Nathan Cullen

Mr. Speaker, there are 20,000 tweets mocking this minister's survey. The first rule of engagement the Liberals should learn is not to treat Canadians like they are stupid. Last week, the Minister of Democratic Institutions insulted our committee and the thousands of Canadians who participated with us in this process, because we were not specific enough for her. Yet today we see a pop-psych survey from this minister, and there is no mention of electoral systems whatsoever. Almost 90% of everyone who spoke to the committee recommended a proportional voting system. Yet the minister cannot even bring herself to put the word “proportional” in her survey.If the minister truly wants a clearer answer, why would she not simply ask the obvious questions?

Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the minister has even read her own survey, because if we do not give the Liberals all that private information, all of our answers are thrown in the garbage.We received a call today from Janet, from Alberta. She said when she called the MyDemocracy hotline, she was told these survey questions were approved by the 12-member all-party committee.That is news to me. I sit on the committee, and we would never have insulted the intelligence of Canadians with such ridiculous questions.First, the minister threw the committee under the bus, and now the Liberals are trying to blame us for their terrible survey. Thank goodness the Privacy Commissioner is investigating.Here is a values question for the Prime Minister. Does he have the integrity to keep his own promise?

Mr. Speaker, we would think the Prime Minister would at least have the decency to blush when he is breaking his promise to Canadians so blatantly, and could at least take that slightly smug look off his face. The way I was raised was that when people broke their word to Canadians, they would find the courage to apologize, which the Prime Minister has yet to do. Just eight weeks ago, the Prime Minister said, “I make promises because I believe in them”. On consensus, he said that he had heard “loudly and clearly that Canadians want a better system of governance”.After such obvious deception, how can anyone believe the Prime Minister ever again?

They cannot answer how much, Mr. Speaker, because they do not know, yet a report out today shows that Canada ranks dead last in the G7. Imagine the irony. As devoted as Donald Trump is to the oil and gas sector, he has to tip his little red cap to the Liberals because they are even worse. These climate champions went out and bought a 65-year-old leaky pipeline for $4.5 billion of our money.Let us do some Liberal multiple choice: Was that money (a) a bailout, (b) a subsidy, (c) a really dumb idea, or (d) all of the above?

Mr. Speaker, it is now clear to everyone watching that the Liberals have totally screwed up their small business tax plan. How do we know this? It is because even Liberal MPs are admitting that the Liberals have totally screwed up their small business tax plan. Why will the finance minister not take up the proposal from New Democrats and from small business owners to expand the review to include all big businesses and to extend the consultations so everyone is heard? Let us all now watch the finance minister get up and try to defend his botched plan, or maybe he will finally tell Canadians why he is so gosh-darned determined to protect his wealthy and well-connected friends.

The voice of the out of touch 1%, Mr. Speaker.Has anyone ever tried to change the channel knowing that the batteries are dying in the remote and just been too lazy to get up to fix them? That is what the Liberals were doing yesterday, trying to change the channel. However, Canadians are not buying it. Rather than admit they screwed up and close the Morneau Shepell ethical loopholes, the Liberals actually voted against doing so.The Prime Minister must believe there are two sets of rules, one for him and his buddies and another set for everyone else.While Canadians are worried about protecting their pensions, why is the Prime Minister only worried about protecting his finance minister?

Mr. Speaker, because that answer was so gosh darn convincing, I have another one for the minister.Her Liberal government is refusing to reveal to Canadians important information about tax cheats, even after the minister's promise to reveal important information about tax cheats. The minister's office now says that it is not its responsibility to release this information. Really? It is not the responsibility of the minister's office to tackle tax evasion and keep the minister's own promises?If the minister is not running her department, could she tell us who the heck is? If she will not do her job, will she at least find somebody who can?

