Michael Cooper

St. Albert-Edmonton, AB - Conservative
Sentiment

Total speeches : 113
Positive speeches : 58
Negative speeches : 44
Neutral speeches : 11
Percentage negative : 38.94 %
Percentage positive : 51.33 %
Percentage neutral : 9.73 %

Most toxic speeches

1. Michael Cooper - 2018-05-22
Toxicity : 0.738868
Responsive image
This is pathetic, absolutely pathetic.
2. Michael Cooper - 2016-01-28
Toxicity : 0.475431
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the survivors of Graham James and other child sexual predators will never be able to forget the crimes inflicted upon them. We were reminded of that this week when Graham James was granted parole.Why is the government standing up for the rights of criminals like Graham James instead of their survivors?
3. Michael Cooper - 2018-04-19
Toxicity : 0.441214
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the criminal organization that Nick Chan is the head of is the so-called Fresh Off the Boat gang, a gang linked to more than a dozen murders.Today Calgary is a less safe place because Nick Chan is back out on the streets because this Minister of Justice has abdicated her responsibilities to deal with the backlog and get judges appointed.When is the minister going to stop making excuses and take responsibility for her negligence?
4. Michael Cooper - 2017-06-05
Toxicity : 0.440778
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, time and again, the Liberals place the rights of criminals first, whether it be opposing mandatory sentences for violent offenders or now putting the rights of sex offenders ahead of the rights of parents to know if one has moved in next door. Instead of worrying about sex offenders, why will the minister not do the right thing for once and put the rights of parents and the rights of children first?
5. Michael Cooper - 2018-10-05
Toxicity : 0.386678
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, Constable Sarah Beckett paid the ultimate sacrifice when she was killed in the line of duty by an impaired driver.This week her husband, Brad Aschenbrenner, spoke out against Bill C-75, which waters down sentences for impaired driving causing bodily harm.Will the Liberals listen to Sarah's husband and other victims, and remove from Bill C-75 the watering down of sentences for this serious crime?
6. Michael Cooper - 2017-10-20
Toxicity : 0.379295
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, sentences handed down for impaired driving causing death are an absolute joke, with offenders walking away with fines as low as $1,500. Instead of standing up for victims, Liberal MPs voted to defeat a Conservative amendment to Bill C-46 to provide for a five-year mandatory sentence for impaired drivers who kill. Why does the minister think it is okay for impaired drivers who kill to walk away with a slap on the wrist?
7. Michael Cooper - 2019-02-28
Toxicity : 0.3749
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister and top PMO officials repeatedly allowed political considerations to trump the rule of law. Gerald Butts said, “there is no solution here that does not involve some interference.” Katie Telford said, “we don’t want to debate legalities anymore.” This is shocking. Canadians deserve to hear the full truth, so why does the Prime Minister not simply let her speak?
8. Michael Cooper - 2016-04-11
Toxicity : 0.373208
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, in attending this fundraising event, the minister broke the Prime Minister's code of open and accountable government and the minister crossed the line by putting herself in a conflict of interest. In order to clear the stench from this sordid Liberal fundraising affair, will the minister release the list of attendees? If not, what does the minister have to hide?
9. Michael Cooper - 2018-09-27
Toxicity : 0.372368
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice shamefully scolded 9/11 widow Maureen Basnicki for understandably criticizing the current government's $10.5-million payout to al Qaeda terrorist Omar Khadr. He even went so far as to compare Maureen's husband, a victim of terrorism, with the convicted terrorist Khadr. Will the parliamentary secretary stand in his place and apologize to Maureen Basnicki?
10. Michael Cooper - 2017-02-22
Toxicity : 0.369146
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, last week, child killer and triple murderer Douglas Garland was sentenced to life in prison. Thanks to consecutive sentencing passed by the previous Conservative government, he will not be eligible for parole for 75 years.Since the Prime Minister will not, will the Minister of Justice assure Canadians that consecutive sentencing for multiple murderers will not be gutted by the Liberals' so-called Criminal Code review, yes or no?
11. Michael Cooper - 2019-04-04
Toxicity : 0.365507
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, that answer is an absolute insult to Canadians. It is no coincidence that the leak occurred on the eve of the release of damning evidence submitted by the former attorney general to the justice committee. It was a clear attempt to undermine the credibility of the former attorney general, and it demonstrates that the Prime Minister will go to no end to obstruct justice.Again, who leaked the information? Was it Gerry Butts?
12. Michael Cooper - 2017-10-16
Toxicity : 0.359679
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Justice claims to support mandatory sentences for serious offences. However, Liberal MPs voted to defeat a Conservative amendment to Bill C-46 to provide for a five-year mandatory sentence for impaired drivers who kill. Was the minister insincere when she claimed that she supports mandatory sentences for serious offences or does the minister believe that impaired driving causing death is not a serious offence?
13. Michael Cooper - 2016-11-01
Toxicity : 0.321666
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, while the Minister of Justice says that legislation to roll back mandatory sentences is coming soon, the minister has yet to say which mandatory sentences she has a problem with. Is it the mandatory jail term for selling drugs near a school or for child pornography; is it the mandatory jail term for drive-by shootings; or perhaps it is the mandatory jail term for murder? Can the minister stand in her place and explain just which of these mandatory sentences she has a problem with?
14. Michael Cooper - 2017-06-06
Toxicity : 0.321508
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the government is considering shutting down a publicly accessible registry for high-risk sex offenders.High-risk sex offenders are the worst of the worst and pose the greatest risk to our children. Every parent has a right to know if one of these predators is moving into his or her neighbourhood. Shutting down this registry would be nothing short of outrageous.Why would the government be making it more difficult for parents to keep their kids safe by shutting down this registry?
15. Michael Cooper - 2018-05-29
Toxicity : 0.321437
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, while the Liberals have failed to appoint a victims' ombudsman after six months, when the prisoners' ombudsman position became vacant, they filled it immediately. When it comes to filling a position to protect the rights of criminals, the Liberals could not move fast enough. However, when it comes to filling a position to protect the rights of victims, the Liberals are AWOL. Why do the Liberals always put the rights of criminals ahead of victims?
16. Michael Cooper - 2017-06-05
Toxicity : 0.32141
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, every parent deserves the right to know when a high-risk sex offender moves into his or her neighbourhood. However, unbelievably, the Minister of Public Safety is considering scrapping a publicly accessible sex offender registry out of concern for, get this, the rights of high-risk sex offenders. How, in good conscience, can the Minister of Public Safety stand in the way of the right of parents to know when a high-risk sex offender moves in next door?
17. Michael Cooper - 2019-04-02
Toxicity : 0.31931
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals shut down the justice committee. They shut down the ethics committee. They have refused a public inquiry. They have blocked key documents from the media. Through it all, the Prime Minister has repeatedly changed his story.When will the Prime Minister end the charade, come clean, tell the truth and end the cover-up?
18. Michael Cooper - 2017-05-31
Toxicity : 0.315734
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Justice continues to sit on her hands with a near record number of judicial vacancies. Meanwhile, another day and another murder case has been thrown out of court, this time in Montreal, and all the minister can do is pat herself on the back. The minister's indifference to this crisis is nothing short of appalling, and the minister's inaction is nothing short of negligent.How many more victims are going to be denied justice because of the minister's negligence?
19. Michael Cooper - 2019-02-19
Toxicity : 0.309002
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, former attorney general of Ontario Michael Bryant stated that allegations involving top PMO officials, including Gerald Butts, are “the kind of allegations that can lead to criminal investigations.”Canadians deserve answers, not a PMO-driven cover-up. Once again, will the Prime Minister stop the cover-up and allow Butts and the former attorney general the opportunity to speak so that Canadians can get the answers they deserve—yes or no?
20. Michael Cooper - 2019-02-07
Toxicity : 0.293175
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, The Globe and Mail article raises serious allegations against the PMO about trying to politically intervene in the criminal prosecution of SNC-Lavelin, thereby interfering with the independence of the Public Prosecution Service of Canada.We all know what happened next. The Prime Minister fired the former attorney general, because, as she said, she “spoke truth to power”.Did the Prime Minister fire the former attorney general because she refused to do his dirty work, yes or no?
21. Michael Cooper - 2016-02-05
Toxicity : 0.284514
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the government wants to eliminate mandatory minimums for repeat and violent offenders. Now the Minister of Public Safety has said that the government wants to make it easier to hand out pardons to convicted criminals. Therefore, are there any criminals out there that the government does not want to go easy on?
