-founded expectations of Canadians and remove him from office?

Mr. Speaker, no one will ever take away from the Minister of National Defence's actual service record, but people in the military have a name for what he did. It is called “stolen valour” when someone takes credit for the brave actions of another. What he did was wrong. Now he has lost the confidence of our men and women in uniform. They need to have confidence in their leaders, especially when they are putting their lives on the line.Will the Prime Minister remove the Minister of National Defence?

Mr. Speaker, it was the former Conservative government that allowed the agreement to expire. We are now dealing with the fifth softwood lumber dispute. Our workers and producers have never been found guilty. We strongly oppose the decision by the U.S. Department of Commerce to impose an unfair and punitive tax. The charges are unfounded. We will continue to raise this issue with the United States. I want to point out that we want a good agreement for Canada, not just any agreement.

Mr. Speaker, every time I have sat down with the American president, whether this one or the previous one, I would bring up the issues that matter to Canadians, including softwood lumber.This is an issue that has been going on for many decades, and we work very hard to ensure that we can come to an agreement that will help both workers and Canadians right across the country and our trade relationship with the United States and the world.

Mr. Speaker, the Government of Canada committed to developing a Canadian poverty reduction strategy. A consultation process was launched in February to give people the opportunity to discuss key poverty-related issues online and in person. My colleagues from Laval and I will be holding a public consultation to hear what our constituents have to say.Would the Minister of Families, Children and Social Development tell us what the deadline is for holding consultations?

A committee? Well, the problem must be solved, Mr. Speaker.It is interesting that the longer the Phoenix fiasco drags on, the fewer answers the government can give about when it is supposed to be resolved. Maybe that is because this broken system is actually making new victims every pay. If the Prime Minister cannot tell us when all the current cases will be resolved, can the Prime Minister at least tell us when it will stop creating new ones?

Mr. Speaker, it has been revealed that the Minister of National Defence misled Canadians once again.Not only did he embarrass himself and the Prime Minister, but he also breached the code of honour and ethics of the men and women in uniform with whom he served. He disgraced himself and dishonoured them. Does the Prime Minister still have confidence in his Minister of National Defence?

Mr. Speaker, the minister was caught claiming to be the architect of Operation Medusa. It was not a slip-up. It was intentional, because he got caught repeating the story. Canadians deserve to know. Why did the minister concoct this story, and how are Canadians supposed to trust this minister?

Mr. Speaker, as I stated, I have acknowledged my mistake. I am not here to make any excuses for it. I am owning it. I am learning from it. I will continue to work, learn from those lessons, and continue to work and serve the Canadian Armed Forces, the men and women who serve us.

Mr. Speaker, I have apologized for my mistake. I will be learning from this, owning the mistake, and not making any excuses for the mistake.

Mr. Speaker, during the campaign, we committed to—

Mr. Speaker, since becoming a politician, the Minister of National Defence has been misleading the House and resorting to “alternative facts”. He quickly became like one of those fake soldiers who puts on a uniform and pretends to be a soldier.His most recent feat was to take credit for being the brains behind Operation Medusa, when in fact he merely carried out orders. For this kind of offence, he would be guilty of violating section 129 of the Code of Service Discipline.When will he do the honourable thing and just tell the truth?

Mr. Speaker, how about the selling of those arms to Saudi Arabia? How is that helping women?The Prime Minister made a personal commitment to fix the Phoenix pay system fiasco. Tens of thousands of people are still waiting, and he is responsible for this file. There are mothers who have been waiting for their maternity benefits for months. Retirees are facing inhumane delays. Many people are receiving only a portion of their salaries. It is shameful.The Prime Minister said he would personally take care of it. Why is he refusing to take action?

Mr. Speaker, last week was a dark week for the over one million Canadians who are supported by Canada's forestry industry. The minister said that the U.S. trade action did not come as a surprise and that job losses are to be expected. Stories of work curtailment and mill closures are being heard right across our country. One small mill owner in my riding today is writing a cheque in the millions. He is not sure how much longer he can keep the doors open. The minister did not have answers last week, so I am asking the Prime Minister. Will he stand today and tell the hard-working forestry families what his plan is now that they are facing uncertain times?