Let us try this again. A rose by any other name, Mr. Speaker. The answer we just heard is total nonsense. The PBO itself is saying that Liberals are restricting its ability to do its job.The Liberal omnibus bill will allow the government to shut down any PBO work that is not to the government's liking. It will give the Senate veto over the parliamentary budget officer's work and stop Canadians from getting the answers they so rightly deserve.These changes are clearly not designed to help accountability. They are designed to help the Liberal Party in governing. Why do the Liberals keep pursuing these unaccountable changes? When will they finally turn a corner and do what they promised to do for Canadians?

Mr. Speaker, our elections are the very foundation of our democracy. The laws that have governed them for generations were never forced through by any government without support and proper debate, up until Stephen Harper came in with his unfair elections act, going it alone and bullying Parliament. The Conservatives were lambasted and then thrown from office. Canadians and even Liberals condemned the actions of that former government, yet now that they are in power, the Liberals are threatening to do the exact same thing. Lord knows that Canadians have learned to tolerate a lot from Liberals, but hypocrisy they will not stand for. Why will the Liberals not work with us rather than bully us? Surely Stephen Harper is not the standard.

Mr. Speaker, when it comes to the cash for access scandal, the Liberals have somehow conveniently managed to miss the entire point. They keep polishing that turd, but it is still a turd somehow.The same special access to the Prime Minister and his cabinet—

Mr. Speaker, I would love to see this guy at an auction. He just keeps bidding against himself.The Liberals paid $4.5 billion for a 65-year-old pipeline, $700 million more lost every year because of their own failed review, and these clowns want to go out and spend another $15 billion building more pipelines and they do not even have a permit. What could possibly go wrong? It is like the Prime Minister went out to buy a house, overpaid for it, did not insist on a home inspection and now the roof is leaking. The Liberals panicked. They were fleeced by a Texas oil company and now we are on the hook for their failure. How many boil water advisories could be lifted? How many green jobs could be created? When are these guys—

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister once famously said, “ I'm not middle class. I don't pretend I am”, so I guess vacationing on a billionaire's private island was just him proving his point. However, he is not just entitled to his entitlement; oh no, he is also entitled to not follow the rules that govern all of us, because he believes he is above the rules. He told Canadians, “Travel back-and-forth from Nassau...happens on the Aga Khan's private helicopter” and that “only happens through private means.”Today we learned that the Prime Minister's excuse is categorically false. Does he wish to change his story, or does he wish to continue to mislead Canadians?

Mr. Speaker, this Liberal budget is full of bluster and bafflegab. A few gems include innovation through superclusters, or this one about offsetting derivative positions in straddle transactions, or even better, capping stock options for the super-rich—oh, wait; that did not make it into the budget. That was in the Liberal platform. This is nothing but a backloaded, bafflegab, better-luck-next-time budget. Way back on page 150 is a $1.2 billion cut to fighting climate change. To all those Canadians who believed the Liberals in Paris were serious about fighting climate change, how can they betray their commitment to them now?

Mr. Speaker, record-setting floods and storms, historically devastating forest fires and a melting Arctic, and rather than bold action, we get more platitudes from the Liberal government.If empty words and broken promises were going to solve climate change, the Liberals would have had this thing beat decades ago, but they adopted Stephen Harper's climate change targets, and they cannot even meet those. No wonder they were such experts on what Harper was thinking about. They have gone down the exact same path with the exact same result, which is the definition, by the way, of insanity.When is the Prime Minister going to wake up to the reality and stop repeating the failures of—

Mr. Speaker, does anyone still wonder why the Prime Minister made sure his last question period happened before the explosive testimony from the former attorney general? Because I do not. Then the Prime Minister had the audacity to tell Canadians that he rejected this damning and detailed testimony, and then admitted that he had not actually listened to it all. Talk about arrogance. Talk about tone deaf. She told us of a consistent and sustained effort to politically interfere in a public prosecution, and a B.C. Liberal said that this was all sour grapes and she just was not a good “team player”. I guess being a good team Liberal player means a willingness to break the law.When will they stop with the misogynistic smears and just agree to a public inquiry?