22. Michael Cooper - 2015-12-10
Toxicity : 0.281371
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the previous Conservative government did everything in its justice legislation to protect victims and hold violent criminals accountable for their crimes. The Liberal government, on the other hand, wants to go easy on violent criminals by eliminating mandatory minimums.Why does the government insist on giving violent criminals a break?
23. Michael Cooper - 2017-04-10
Toxicity : 0.278354
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, instead of patting herself on the back, the minister should be ashamed of herself.There are nearly 60 judicial vacancies across Canada. Since coming to office, the minister has appointed only three judges in the province of Quebec, leaving multiple vacancies. Meanwhile, more than 800 criminal cases in the province of Quebec are at risk of being thrown out of court. If the minister will not do her job, then will she get out of the way so that someone else can?
24. Michael Cooper - 2016-09-27
Toxicity : 0.278146
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Justice has said that the government will support our Conservative opposition motion calling on the government to respect Atlantic Canadian representation on the Supreme Court, but the minister has refused to actually confirm that the government will appoint an Atlantic Canadian.Will the minister confirm that the government will appoint an Atlantic Canadian to fill the vacancy of Justice Cromwell, or is this just another example of the Liberals saying one thing and doing another?
25. Michael Cooper - 2016-12-12
Toxicity : 0.270399
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the minister has said that Wynn's law is unnecessary because measures in the bill are already in place. For Constable David Wynn, clearly those measures were not good enough.Why will the minister not do the right thing and close this loophole in the Criminal Code? Why will the minister not support Wynn's law so that what happened to Constable Wynn never happens again?
26. Michael Cooper - 2018-10-03
Toxicity : 0.259686
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, for weeks, the Minister of Public Safety has tried to pass the buck over the outrageous decision to transfer child killer Terri-Lynne McClintic to a healing lodge. However, no matter how hard the minister tries to avoid taking responsibility, the buck stops with him. He has the authority to reverse the decision. He has the authority to put McClintic back where she belongs, behind bars. Why will he not?
27. Michael Cooper - 2016-02-05
Toxicity : 0.25863
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Public Safety characterized changes brought in by the previous Conservative government to prevent child sexual predators from ever receiving a pardon as ideological. Will anyone on the government side stand and tell the victims of child sexual abuse what is ideological about ensuring that those who commit the most heinous crimes against children will never again be able to walk our streets and communities in anonymity?
28. Michael Cooper - 2017-05-15
Toxicity : 0.257664
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, in opposing Wynn's law, the Liberals have argued that presenting the criminal history of bail applicants will make bail hearings less efficient. The bail hearing of Constable Wynn's killer was very efficient, but it had fatal consequences. Why would the Liberals put so-called efficiency over ensuring all evidence about the criminal history of bail applicants is before the courts so what happened to Constable Wynn never happens again?
29. Michael Cooper - 2018-04-23
Toxicity : 0.255365
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, Nick Chan was charged with first degree murder, conspiracy to commit murder, and directing a criminal organization.Today, he is a free man, after the charges were thrown out of court due to delay because of the justice minister's negligence. The minister has failed to fill nine out of 10 new judicial spots to deal with the backlog in Alberta's courts.In light of that, what excuses will the minister give to this criminal's next victims?
30. Michael Cooper - 2016-09-22
Toxicity : 0.254524
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the Liberal Supreme Court appointment process is an insult to Atlantic Canada. The Liberals are upending a 141-year constitutional convention guaranteeing Atlantic Canadian representation on the court.Of the 32 Liberal MPs from Atlantic Canada, is there not one who is prepared to stand up against this Liberal attempt to shut out Atlantic Canada?
31. Michael Cooper - 2016-10-17
Toxicity : 0.253002
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, serious criminal cases have been thrown out of court as a result of the failure of the Minister of Justice to fill judicial vacancies. Now, in Alberta, a case involving the most serious offence, a first degree murder, was thrown out of court.How many more cases is the Minister of Justice prepared to see thrown out of court before she does her job and starts appointing judges?
32. Michael Cooper - 2019-02-25
Toxicity : 0.246449
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister conspired to stop the criminal trial of a company charged with bribery. Canadians deserve transparency. Canadians deserve answers about the Prime Minister's involvement in this sordid affair. Again, what did the Prime Minister say to Wernick that prompted him to pick up the phone and call the former attorney general to check in on the SNC-Lavalin matter? What did he say?
33. Michael Cooper - 2017-02-07
Toxicity : 0.245304
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Justice has lamely tried to justify the Liberals' opposition to Wynn's law on the basis that it was not recommended in the Alberta bail review. Jonathan Denis, Alberta's former justice minister who ordered the review, says that Wynn's law actually complements the review, a review that was limited to provincial jurisdiction.Now that the minister's lame excuse has clearly been debunked by the very minister who ordered the review, will she do the right thing and support Wynn's law?
34. Michael Cooper - 2018-04-17
Toxicity : 0.242834
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, today in Calgary, first degree murder charges involving notorious gang leader Nick Chan were thrown out of court due to delay. A year and a half ago, 10 new judicial spots were established to deal with the backlog in Alberta's courts. A year and a half later, the Minister of Justice has managed to fill just one of these vacancies. Clearly, the minister is not doing her job.Will she take responsibility for the release of this dangerous criminal?
35. Michael Cooper - 2018-12-13
Toxicity : 0.233471
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, Shawn Rehn murdered Constable David Wynn while out on bail because his extensive criminal history was not presented at the bail hearing. Now, due to a loophole with the Liberals' judicial referral hearing process, it could not be presented because it would not be entered into CPIC, the national police database, in the first place. I wrote to the Minister of Justice about this issue. What action is the minister taking to close this dangerous loophole?
36. Michael Cooper - 2017-04-07
Toxicity : 0.233345
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, as dozens of serious criminal cases involving murder, sexual assault, and child abuse are being thrown out of court due to delay, the Minister of Justice continues to sit on her hands when it comes to appointing judges. We have nearly 60 judicial vacancies. The minister has appointed a measly six judges this year. With all of these cases being thrown out of court, is the minister's inaction due to incompetence or is it actually part of the Liberals' soft on crime agenda?
37. Michael Cooper - 2017-06-02
Toxicity : 0.231079
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, every day accused criminals are being set free due to court delays. A father accused of breaking his infant's ankles was set free. A man accused of shooting an Ottawa area man twice in the head was set free.The Minister of Justice said that she is proud of her record. How can the minister possibly be proud of her record of negligence in failing to fill judicial vacancies, which has resulted in accused criminals like these being set free?
38. Michael Cooper - 2017-12-07
Toxicity : 0.227333
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance misled Canadians that his assets were in a blind trust when they were not. He hid from the Ethics Commissioner an offshore company. He is under investigation as we speak. To top it off, he refuses to disclose assets in multiple numbered companies.With a record like that, there is only one thing left for the minister to do, and that is resign. Why will he not?
39. Michael Cooper - 2017-02-14
Toxicity : 0.227311
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, instead of blaming mandatory minimums for a delay, the minister should look in the mirror, because it is this minister who has failed to appoint judges in a timely manner, which has resulted in serious criminal cases being thrown out. Murder cases are being thrown out. Sexual assault cases are being thrown out. Yesterday charges against a father accused of breaking the ankles of his infant were thrown out. We have dozens of judicial vacancies. How many more cases are going to be thrown out before the minister starts doing her job?
40. Michael Cooper - 2016-11-22
Toxicity : 0.227223
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Justice has said that she has a problem with mandatory jail sentences passed by the previous Conservative government.The previous Conservative government passed mandatory jail sentences for child sexual predators. In light of the Prime Minister's defence of the disturbing decision of an Ontario Superior Court judge to throw out a mandatory jail sentence involving sexual interference involving a minor, would the Minister of Justice stand in her place and assure Canadians that the government will not repeal mandatory jail—
41. Michael Cooper - 2019-02-07
Toxicity : 0.225712
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, today The Globe and Mail reported that the former minister of justice was pressured by officials in the PMO to politically intervene in the criminal prosecution of SNC-Lavalin. Was the former minister of justice fired by the Prime Minister because she refused to do his dirty work? Did she pay the price for his mistakes?
42. Michael Cooper - 2017-04-10
Toxicity : 0.220264
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, last week, charges against a Quebec man accused of murdering his wife were thrown out of court due to delay. For months the Minister of Justice has been aware of the urgent need to fill judicial vacancies to prevent more cases from being thrown out of court, and for months the minister has abdicated her responsibility to fill judicial vacancies in a timely manner.How many more accused killers will walk free before the minister starts doing her job?