Mr. Speaker, in heavy-handed tactics, last week President Trump signed an executive order imposing a massive, illegal, punitive tariff on Canadian softwood lumber. This action seemed to take the government and the Prime Minister completely by surprise, but if they were properly conducting diplomatic relations, they could have and should have seen this coming.My question for the Prime Minister is very specific. Did he personally raise this specific issue of softwood lumber when he met with Trump in Washington in February, yes or no? Did he talk about softwood?

Mr. Speaker, the minister makes it sound like Canadians are not generous if they simply stand up for their right to have our border integrity secured. Recent media reports have said that over half the illegal border crossers have serious criminal records. This puts the safety of the CBSA, RCMP, and community members in the area at risk. My question is very clear. There is a way we can stop this, and it is by closing the loophole in the safe third country agreement. Why has the minister failed to act?

Mr. Speaker, thank you for the opportunity to apologize for my mistake in describing my role. I retract that description and I am truly sorry for it. I in no way intended to diminish the great work that our men and women in the Canadian Armed Forces have done, and their superiors, and I am truly sorry for it.

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister dragged his feet on the softwood lumber file, which affects 200,000 families in our communities. He has no plan to compensate people for job losses. He has no plan to make Donald Trump back down. Instead, he has been trying to butter him up. Here is my question for the Prime Minister. Now that he has paid court to the U.S. president instead of standing up to him, does he think his approach to dealing with Donald Trump worked?

Mr. Speaker, it is well noted that the Prime Minister is refusing to respond to a party leader. This is a breach of parliamentary protocol and tradition. It is what happens when there is no possible answer to a Minister of National Defence who has told a whopper about his record. That is not something one would apologize for. It is something one has to step down for.

Mr. Speaker, last week the Prime Minister told a group of young Canadians that his father had used his connections to ensure that possession charges against his brother would “go away”. Now that the Prime Minister has had a chance to ensure that the arrests and criminal records stop for all families, he refuses to do so. The Prime Minister himself has admitted to smoking pot while he was a member of Parliament, so why the double standard? Why is there one set of rules for the Trudeau family and another for thousands of young and racialized Canadians who are still receiving criminal records for pot possession in Canada?

Mr. Speaker, the defence minister knows that there are consequences for being dishonest and untrustworthy under the military's code of conduct and ethics, and the defence minister understands that as a veteran. The minister's apology does not repair the damage he created. Canadians do not believe him. Our military does not trust him. How can the Prime Minister have any confidence in the minister?

Mr. Speaker, how many times has the minister said that fib over the last two years? Veterans are disgusted that the minister took credit for his role in the battlefield that involved hundreds of soldiers. That is valour stolen. The defence minister is now a laughingstock. His reputation is damaged beyond repair. Canadians do not believe him. The military does not trust him, and our allies are not going to take him seriously.How can the Prime Minister still have confidence in the defence minister?

Mr. Speaker, the minister has admitted to concocting stories about his service record. Now he says he is sorry, but only after he got caught. When did the minister decide it was acceptable to start making up stories about his service record? Why did he think it was acceptable to take credit for the work of others, and how are the military and Canadians supposed to have confidence in anything this minister says?

Amidst all this talk of growth and improvement, Mr. Speaker, we are dealing with yet another softwood lumber crisis, the fifth in 35 years.This is going to be really devastating for Quebec, our regions, our families, and our communities. Forestry workers know that they cannot count on the 40 Liberal MPs from Quebec, who have said nothing. How many sawmills will have to close their doors before the government wakes up?For the fifth time, is Ottawa going to abandon Quebec's forestry sector, or will it at the very least provide loan guarantees to help it get through this crisis?

Mr. Speaker, the Government of Canada disagrees with the decision by the U.S. Department of Commerce to impose unfair and punitive tariffs on Canadian softwood lumber.Earlier this year, I created a federal-provincial working group to support the forestry industry in this difficult period. We will continue to work with producers, workers, their families, and the provinces. Canadian workers can count on us.