Mr. Speaker, on the very day that 180 Liberals broke their promise to Canadians to make every vote count, they chose that day to promise to fix the cash for access mess. Who created this mess in the first place? It was the Liberals. Bill C-50 has a Liberal loophole so big we could drive a limo through it. Wealthy Liberal Laurier club donors can drop their cash at a Liberal convention and the bill does not apply. That is good news for the wealthy and the well connected.Where did the Liberals summon the political courage for such breathtaking cynicism?

Mr. Speaker, when watching the Kinder Morgan saga, a lot of Canadians are asking themselves, “How the heck did we get here?” Let us review.First, Stephen Harper guts the environmental review process and ignores first nations consultation. Then the Liberals get elected, promising to do better and have a legitimate review. They betray that promise, and now we find out why. They got a call from the CEO of Kinder Morgan telling them to hurry up and rush the process.Exactly who is in charge over there, a Texas billionaire or the Prime Minister of Canada?

Mr. Speaker, for two weeks now, the Heiltsuk Nation has been living their worst nightmare as diesel washed up on their shores, wiping out critical fish habitat and putting their entire economy at risk.The Heiltsuk deserve compensation from a government that did so little, so late, in their time of need. Instead of self-congratulatory “mission accomplished” from the fisheries minister, when is he going to actually compensate the families of Bella Bella who will lose their livelihoods this winter because of his department's incompetence?When will the Liberals finally follow through on their commitment to protect B.C.'s coast so that this nightmare never happens again?

Mr. Speaker, have you ever been on one of those family vacations where your dad makes you take so many photos that just out of sheer desperation, you have to throw yourself on the ground? That is how Canadians felt watching the Prime Minister's terrible trip to India. Not only that, but he also managed to create a major international security incident in the process. Now, adding insult to injury, we learn that the Indian government is raising the tariff on Canadian chickpeas. My question is simple. Did the Prime Minister raise the issue of trade, and now that we have a problem, is he going to do something to help Canadian farmers who are being targeted?

Mr. Speaker, when the Liberals bought a 65-year-old leaky pipeline, most Canadians thought they definitely would have a super-duper cleanup plan in case of an oil spill. Well, apparently not.Washington state is raising the alarm, saying the Liberals emergency plan has major “deficiencies in critical areas” to protect salmon and whales. It is like the Liberals went out and bought a 1972 Pinto, with no airbags, no seat belts, and said “Kids, hop in. Let's go for a ride.” No parent would do this.Why did the Liberals burden Canadians with this old pipeline? They did not even bother to keep the receipt for $4.5 billion, and they do not have an emergency plan to clean up a spill.

Mr. Speaker, Canadian charities remember well the dark days when the Harper government used the CRA to attack them, trying to silence the voices of civil society: anti-poverty groups, environmental groups, women's groups. The Liberals promised them that the attacks would stop, but as with so many other Liberal promises, they broke their word. These groups counted Liberals as maybe friends, but with friends like them, these groups do not need any enemies.Charities beat the Harper rules at the Ontario Superior Court. The Liberals are appealing that decision. How about going after hate groups or billionaires and their tax havens rather than trying to silence the voices of civil society?

Mr. Speaker, do you know how cynicism grows in our politics? First, we ask Canadians to get engaged on reforming our democracy. Next, we have MPs hold town halls right across the country. Then we spend millions of dollars going back and forth asking Canadians, and in good faith they respond and in droves. They get excited about their democracy, but then Liberals say, “Sorry, Canada, not good enough. That is not the answer that Liberals were looking for.” That is how cynicism grows in our politics.The Prime Minister campaigned on being an antidote to cynicism, not a brand new sources of it, so at the very least, will he find the decency to apologize to Canadians who took him in good faith?