43. Michael Cooper - 2018-05-24
Toxicity : 0.219916
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the Chinese communist regime is bullying and threatening airlines, including Air Canada, with the outrageous demand that they change their designation from “Taiwan” to “Taiwan, China”. The U.S. administration has rightfully called these demands Orwellian. By contrast, the Liberals have been silent in the face of a foreign government dictating terms to a Canadian company. When will the Liberals stand up to Beijing's bullying?
44. Michael Cooper - 2016-09-26
Toxicity : 0.214151
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, while the minister from Nova Scotia has been busy attacking the independence of the Supreme Court, the minister for Atlantic Canada—where is he from again? Oh, yes, Mississauga. The minister for Atlantic Canada from Mississauga has been silent in standing up for Atlantic Canadian representation on the Supreme Court, as have all 32 Liberal MPs from Atlantic Canada. When will the minister for Atlantic Canada from Ontario break his silence and stand up for Atlantic Canada?
45. Michael Cooper - 2017-05-10
Toxicity : 0.213142
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the Liberals voted to defeat Wynn's law at committee thereby refusing to close a loophole that cost Constable Wynn his life. Can the Prime Minister tell Shelly MacInnis-Wynn, the widow of Constable David Wynn, why he thinks it is okay for prosecutors to withhold the criminal history of bail applicants like the career criminal who murdered Constable David Wynn?
46. Michael Cooper - 2019-02-06
Toxicity : 0.212795
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, Ana Mae is a constituent of mine who works hard, but is struggling to get by. She earns $15.50 at a fast-food restaurant. Contrary to the Prime Minister's insulting assertion that low-income Canadians do not pay taxes, Ana Mae pays federal income tax, CPP, EI and the GST.Will the millionaire Prime Minister, with his vast family fortune, look Ana Mae in the eye and tell her that she does not pay taxes?
47. Michael Cooper - 2017-01-30
Toxicity : 0.211675
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister incredibly said that he was at a disadvantage when it came to learning the facts about Wynn's law.Do members know who was at a disadvantage? It was Constable Wynn. He was at a disadvantage when he was shot and killed by someone who should not have been on the streets and would not have been on the streets had Wynn's law been the law.Now that the Prime Minister is in the loop, will he do the right thing and pass Wynn's law?
48. Michael Cooper - 2016-12-12
Toxicity : 0.209467
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, Wynn's law closes a loophole in the Criminal Code by requiring prosecutors to disclose the criminal history of bail applicants. For Constable David Wynn, this loophole proved fatal after his killer was let out on bail because his extensive criminal history was not disclosed. Given that the minister opposes closing this loophole, will the minister say when exactly it is okay for someone to be let out on bail and on to the streets without their criminal history being disclosed?
49. Michael Cooper - 2017-11-03
Toxicity : 0.209119
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the finance minister misled Canadians by hiding his assets from the Ethics Commissioner. He made millions off the company he regulates. He broke the law. Now he is hiding from Canadians his assets in multiple numbered companies.What does this minister have to hide? Why will he not disclose his assets?
50. Michael Cooper - 2016-03-10
Toxicity : 0.208354
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada has a duty to stand up and defend the laws of the land. In at least five cases Ontario judges have given extra credits to convicted criminals, in direct contravention of the proof in sentencing act. When will the minister finally stand up for victims by standing up for the proof in sentencing act, instead of just standing up for convicted criminals?

Most negative speeches

1. Michael Cooper - 2018-05-22
Polarity : -1
Responsive image
This is pathetic, absolutely pathetic.
2. Michael Cooper - 2019-02-06
Polarity : -0.430556
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, Ana Mae is a constituent of mine who works hard, but is struggling to get by. She earns $15.50 at a fast-food restaurant. Contrary to the Prime Minister's insulting assertion that low-income Canadians do not pay taxes, Ana Mae pays federal income tax, CPP, EI and the GST.Will the millionaire Prime Minister, with his vast family fortune, look Ana Mae in the eye and tell her that she does not pay taxes?
3. Michael Cooper - 2016-04-13
Polarity : -0.366667
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, while the Minister of Justice attends pay-to-play fundraisers, the minister has been AWOL in fulfilling her responsibilities as minister. After nearly six months, the minister has yet to make a judicial appointment, creating a situation that the Chief Justice of Alberta has called “desperate”. When will the Minister of Justice stop attending pay-to-play fundraisers and start appointing desperately needed judges, or is the minister taking applications at the fundraisers?
4. Michael Cooper - 2019-04-04
Polarity : -0.335
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals have demonstrated their complete contempt for the rule of law. In another shocking display, they have attacked the independence of the judiciary by leaking highly confidential information about a respected jurist and his application to sit on the Supreme Court, all part of a desperate effort to change the channel on the Prime Minister's corruption.Who leaked the information?
5. Michael Cooper - 2018-10-03
Polarity : -0.298611
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, for weeks, the Minister of Public Safety has tried to pass the buck over the outrageous decision to transfer child killer Terri-Lynne McClintic to a healing lodge. However, no matter how hard the minister tries to avoid taking responsibility, the buck stops with him. He has the authority to reverse the decision. He has the authority to put McClintic back where she belongs, behind bars. Why will he not?
6. Michael Cooper - 2015-12-10
Polarity : -0.294048
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the previous Conservative government did everything in its justice legislation to protect victims and hold violent criminals accountable for their crimes. The Liberal government, on the other hand, wants to go easy on violent criminals by eliminating mandatory minimums.Why does the government insist on giving violent criminals a break?
7. Michael Cooper - 2018-05-24
Polarity : -0.28125
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the Chinese communist regime is bullying and threatening airlines, including Air Canada, with the outrageous demand that they change their designation from “Taiwan” to “Taiwan, China”. The U.S. administration has rightfully called these demands Orwellian. By contrast, the Liberals have been silent in the face of a foreign government dictating terms to a Canadian company. When will the Liberals stand up to Beijing's bullying?
8. Michael Cooper - 2019-02-07
Polarity : -0.2
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, today The Globe and Mail reported that the former minister of justice was pressured by officials in the PMO to politically intervene in the criminal prosecution of SNC-Lavalin. Was the former minister of justice fired by the Prime Minister because she refused to do his dirty work? Did she pay the price for his mistakes?
9. Michael Cooper - 2017-05-15
Polarity : -0.191667
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, in opposing Wynn's law, the Liberals have argued that presenting the criminal history of bail applicants will make bail hearings less efficient. The bail hearing of Constable Wynn's killer was very efficient, but it had fatal consequences. Why would the Liberals put so-called efficiency over ensuring all evidence about the criminal history of bail applicants is before the courts so what happened to Constable Wynn never happens again?
10. Michael Cooper - 2016-12-12
Polarity : -0.183333
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, Wynn's law closes a loophole in the Criminal Code by requiring prosecutors to disclose the criminal history of bail applicants. For Constable David Wynn, this loophole proved fatal after his killer was let out on bail because his extensive criminal history was not disclosed. Given that the minister opposes closing this loophole, will the minister say when exactly it is okay for someone to be let out on bail and on to the streets without their criminal history being disclosed?
11. Michael Cooper - 2016-05-16
Polarity : -0.170417
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, last week, Chief Justice Wittmann said this of the judicial vacancy crisis, “Sooner or later there's going to be a serious delay in a serious offence, by that I mean a violent crime.”This week we find out that at least two sexual assault cases in Alberta will likely be thrown out of court due to delay.When will the minister stop dithering, stop the delay, and start appointing judges?
12. Michael Cooper - 2017-05-15
Polarity : -0.167857
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, opposing Wynn's law and disrespecting victims is the Liberal record. Wayne Petherbridge, whose son was brutally murdered, wrote to the minister last September to raise substantive issues around sentencing. Eight months later, aside from receiving an insulting email that the minister receives many emails, he has heard absolutely nothing from the minister.When is the minister going to finally start respecting victims instead of just ignoring them?
13. Michael Cooper - 2017-10-16
Polarity : -0.166667
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Justice claims to support mandatory sentences for serious offences. However, Liberal MPs voted to defeat a Conservative amendment to Bill C-46 to provide for a five-year mandatory sentence for impaired drivers who kill. Was the minister insincere when she claimed that she supports mandatory sentences for serious offences or does the minister believe that impaired driving causing death is not a serious offence?
14. Michael Cooper - 2016-12-12
Polarity : -0.152857
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the minister has said that Wynn's law is unnecessary because measures in the bill are already in place. For Constable David Wynn, clearly those measures were not good enough.Why will the minister not do the right thing and close this loophole in the Criminal Code? Why will the minister not support Wynn's law so that what happened to Constable Wynn never happens again?
15. Michael Cooper - 2016-12-05
Polarity : -0.15
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, Wynn's law would require prosecutors to disclose the criminal history of bail applicants, closing a loophole that cost Constable David Wynn his life. The Minister of Justice opposes this common sense legislation.Will the minister tell Shelley Wynn, the widow of Constable Wynn, why she thinks it is okay for individuals to be let out on bail without their criminal history being disclosed? Why is the minister opposed to closing the loophole that cost Constable Wynn his life?
16. Michael Cooper - 2018-04-18
Polarity : -0.144413
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, yesterday, first-degree murder charges against notorious gang leader Nick Chan were thrown out of court due to delay. The Minister of Justice claims that she is appointing judges, but after a year and a half, only one out of 10 new judicial spots created to stem the backlog in Alberta's courts has been filled. This is worse than inaction. This is negligence.Will the minister take responsibility for the release of this dangerous criminal?
17. Michael Cooper - 2018-10-05
Polarity : -0.138492
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, Constable Sarah Beckett paid the ultimate sacrifice when she was killed in the line of duty by an impaired driver.This week her husband, Brad Aschenbrenner, spoke out against Bill C-75, which waters down sentences for impaired driving causing bodily harm.Will the Liberals listen to Sarah's husband and other victims, and remove from Bill C-75 the watering down of sentences for this serious crime?
18. Michael Cooper - 2018-12-13
Polarity : -0.129167
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, Shawn Rehn murdered Constable David Wynn while out on bail because his extensive criminal history was not presented at the bail hearing. Now, due to a loophole with the Liberals' judicial referral hearing process, it could not be presented because it would not be entered into CPIC, the national police database, in the first place. I wrote to the Minister of Justice about this issue. What action is the minister taking to close this dangerous loophole?
19. Michael Cooper - 2016-09-26
Polarity : -0.125
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, just about everyone has criticized the Liberal appointment process to shut out Atlantic Canada, from academics and lawyers to the Canadian Bar Association, to first nation leaders, and the process is being challenged in court as we speak. When will the minister get the message and reverse this objectionable constitutionally questionable appointment process to shut out Atlantic Canada?
20. Michael Cooper - 2019-02-07
Polarity : -0.123333
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, The Globe and Mail article raises serious allegations against the PMO about trying to politically intervene in the criminal prosecution of SNC-Lavelin, thereby interfering with the independence of the Public Prosecution Service of Canada.We all know what happened next. The Prime Minister fired the former attorney general, because, as she said, she “spoke truth to power”.Did the Prime Minister fire the former attorney general because she refused to do his dirty work, yes or no?
21. Michael Cooper - 2017-03-09
Polarity : -0.120833
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, Canadians courts are at a tipping point, prosecutors are dropping serious criminal cases because they lack resources to meet deadlines, and the Minister of Justice has failed to fill more than 60 judicial vacancies, resulting in serious criminal cases being thrown out of court.Could the minister tell us how many cases are going to be thrown out of court before she finally gets her act together and starts appointing judges?
22. Michael Cooper - 2017-02-06
Polarity : -0.117188
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister promised an open appointment process. In that spirit of openness, the Minister of Justice has appointed guess who to the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal. It is none other than her former chief of staff. By openness, did the Prime Minister mean open to Liberals and closed to everyone else? Or is this just another Liberal promise made and another Liberal promise broken?
23. Michael Cooper - 2019-02-25
Polarity : -0.116667
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister conspired to stop the criminal trial of a company charged with bribery. Canadians deserve transparency. Canadians deserve answers about the Prime Minister's involvement in this sordid affair. Again, what did the Prime Minister say to Wernick that prompted him to pick up the phone and call the former attorney general to check in on the SNC-Lavalin matter? What did he say?
24. Michael Cooper - 2018-04-17
Polarity : -0.107997
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, today in Calgary, first degree murder charges involving notorious gang leader Nick Chan were thrown out of court due to delay. A year and a half ago, 10 new judicial spots were established to deal with the backlog in Alberta's courts. A year and a half later, the Minister of Justice has managed to fill just one of these vacancies. Clearly, the minister is not doing her job.Will she take responsibility for the release of this dangerous criminal?
25. Michael Cooper - 2017-03-07
Polarity : -0.1
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, today I had the honour to stand with Constable Wynn's widow, who was in Ottawa to talk about the importance of Wynn's law. Wynn's law would close a loophole in the Criminal Code that helped cost Constable Wynn his life. I know that the Minister of Justice met with Ms. MacInnis-Wynn, and I thank her for that. However, since the minister opposes Wynn's law, could the minister explain just when it is okay for the criminal history of a bail applicant not to be disclosed?
26. Michael Cooper - 2017-05-10
Polarity : -0.1
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the Liberals voted to defeat Wynn's law at committee thereby refusing to close a loophole that cost Constable Wynn his life. Can the Prime Minister tell Shelly MacInnis-Wynn, the widow of Constable David Wynn, why he thinks it is okay for prosecutors to withhold the criminal history of bail applicants like the career criminal who murdered Constable David Wynn?
27. Michael Cooper - 2017-04-07
Polarity : -0.0944444
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, as dozens of serious criminal cases involving murder, sexual assault, and child abuse are being thrown out of court due to delay, the Minister of Justice continues to sit on her hands when it comes to appointing judges. We have nearly 60 judicial vacancies. The minister has appointed a measly six judges this year. With all of these cases being thrown out of court, is the minister's inaction due to incompetence or is it actually part of the Liberals' soft on crime agenda?
28. Michael Cooper - 2017-10-23
Polarity : -0.075
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance cannot be trusted. For two years, he misled Canadians into believing he had placed millions of dollars of shares in Morneau Shepell into a blind trust. He did not. Instead he made millions off a company that he regulates as Finance Minister. In light of that record of deception, why should Canadians believe the minister when he says he is not hiding other conflicts of interest in eight numbered companies that he owns?
29. Michael Cooper - 2017-02-22
Polarity : -0.0733333
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, last week, child killer and triple murderer Douglas Garland was sentenced to life in prison. Thanks to consecutive sentencing passed by the previous Conservative government, he will not be eligible for parole for 75 years.Since the Prime Minister will not, will the Minister of Justice assure Canadians that consecutive sentencing for multiple murderers will not be gutted by the Liberals' so-called Criminal Code review, yes or no?
30. Michael Cooper - 2016-02-24
Polarity : -0.06
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, last month I urged the Prime Minister to stand up for Canadian families who have been waiting too long to bring adopted children home from the DRC by calling President Kabila and asking for 16 exit visas.No phone call has been made, and no progress has been made, despite the fact that this past week, the DRC issued exit visas to American and European adopted children.To the Prime Minister: Will you pick up the phone and call President Kabila?
31. Michael Cooper - 2017-02-07
Polarity : -0.0595238
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Justice has lamely tried to justify the Liberals' opposition to Wynn's law on the basis that it was not recommended in the Alberta bail review. Jonathan Denis, Alberta's former justice minister who ordered the review, says that Wynn's law actually complements the review, a review that was limited to provincial jurisdiction.Now that the minister's lame excuse has clearly been debunked by the very minister who ordered the review, will she do the right thing and support Wynn's law?
32. Michael Cooper - 2016-04-12
Polarity : -0.05
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the independence of the Minister of Justice has been compromised and her credibility is in tatters as she tries to justify her attendance at the pay-to-play fundraiser. If everything is above board and the minister has nothing to hide, will she release the list of attendees, yes or no?
33. Michael Cooper - 2019-02-27
Polarity : -0.0482143
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the former attorney general wrote to the chair of the justice committee to indicate that the Prime Minister's order in council “falls short of what is required” in terms of sharing all relevant information. The Prime Minister has just a little over an hour. If he truly has nothing to hide, then why will he not simply lift all solicitor-client privilege and cabinet confidentiality? What is he afraid of?