Mr. Speaker, if that were the case we would have to ask why Liberals stacked Liberal members on the committee picking the new voting system. Details matter, and Liberals have proposed a system in which Liberals could unilaterally change our voting system. On the weekend, the minister said she is looking forward to, and I quote “broad support”. Two-thirds of the House were elected on a promise of electoral reform. Some have accused the minister of damaging the credibility of the process with her platitudes and vague answers to straightforward questions. Therefore, we implore the Liberals to answer this one simple question. Are the Liberals actually willing to go it alone and unilaterally change our voting system, or will they require the support of at least one recognized party in the House?

Mr. Speaker, these answers are not going to satisfy. I do not think the Prime Minister is fully understanding the gravity of this situation. He is claiming ignorance, but on September 19, in the middle of its study on money laundering, the Prime Minister removed the MP from the finance committee. The RCMP, FINTRAC and the Ethics Commissioner are all investigating this colleague and friend of the Prime Minister. He said he knew nothing. He did nothing. Once again, did the Prime Minister remove the member of Parliament for Brampton East from the finance committee because he was using his position to avoid possible prosecution?

Mr. Speaker, I think we can all agree on the amount of arrogance shown by the Republican candidate when he told Americans that if he does not win the election, then it must be rigged, yet after promising to end our unfair election system in his platform, in his throne speech, and now in the House of Commons many times, the Prime Minister now tells Canadians that because he won the last election, the system must now be perfect. Canadians are tired of self-serving politicians making promises just to get elected. Will the Prime Minister honour his commitment to make every vote count, or will he use his popularity to trump promises he does not want to keep?

Mr. Speaker, I have been flipping through the Liberal platform, which has been nominated for several prestigious Canadian fiction awards, by the way, yet nowhere in this fantasy does it say anything about shovelling out millions of dollars for private company bonuses. I cannot seem to find the chapter that talks about paying millions more in bonuses to government executives who screwed up the lives of 82,000 public servants. When will the Liberals actually start helping working people in the country, instead of the wealthy and well-connected? Frankly, Canadians are getting tired of this old Liberal story.

Mr. Speaker, it seems that the Prime Minister will walk across broken glass to defend his ethically embattled finance minister, but will not lift a finger to help out Canadian pensioners. Bill C-27 is not only a clear attack on workers' pensions, it is also a massive conflict of interest. The opposition hears it and raises concerns, and the Liberals refuse to. Canadians see it, and the Liberals ignore it. The Ethics Commissioner is speaking about it, but the Liberals will not even mention it. She has launched an official investigation into this minister and this bill. Therefore, will the Prime Minister maybe update his hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil ethics code?

Words are fine, Mr. Speaker, but they are only meaningful if they are backed up with action. Will the Prime Minister join with New Democrats, first nations leaders, and Canadians calling for the resignation of Senator Beyak? Senator Meredith has sexually targeted a 16-year-old girl by his own admission, and yet when asked to condemn this horrible act, the so-called feminist Prime Minister said, “It is not for me to weigh in.” That is simply not good enough.Does he at least have the dignity and decency to condemn this act, and does he have one good idea to make the Senate more accountable to Canadians? Just saying “It's not my fault” is not going to cut it.

Mr. Speaker, it would have been better if he had just said, “Your call is important to us; please stay on the line.”When it comes to the Kinder Morgan pipeline, the threats to our environment are well known. The threats to first nations rights and title are also well known. Now we have a new threat to the Canadian taxpayer. Not only did the Liberals break their promise to put the pipeline under a proper environmental review, and break their promise to respect first nations rights and title, the Prime Minister is now negotiating in secret a public bailout to help an American oil giant ship Canadian raw bitumen to China.Why will the Liberals not simply come clean and tell us how many billions this is going to cost us and how much damage they are willing to do to our environment and to first nations rights?

Madam Speaker, officers of Parliament work on behalf of all members of Parliament, not just the government, and certainly not the Prime Minister's Office. However, six months after the Liberals' failed attempt to appoint a Liberal as language commissioner, they are reusing the exact same broken process.The Liberals voted against the NDP proposal to fix this mess and are now sending us letters, with one single name on it, and calling it consultation. That is not consultation; that is a charade.Will the Liberals stop doing this? Will they work with Parliament so we can hire the best watchdogs to work on behalf of all of us and on behalf of all Canadians?

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister kept calling this a “conflict of ethics”, so I wonder how many sets of ethics the Liberals actually have for them to have a conflict between one set and another. He said he is focused on what he thinks is important. Well, a finance minister setting up a numbered company to exploit an ethics loophole is important to Canadians. He says this finance minister's breaking of his own ethics code is “petty politics”. We think protecting Canadian pensions is important and do not think a conflict of ethics is petty politics.When is he going to apologize for his dismissive remarks and finally take some action about this blatant abuse of public office?

Mr. Speaker, there is no way he even believes that anymore. This whole fiasco of an approval process is looking more rigged than a Russian election. The Prime Minister promised the people of Alberta a credible process. He broke that promise. He promised the people of British Columbia meaningful consultation with first nations. He broke that promise too. Many people suspected the fix was in from the beginning, that the decision had already been made, and now we have the proof from leaked papers from his own administration. If the Prime Minister wants to regain a scintilla of trust that he once commanded in the country, will he reveal all the Kinder Morgan papers once and for all?

Madam Speaker, in the last campaign just a year ago, the Liberals promised to stop the terrible Conservative plan to strip Canadians overseas of their sacred right to vote, but yesterday we learned that the Liberals are actually continuing the Conservatives' fight at the Supreme Court of Canada against Canadians living abroad. The Liberal Party had the audacity to hit these very same Canadians up for a donation during the campaign. Someone once said “A Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian”, and I agree, so why would the Liberals take up Stephen Harper's scheme to rob 1.5 million Canadians of their right to vote?

Mr. Speaker, it must be Groundhog Day again already, because once more we see the U.S. administration targeting a vital Canadian industry. This time it is the steel sector. Here is the pattern with the Liberal government, and it is not a good one. While it sits in round after round of NAFTA talks, Donald Trump targets Canadian industry after industry with illegal tariffs. Here is Trump's Canadian hit list so far: softwood lumber, aerospace, agriculture, and now steel. Exactly how many more tariffs and attacks will Canadian workers have to face before the Liberals reach a durable and fair agreement?

Mr. Speaker, New Democrats have fought for tax fairness for generations, so we welcome the Liberals to the conversation with open arms. Yet, in typical Liberal fashion, they have somehow managed to screw up the consultation and decided to focus only on small business. The New Democrats are calling on the government to extend and expand this review to get it right. Billions in tax havens, hundreds of millions of dollars in CEO stock options, no wonder small businesses do not trust the Liberals when it comes to their affairs. The Minister of Finance is going after all the minnows but he keeps throwing back the whales.Will the Liberals get serious about going after tax cheats even if it might hurt some of their wealthy and well-connected friends?

Mr. Speaker, it does not matter what question we ask them, the Liberals give us the exact same answer back. By refusing to agree with even the most simple and obvious requests for answers, the Liberals look even more guilty. Let us remind Canadians what we are talking about. Obstruction of justice is the crime of wilfully interfering with the process of justice by influencing or threatening a legal officer or a legal process. It comes with a 10-year jail sentence. What we are talking about is the most serious form of corruption and political criminality. This is why people are cynical about politics. This is why people do not trust government.Again, I ask a simple question. Will the Liberals help us get the answers we need and support our call for an investigation into this mess?

Mr. Speaker, Canadians are seeing a very disturbing pattern here with the Liberals.A giant pharmaceutical company or a billionaire with his own island, the Prime Minister is at their beck and call, even if it means breaking the law. However, for regular Canadians struggling to pay the bills, struggling to pay for those overpriced medicines, the Liberals are just not that into them.If the Liberals will crawl across broken glass to answer the phone of the wealthy and well connected, when are they going to work half as hard for average Canadians who are just trying to follow the law and pay the bills?