34. Michael Cooper - 2016-11-01
Polarity : -0.04
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, while the Minister of Justice says that legislation to roll back mandatory sentences is coming soon, the minister has yet to say which mandatory sentences she has a problem with. Is it the mandatory jail term for selling drugs near a school or for child pornography; is it the mandatory jail term for drive-by shootings; or perhaps it is the mandatory jail term for murder? Can the minister stand in her place and explain just which of these mandatory sentences she has a problem with?
35. Michael Cooper - 2019-02-28
Polarity : -0.03
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister and top PMO officials repeatedly allowed political considerations to trump the rule of law. Gerald Butts said, “there is no solution here that does not involve some interference.” Katie Telford said, “we don’t want to debate legalities anymore.” This is shocking. Canadians deserve to hear the full truth, so why does the Prime Minister not simply let her speak?
36. Michael Cooper - 2016-03-10
Polarity : -0.03
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada has a duty to stand up and defend the laws of the land. In at least five cases Ontario judges have given extra credits to convicted criminals, in direct contravention of the proof in sentencing act. When will the minister finally stand up for victims by standing up for the proof in sentencing act, instead of just standing up for convicted criminals?
37. Michael Cooper - 2018-04-23
Polarity : -0.0265152
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, Nick Chan was charged with first degree murder, conspiracy to commit murder, and directing a criminal organization.Today, he is a free man, after the charges were thrown out of court due to delay because of the justice minister's negligence. The minister has failed to fill nine out of 10 new judicial spots to deal with the backlog in Alberta's courts.In light of that, what excuses will the minister give to this criminal's next victims?
38. Michael Cooper - 2017-06-06
Polarity : -0.025496
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the government is considering shutting down a publicly accessible registry for high-risk sex offenders.High-risk sex offenders are the worst of the worst and pose the greatest risk to our children. Every parent has a right to know if one of these predators is moving into his or her neighbourhood. Shutting down this registry would be nothing short of outrageous.Why would the government be making it more difficult for parents to keep their kids safe by shutting down this registry?
39. Michael Cooper - 2017-06-14
Polarity : -0.025
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, in minutes, this House will vote on a Liberal motion to defeat Wynn's law, a law that would close a Criminal Code loophole that cost the life of Constable Wynn. Wynn's law would simply require prosecutors to lead evidence of the criminal history of bail applicants so that what happened to Constable Wynn never happens again. How in good conscience can the Liberals oppose this?
40. Michael Cooper - 2016-05-10
Polarity : -0.0238095
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, it has been six months since the Minister of Justice was appointed, and in that time, the minister has found plenty of time to attend pay-to-play fundraisers, but has not found the time to appoint a single judge. This at a time when our courts face an unprecedented backlog. All the minister can say is that she will get around to it.When will the minister stop fundraising and start appointing desperately needed judges?
41. Michael Cooper - 2019-02-19
Polarity : -0.00641026
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, last week, Liberals on the justice committee did the PMO's bidding by voting against calling key witnesses, including Gerald Butts, the Prime Minister's top political adviser, as well as the former attorney general.Allegations that the former attorney general was pressed by officials in the PMO to interfere in a criminal prosecution are as serious as they get. Will the Prime Minister stop the cover-up and allow Butts and the former attorney general to come to committee, and waive any purported solicitor-client privilege involving the former attorney general?
42. Michael Cooper - 2019-02-27
Polarity : -0.00625
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister's order in council prevents the former attorney general from discussing her resignation from cabinet, the presentation that she gave to cabinet following her resignation and discussions that she had upon being fired as the Attorney General, all matters relevant to getting to the heart of the truth.Why is the Prime Minister trying to silence his former attorney general? What is he afraid of?
43. Michael Cooper - 2017-05-02
Polarity : -0.00570437
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, in response to the question, or perhaps statement, of the parliamentary secretary to the government House leader, I am a little taken aback that he would have the audacity to talk about this question of privilege going to the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs. That is precisely what the government tried to prevent from happening. The government tried to shut down an opportunity for the committee on procedure and House affairs to get to the bottom of this issue.It is the government that tried to do so. The only reason it backed down, although it never really did back down, was the hon. member for Perth—Wellington stood and said that it did not have a right to do it, and the Speaker agreed with him.We are going to continue to fight against the effort on the part of the government to roll back the rights and privileges of hon. members. It is unbelievable the member would talk about the procedure and House affairs committee, because it was exactly that, as I said, the government tried to prevent from getting to the bottom of this issue.
44. Michael Cooper - 2017-06-05
Polarity : -0.00285714
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, time and again, the Liberals place the rights of criminals first, whether it be opposing mandatory sentences for violent offenders or now putting the rights of sex offenders ahead of the rights of parents to know if one has moved in next door. Instead of worrying about sex offenders, why will the minister not do the right thing for once and put the rights of parents and the rights of children first?

Most positive speeches

1. Michael Cooper - 2017-06-02
Polarity : 0.445833
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, every day accused criminals are being set free due to court delays. A father accused of breaking his infant's ankles was set free. A man accused of shooting an Ottawa area man twice in the head was set free.The Minister of Justice said that she is proud of her record. How can the minister possibly be proud of her record of negligence in failing to fill judicial vacancies, which has resulted in accused criminals like these being set free?
2. Michael Cooper - 2016-06-08
Polarity : 0.35
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, it has been 299 days since the Azer children were abducted by their father. We now know that the children are in Iran. How much longer do these children need to be in harm's way? When will the government demand that Iran safely return these four Canadian children?
3. Michael Cooper - 2017-06-19
Polarity : 0.334091
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Justice likes to say that she is proud of her record. Is the minister proud of the near-historic number of judicial vacancies? Is the minister proud of the fact that nearly half of the judicial advisory committees remain vacant? Is the minister proud of the dozens of serious criminal cases that have been thrown out of court due to her inaction, with thousands more at risk? How can the minister say she is proud of that record with a straight face?
4. Michael Cooper - 2017-01-30
Polarity : 0.328571
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister incredibly said that he was at a disadvantage when it came to learning the facts about Wynn's law.Do members know who was at a disadvantage? It was Constable Wynn. He was at a disadvantage when he was shot and killed by someone who should not have been on the streets and would not have been on the streets had Wynn's law been the law.Now that the Prime Minister is in the loop, will he do the right thing and pass Wynn's law?
5. Michael Cooper - 2016-02-05
Polarity : 0.305556
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Public Safety characterized changes brought in by the previous Conservative government to prevent child sexual predators from ever receiving a pardon as ideological. Will anyone on the government side stand and tell the victims of child sexual abuse what is ideological about ensuring that those who commit the most heinous crimes against children will never again be able to walk our streets and communities in anonymity?
6. Michael Cooper - 2016-01-28
Polarity : 0.291667
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the survivors of Graham James and other child sexual predators will never be able to forget the crimes inflicted upon them. We were reminded of that this week when Graham James was granted parole.Why is the government standing up for the rights of criminals like Graham James instead of their survivors?
7. Michael Cooper - 2017-04-10
Polarity : 0.289286
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, last week, charges against a Quebec man accused of murdering his wife were thrown out of court due to delay. For months the Minister of Justice has been aware of the urgent need to fill judicial vacancies to prevent more cases from being thrown out of court, and for months the minister has abdicated her responsibility to fill judicial vacancies in a timely manner.How many more accused killers will walk free before the minister starts doing her job?
8. Michael Cooper - 2016-10-20
Polarity : 0.278788
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the government's parliamentary vetting process has about as much credibility as an episode of Judge Judy.Instead of an opportunity to engage in dialogue, members of Parliament are being invited to the University of Ottawa to be props before a live studio audience for a Q&A hosted by a non-parliamentarian.Is this the government's idea of meaningful parliamentary participation, or is this an attempt at creating a reality TV show?
9. Michael Cooper - 2016-05-10
Polarity : 0.264286
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the minister has to understand the urgency in appointing judges, and yet the minister has not even figured out the process, let alone appointed a single judge. The minister is creating a crisis because of her own apathy.How backlogged do the Liberals want the courts to be? When will the minister stop going AWOL and start doing her job?
10. Michael Cooper - 2017-05-18
Polarity : 0.258766
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, in addition to the official languages commissioner, we now learn that the price of appointment as a superior court judge also involves generous donations to the Liberal Party, with two of the latest appointees being none other than generous Liberal Party donors. For a Prime Minister who promised a new merit-based appointment process, is it just a coincidence that so many Liberal Party donors are being appointed, or is this just the latest example of a Liberal promise made and a Liberal promise broken?
11. Michael Cooper - 2017-06-08
Polarity : 0.25
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, for the past week the Liberals have refused to answer straightforward questions about whether they plan to cancel a publicly accessible registry for high-risk sex offenders. What do the Liberals have to hide? Should Canadians take the Liberals' non-answer as a yes, that indeed they plan to cancel this tool for parents to keep their kids safe from high-risk sex offender, yes or no?
12. Michael Cooper - 2018-06-07
Polarity : 0.205606
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister claimed that the cost of the pipeline would be $4.5 billion. We now know that it is not true, that it is just a guess. Canadians could be on the hook for a lot more than $4.5 billion for the existing pipeline, never mind the construction costs for the new pipeline. When will the Liberals come clean and tell Canadians how much it will cost?
13. Michael Cooper - 2016-04-13
Polarity : 0.2
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Justice, in attending the pay-to-play fundraiser with select lawyers and lobbyists, has compromised her independence, brought the office that she holds into disrepute, and breached ethical standards by which the minister is bound. Will the minister stop the excuses and return the pay-to-play cash?
14. Michael Cooper - 2017-12-01
Polarity : 0.183333
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance said that the sale of 680,000 shares in Morneau Shepell days before he announced tax changes, a sale that saved him a cool half-million, had nothing to do with the tax changes and everything to do with divesting himself prior to being sworn in as minister. The sale was really about divestment.Can the minister explain why he held one million shares in Morneau Shepell until one month ago?
15. Michael Cooper - 2017-06-05
Polarity : 0.174554
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, every parent deserves the right to know when a high-risk sex offender moves into his or her neighbourhood. However, unbelievably, the Minister of Public Safety is considering scrapping a publicly accessible sex offender registry out of concern for, get this, the rights of high-risk sex offenders. How, in good conscience, can the Minister of Public Safety stand in the way of the right of parents to know when a high-risk sex offender moves in next door?
16. Michael Cooper - 2017-05-02
Polarity : 0.14826
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, my colleague is absolutely right. The ability of an hon. member to access this House in order to vote on a matter before the House is of utmost importance. Indeed, there is nothing more important in terms of the function of a member of Parliament than to stand up and vote on matters before the House on behalf of their constituents. That is what our constituents elect us to do. Unfortunately, in the case of the hon. member for Milton and the hon. member for Beauce, that privilege was infringed upon when they were prevented from getting here. That is why this debate is so important. In terms of the consequences of what could have happened, one consequence was that two hon. members were not able to stand in their place on behalf of 100,000 or so constituents. That is a pretty significant consequence, but it could have been an even worse consequence if we had been talking about a vote of confidence. The inability of the members to access this House, to show up and vote, could have the consequence of literally resulting in a potential loss of confidence in the government. We are talking about very serious consequences that could flow from the privileges of members being infringed upon in terms of being able to access this place.
17. Michael Cooper - 2017-01-30
Polarity : 0.145
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, last week, when the Prime Minister was asked at a town hall why the Liberals opposed Wynn's law, he said that he did not know anything about the bill, a bill that has been before Parliament for more than a year and that his cabinet, presumably, has vetted.It begs the question, just how many other decisions of his cabinet is the Prime Minister in the dark about?
18. Michael Cooper - 2016-10-04
Polarity : 0.142857
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, since the Prime Minister unveiled his Supreme Court appointment process to shut out Atlantic Canada, the silence from the 32 Liberal MPs from Atlantic Canada has been deafening. Now, four senators from Atlantic Canada are calling on the Prime Minister to respect Atlantic representation.Given that these senators are finally speaking up, will the Prime Minister get around to doing the right thing and appoint an Atlantic Canadian?
19. Michael Cooper - 2017-05-02
Polarity : 0.13789
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise this afternoon to participate in the debate on the question of privilege. For some Canadians, this debate may seem a bit antiquated, a bit technical. They may not fully understand what it is we are talking about. Notwithstanding that, let us make no mistake about it that the debate today is of high importance, because it goes to the foundations of our democracy. It goes to the heart of the ability of members of Parliament to perform their functions to collectively represent Canadians. Having regard for the importance of this debate on privilege, it is disappointing to see that the current Liberal government has responded by trying to shut down debate, by trying to silence members of Parliament by bringing forward time allocation. Canadians will remember that during the last election, the Prime Minister talked so much about sunny ways. He waxed and waned eloquently. He talked about how there would be sunlight brought into this place and how everything would be wonderful, that members would be able to speak and vote freely and that we would have a government that respected the will of Parliament, and he admonished the previous Conservative government for bringing in time allocation, which of course is perfectly within the rules. It is in the Standing Orders. That was fair. There were a lot of Canadians who accepted that, who said that perhaps Parliament could work better, and they entrusted the Prime Minister to deliver. What we have seen, like so much of what we see from the Prime Minister, is that the words that he espoused during the election campaign were nothing more than empty words, because on this issue he has tried to shut down debate. The government is trying to shut down debate, but it is not just on this issue. It is on multiple issues. The government has moved time allocation more than a dozen times already. What is even worse is that the government House leader has now indicated that the government will use this issue as a pretext to invoke time allocation on a regular basis, so we have now a complete 180° turnaround from the government. Eighteen or 19 months ago, the Liberals were admonishing the previous Conservative government for imposing time allocation, and today the government House leader is talking about bringing in time allocation all the time, regularly, and with enthusiasm. It really speaks to the lack of trust that Canadians should have in the current government. I think that every day more and more Canadians recognize that the current government simply cannot be trusted.To the substance of this important debate on this issue of privilege, it arose on the day of the budget when access by the hon. members for Beauce and Milton to the parliamentary precinct to be able to get into this chamber and vote was impeded. Their access was impeded when they tried to access a House of Commons bus to come to the chamber to vote, to do what hon. members should do. The bells were ringing. They waited. They saw a bus coming. The bus driver apparently saw them, but the bus could not get to them because the bus was stopped. It was blocked by either the Prime Minister's empty motorcade or a media bus or a combination of the two. Nonetheless, it was blocked, and it was blocked, according to the hon. member for Beauce, for some nine minutes. As a result, the hon. members for Milton and Beauce were unable to vote.Upon the conclusion of that vote, those hon. members rose in their places and immediately alerted this House that their access to this House had been impeded, that they had been prevented from doing the job that their constituents had sent them here to do and doing what their constituents expect them to do, which is to vote on matters before the House of Commons, and that consequently there had been a breach of their parliamentary privilege.Upon hearing the evidence from the hon. members for Beauce and Milton, Mr. Speaker, you ruled that there was indeed a prima facie breach of a member's privilege.What should have happened then, and what has always happened upon the Speaker's finding of a prima facie breach of privilege, was for a debate to take place in this chamber, for a vote to take place, and in the event that the members of this House affirmed the ruling of the Speaker in finding that there was in fact a breach of privilege, the matter would then be referred to the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs so that the issue of privilege could be studied and the committee could get to the bottom of exactly what happened.That is not what happened in this case. What should have happened did not happen because the government decided instead that it wanted to attack the rights of hon. members to defend and protect the privileges of this House. What the government did in that regard was to bring forward a motion to proceed to orders of the day. In so doing, what the government did was shut down the ability of hon. members to debate the issue of privilege, to vote on the issue of privilege, and to have the matter referred to the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, where it would have received precedence at that committee, just as it receives precedence in this House upon the Speaker's finding.What the government did was unprecedented. No government before has done what the current government did. What the current government did was very serious. It was fundamentally an attack on this place. It was an attack on this institution and on all hon. members, because the ability to debate and vote on a question of privilege is no small matter. It is significant. It is fundamental. It is fundamental to the ability of members of Parliament to perform the functions of the member of Parliament. It is fundamental to the ability of members of Parliament to do their job. That is why privilege is not the property of the government; it is the property of this chamber and it is the property of all 338 members of Parliament.To understand the significance of what the government tried to do, it is perhaps important to have some understanding of the history of privilege, the foundation of privilege. Privilege goes back centuries. It goes back to the 14th and 15th centuries, to the United Kingdom, when the king would interfere, impede, obstruct, use force, and in some cases arrest hon. members of Parliament, attacking and impeding their ability to do their jobs.Sir Thomas More was one of the first speakers in the House of Commons who petitioned the king for the recognition of certain privileges of the House. Those privileges included the right to be free from interference, obstruction, and use of force by the king and his executive in the House of Lords. What privilege really is and what it turned out to be was a compromise among the king, the executive, and members of Parliament, that Parliament, the House of Commons, would be a place where members could speak freely, debate freely, criticize, and depose the government without interference from the executive.In Canada, privilege was imported from the United Kingdom. The type of force, arrests, and intimidation that British members of Parliament had endured in the 14th and 15th centuries had passed. By the time of Canada's Confederation, however, what had not passed was the significance of members' parliamentary privilege. That is why parliamentary privilege was enshrined in our Constitution. Section 18 of the Constitution Act of 1867, provides that the House may define members' privileges provided that those privileges do not exceed the privileges enjoyed by members of the British House of Commons at the time of Confederation in 1867. Indeed, the House, through the act of Parliament, adopted all those privileges. Among those privileges is freedom from obstruction and interference. That is precisely what this question of privilege relates to: the interference of the hon. members for Beauce and Milton's access to the chamber to perform the most important function of a member of Parliament, and that is to stand and vote on behalf of their constituents.When we are talking about the issue of privilege, we are talking about something that has been constitutionally protected. We are talking about something that has been protected by our courts. We are talking about something that has been protected by the common law. It is why what the government sought to do to prevent members of Parliament from having an opportunity to debate and vote on privilege is so significant.When the arguments were put forward to the government about the seriousness of what was happening and the consequences of what was happening, the response of the government was, more or less, that it did not care. Given some of the actions of the government, when it comes to the disrespect it has exhibited to this institution, perhaps we should not be surprised that this was its attitude. However, Canadians should be surprised that, one by one, Liberal MP after Liberal MP stood and voted in favour of the government's extinguishing the ability of members of Parliament to defend and protect their privileges.It seems a lot of members over there perhaps forgot, or maybe they do not care, that they are not members of the government, other than those Liberal MPs who are members of cabinet. Perhaps they lost sight of the fact that members' privileges are privileges that do not just protect opposition members and enable them to do their work on behalf of their constituents. Members' privileges protect all members of the House, including government backbench MPs so they can carry out their jobs as well.It is unfortunate that it took the hon. member for Perth—Wellington, my colleague, to stand and question whether the government could in fact shut down a debate on privilege without a vote. He argued that it was a violation of privilege. You, Mr. Speaker, agreed with the hon. member for Perth—Wellington. As a result of that ruling, we are having a debate on this question of privilege. It should not have happened that way. It need not have happened that way. However, it happened because of the arrogance of the government.It does raise a question as to how that happened and why it happened. Why was the government so determined to extinguish the rights of hon. members to defend members' privileges? The answer is that had the motion passed the House of Commons, it would have been referred to the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, where it would have received precedence, just as it receives precedence in this chamber. That happened to be an inconvenience to the government because the government was simultaneously trying to ram through, at the procedure and House affairs committee, the rules of this place, the rules in terms of how Parliament functioned. The government was trying to strip the rights and abilities of hon. members of the House to hold the government to account, and so we got this mess.The government has backed off a little in terms of its efforts to ram through changes in the procedure and House affairs committee. However, while it backed off a little at the procedure and House affairs committee, it nonetheless remained intent on shutting down debate on a most important question of privilege.What the government has done, and is doing, is wrong. It is undemocratic. It is an attack on all members of Parliament and, as a result, it is an attack on all Canadians. When the abilities of members of Parliament to speak and represent their constituents is impeded upon, that impacts all Canadians who count on us to represent them here every day.My colleagues in the opposition will continue to do what is necessary to hold the government to account, to call on the government to respect the House, to respect this institution, to respect the ability of members of Parliament to stand and vote on behalf of their constituents, and to respect the privileges afforded to all hon. members in the House.
20. Michael Cooper - 2017-10-20
Polarity : 0.136111
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, sentences handed down for impaired driving causing death are an absolute joke, with offenders walking away with fines as low as $1,500. Instead of standing up for victims, Liberal MPs voted to defeat a Conservative amendment to Bill C-46 to provide for a five-year mandatory sentence for impaired drivers who kill. Why does the minister think it is okay for impaired drivers who kill to walk away with a slap on the wrist?
21. Michael Cooper - 2018-04-19
Polarity : 0.122222
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the criminal organization that Nick Chan is the head of is the so-called Fresh Off the Boat gang, a gang linked to more than a dozen murders.Today Calgary is a less safe place because Nick Chan is back out on the streets because this Minister of Justice has abdicated her responsibilities to deal with the backlog and get judges appointed.When is the minister going to stop making excuses and take responsibility for her negligence?
22. Michael Cooper - 2019-02-19
Polarity : 0.114286
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, former attorney general of Ontario Michael Bryant stated that allegations involving top PMO officials, including Gerald Butts, are “the kind of allegations that can lead to criminal investigations.”Canadians deserve answers, not a PMO-driven cover-up. Once again, will the Prime Minister stop the cover-up and allow Butts and the former attorney general the opportunity to speak so that Canadians can get the answers they deserve—yes or no?
23. Michael Cooper - 2016-10-20
Polarity : 0.112381
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, when the Prime Minister announced his Supreme Court appointment process, he promised that members of the justice and legal affairs committee would have an opportunity to directly engage with the nominee. However, we now learn that nearly half of the members of the committee will not have an opportunity to ask a question, and those who do will be limited to one one-minute question. That is hardly meaningful parliamentary participation.Why did the Prime Minister break his word yet again?
24. Michael Cooper - 2016-06-15
Polarity : 0.109762
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, last month the Minister of Justice said in this House that she would put in place short-term procedures to appoint judges “in the very near future”. One month later, the minister has yet to appoint a single judge, notwithstanding an unprecedented backlog in our courts.When will the Minister of Justice stop talking and start appointing?
25. Michael Cooper - 2017-05-31
Polarity : 0.107143
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Justice continues to sit on her hands with a near record number of judicial vacancies. Meanwhile, another day and another murder case has been thrown out of court, this time in Montreal, and all the minister can do is pat herself on the back. The minister's indifference to this crisis is nothing short of appalling, and the minister's inaction is nothing short of negligent.How many more victims are going to be denied justice because of the minister's negligence?
26. Michael Cooper - 2017-06-01
Polarity : 0.105952
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Justice is trying to blame everyone other than herself for court delays as serious criminal cases continue to be thrown out of court, a murder case in Montreal being the latest. However, Chief Justice McLachlin says a big part of the problem is 58 superior court vacancies, 58 vacancies that the minister has yet to fill. When is the minister going to stop making excuses, take responsibility, and get these vacancies filled?
27. Michael Cooper - 2017-06-07
Polarity : 0.104167
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, for the past few days, the Liberals have refused to clear the air about whether they plan to cancel a publicly accessible registry for high-risk sex offenders, cancelling a tool for parents to keep their kids safe. Let me provided the Prime Minister with another opportunity to clear the air. Are the Liberals planning to cancel this registry for high-risk sex offenders, yes or no?
28. Michael Cooper - 2017-10-23
Polarity : 0.1
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the Finance Minister had $20 million of Morneau Shepell shares until he got caught. He hid from Canadians his private offshore company in France until he got caught. Now the minister is trying to hide his investments in eight numbered companies. If the minister really has nothing to hide, then why will he not disclose his investments?
29. Michael Cooper - 2016-11-23
Polarity : 0.1
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Prime Minister, a self-described feminist, defended the disturbing decision of an Ontario judge to throw out a mandatory sentence for sexual interference involving a 15-year-old girl.Does the Minister of Justice support the position of the Prime Minister, or is she finally prepared to stand up for victims, and assure Canadians that the government will not roll back mandatory sentences for child sexual predators, yes or no?
30. Michael Cooper - 2016-04-12
Polarity : 0.1
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Justice claimed that the focus of the pay-to-play fundraiser was in her role as an MP, this after the event was advertised as an opportunity for attendees to engage the minister on matters that pertained directly to the minister's responsibilities. Yesterday the minister admitted that she attended as Minister of Justice after all.Will the minister end the charade, take responsibility, and return the pay-to-play cash?
31. Michael Cooper - 2016-11-22
Polarity : 0.0833333
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Justice has said that she has a problem with mandatory jail sentences passed by the previous Conservative government.The previous Conservative government passed mandatory jail sentences for child sexual predators. In light of the Prime Minister's defence of the disturbing decision of an Ontario Superior Court judge to throw out a mandatory jail sentence involving sexual interference involving a minor, would the Minister of Justice stand in her place and assure Canadians that the government will not repeal mandatory jail—
32. Michael Cooper - 2016-05-16
Polarity : 0.0742064
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, in the six months that the Minister of Justice has been in office, she has yet to make a single judicial appointment.Last week, Chief Justice Wittmann of Alberta said that due to judicial vacancies, cases were being thrown out of court, including one serious fraud case.How many cases is the Minister of Justice prepared to see thrown out of court due to her own inaction?
33. Michael Cooper - 2019-04-04
Polarity : 0.0666667
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, that answer is an absolute insult to Canadians. It is no coincidence that the leak occurred on the eve of the release of damning evidence submitted by the former attorney general to the justice committee. It was a clear attempt to undermine the credibility of the former attorney general, and it demonstrates that the Prime Minister will go to no end to obstruct justice.Again, who leaked the information? Was it Gerry Butts?
34. Michael Cooper - 2016-04-11
Polarity : 0.0642857
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, last week, the minister attended a pay-to-play fundraiser in which attendees were invited to pay in return for access to the minister. The Minister of Justice has a duty not only to be independent but to be perceived as independent, which the minister has clearly compromised.Will the minister do the right thing, stand up, apologize, and return the pay-to-play cash?
35. Michael Cooper - 2016-10-03
Polarity : 0.0625
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the Liberal member for Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook was reported as saying that the majority of candidates on the Prime Minister's Supreme Court short list are from outside of Atlantic Canada. This confirms that the Liberals are preparing to shut out Atlantic Canada from the court for the first time ever.Now, if that is not the case, then the minister could simply stand to confirm that the government will in fact appoint an Atlantic Canadian.Why will she not?
36. Michael Cooper - 2016-04-14
Polarity : 0.055
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister's own ethics code states that ministers shall not raise funds from department stakeholders and lobbyists. Yet last week the Minister of Justice attended a pay-to-play fundraiser at a law firm with extensive dealings with the minister's department and a lobbyist who was registered to lobby, guess who, the minister. Therefore, will the minister stand in the House and advise which other lobbyists were at the fundraiser?
37. Michael Cooper - 2017-02-16
Polarity : 0.0513528
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Justice boasts about the reconstituted judicial advisory committees, yet months after they were announced, nearly half of the spots are vacant, with not a single person being appointed in New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Manitoba, or Saskatchewan.How is the minister going to fill 60 judicial vacancies when she cannot even fill the committees responsible for vetting judicial applicants? When is the minister going to stop dithering and start doing her job?
38. Michael Cooper - 2016-09-26
Polarity : 0.05
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, while the minister from Nova Scotia has been busy attacking the independence of the Supreme Court, the minister for Atlantic Canada—where is he from again? Oh, yes, Mississauga. The minister for Atlantic Canada from Mississauga has been silent in standing up for Atlantic Canadian representation on the Supreme Court, as have all 32 Liberal MPs from Atlantic Canada. When will the minister for Atlantic Canada from Ontario break his silence and stand up for Atlantic Canada?
39. Michael Cooper - 2016-04-11
Polarity : 0.05
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, in attending this fundraising event, the minister broke the Prime Minister's code of open and accountable government and the minister crossed the line by putting herself in a conflict of interest. In order to clear the stench from this sordid Liberal fundraising affair, will the minister release the list of attendees? If not, what does the minister have to hide?
40. Michael Cooper - 2016-10-17
Polarity : 0.0458333
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, serious criminal cases have been thrown out of court as a result of the failure of the Minister of Justice to fill judicial vacancies. Now, in Alberta, a case involving the most serious offence, a first degree murder, was thrown out of court.How many more cases is the Minister of Justice prepared to see thrown out of court before she does her job and starts appointing judges?
41. Michael Cooper - 2017-02-14
Polarity : 0.0444444
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, instead of blaming mandatory minimums for a delay, the minister should look in the mirror, because it is this minister who has failed to appoint judges in a timely manner, which has resulted in serious criminal cases being thrown out. Murder cases are being thrown out. Sexual assault cases are being thrown out. Yesterday charges against a father accused of breaking the ankles of his infant were thrown out. We have dozens of judicial vacancies. How many more cases are going to be thrown out before the minister starts doing her job?
42. Michael Cooper - 2017-04-10
Polarity : 0.0333333
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, instead of patting herself on the back, the minister should be ashamed of herself.There are nearly 60 judicial vacancies across Canada. Since coming to office, the minister has appointed only three judges in the province of Quebec, leaving multiple vacancies. Meanwhile, more than 800 criminal cases in the province of Quebec are at risk of being thrown out of court. If the minister will not do her job, then will she get out of the way so that someone else can?
43. Michael Cooper - 2017-05-02
Polarity : 0.029602
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the government could start by respecting the ability and right of hon. members to debate this question of privilege by backing down on trying to shut down debate. A second thing the government could do is respect the fact that before it changes the rules of the House, in order to do so, there must be consensus. That has been the tradition. I know the government House leader has backed down somewhat on the government's intent to change the Standing Orders, but she has not committed to doing so on the basis of consensus. That would be a second major thing the government could do to show it finally does have respect for this place and for members of Parliament. However, I do not have a lot of confidence in the government when it comes to doing that. We see no indication that it is prepared to do that. For the government, it really comes down to how far it can go and get away with it. We saw that last spring when the government introduced Motion No. 6 to literally try to take away every tool that was available to opposition members to do their jobs to hold the government to account. It only backed down after that unfortunate incident involving the Prime Minister. Then we saw the government try to prevent a vote in the House on the ability of members to defend the privileges of members. The government was stopped as a result of my hon. colleague, the member for Perth—Wellington, raising a new question of privilege and the Speaker ruling on it. Now we see that the government has sort of backed down on changes to the Standing Orders, but only partly. It would not surprise me, given the arrogance and attitude of the government, that before much longer we will see another effort to try to do what it has not been able to get away with yet. Canadians should be very concerned.
44. Michael Cooper - 2019-02-21
Polarity : 0.025
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, the Supreme Court, in Krieger, stated, “It is a constitutional principle that the Attorneys General of this country must act independently of partisan concerns when exercising their delegated sovereign authority to initiate, continue or terminate prosecutions.” In the face of that, what in the world were the Prime Minister, the Prime Minister's principal secretary and the Clerk of the Privy Council doing talking to the attorney general to overturn the decision of the public prosecutor?
45. Michael Cooper - 2019-02-26
Polarity : 0.025
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, instead of respecting the former attorney general and the independence of her office, the Prime Minister launched a concerted campaign to change her mind, a concerted campaign to interfere with the independence of the office of the Attorney General. What lawful authority did he have to do that?
46. Michael Cooper - 2018-05-29
Polarity : 0.025
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, while the Liberals have failed to appoint a victims' ombudsman after six months, when the prisoners' ombudsman position became vacant, they filled it immediately. When it comes to filling a position to protect the rights of criminals, the Liberals could not move fast enough. However, when it comes to filling a position to protect the rights of victims, the Liberals are AWOL. Why do the Liberals always put the rights of criminals ahead of victims?
47. Michael Cooper - 2016-10-07
Polarity : 0.0223214
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, it is certainly interesting that the minister would say that, because it certainly was not the Liberal approach with the case of Mohamed Fahmy. Needless to say, the Minister of Foreign Affairs did not answer the question that was posed by the hon. member for Courtenay—Alberni to provide this House and all Canadians with an update on the status of the Azer children. Will he do so now?
48. Michael Cooper - 2019-02-25
Polarity : 0.0166667
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, Michael Wernick testified that on December 19, he met with the Prime Minister and immediately following this meeting he picked up the phone and called the former attorney general to check in on the SNC-Lavalin matter. What instructions did the Prime Minister provide Wernick to initiate this call?
49. Michael Cooper - 2019-02-26
Polarity : 0.0166667
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, yesterday at the justice committee, retired judge Mary Ellen Turpel-Lafond testified that public officials must be able to point to lawful authority for their actions. What lawful authority did the Prime Minister have to conspire to stop the criminal trial of a company charged with bribery? What lawful authority?
50. Michael Cooper - 2016-10-07
Polarity : 0.0127778
Responsive image
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Minister of Foreign Affairs gave a thumbs down when I called on the government to make the return of the Azer children a priority. The minister came close today to apologizing, but yesterday he doubled down, by deploying a Liberal insider to criticize Alison Azer for daring to speak up for the return of her children.Will the minister give a sincere apology to Alison Azer, and, second, apologize for deploying a Liberal insider to criticize Alison Azer's efforts?