Mr. Speaker, after wasting more than seven months, the Liberals are now actually openly talking about failure when it comes to democratic reform. The minister has said over and over again that she wants to work with other parties, so here is a radical idea. How about the Liberals actually work with the other parties to get this job done? Canadians watched the Liberals stack the deck using their false majority and evasive answers to simple, straightforward questions. Here is one more for the minister. Are the Liberals actually willing to change the way Canadians vote unilaterally, yes or no?

Madam Speaker, let me get this. When the Liberals say their process is open, they mean closed. When they say it is transparent, they actually mean it is opaque. “Just trust us” does not cut it when it comes to the Liberals, because when they go it alone, we have noticed things tend to go badly. When they tried to appoint a Liberal partisan as language commissioner, it blew up. Their spectacularly bad and expensive MyDemocracy.ca fiasco and their $5.5 million backyard rink come to mind.The Ethics Commissioner is not only on her third extension under the government, she is also investigating the Prime Minister and the finance minister. I ask the Liberals to stop this mess, to work with all parties to do this right, not the mess they—

I guess he is on the clock, Mr. Speaker.For the Prime Minister, some good advice is that the best thing about telling the truth is that it is easy to repeat because it does not change. However, this Prime Minister treats the truth like his socks: He has a different version for every day of the week. His most trusted adviser has resigned under a cloud of controversy. In an attempt to change the channel, the Prime Minister's Office ran what many saw as a sexist and racist smear campaign against the former attorney general. In my experience, powerful people do not quit their powerful jobs because they are innocent. Will the Liberals finally work with us to get the answers that Canadians rightly deserve?

Mr. Speaker, never once has the finance minister been straight with Canadians. Reporters had to dig to find out about his villa in France. Two years after telling everyone he had put his Morneau Shepell shares in a blind trust, he had to admit that it was not true. Now that he has been caught profiting from a bill that he himself introduced, he is trying to buy his way out of the problem. Maybe on Bay Street, when people commit a crime, they just ask the judge, “How much do I have to make the cheque out for?” However, it does not work that way in the House of Commons. This is an admission of guilt by no other means, so I ask the—

Mr. Speaker, you have to wonder which first nations they are engaging with, because the first nations actually impacted by this mega-dam cannot even get their letters returned from the government. It seems to me that there are two Liberal Parties: one that is in campaign and makes sacred promises to first nations people, and one that governs to break them.The question comes for the Liberal government here and now. Right now they are in the position of authorizing this mega-dam in northeastern British Columbia. First nations have pleaded with the government not to do so, to pause the process and allow the consultation the government promised to actually take place.Which Liberal Party are we actually going to see?

Mr. Speaker, watching the Liberals' electoral reform process is like watching that bus in Montreal slowly sliding down the icy hill, mesmerizing disaster in slow motion. After just one day, the minister's electoral reform survey turned into a dumpster fire on social media. Pollsters like Mario Canseco at Insights West said, “I've seen @Cosmopolitan quizzes that were better designed”, “Bad questionnaire... = Unusable data”. I have a question for the minister, inspired by her own survey. Does she believe seats in Parliament should be allocated based on popular vote or based on the outcome of rock, paper, scissors?

Mr. Speaker, after losing what was the worst and most expensive game of Texas Hold'em in history, we now learn that the company the Liberals bought their pipeline from may have falsified evidence to the NEB.For Coldwater first nations, 90% of their drinking water is threatened by this pipeline. Do members know what their backup plan is? They have a fire truck. Chief Lee Spahan said that this Prime Minister “is saying he wants to implement” the UN declaration, “he wants to stop boiling water advisories” for first nations, yet he won't look at the impact of a pipeline that “goes right through our aquifer.”Will the Prime Minister have the courage to actually visit Coldwater to see the impacts of his mad scheme to build a pipeline where it is not wanted and not needed?

Madam Speaker, we also learned yesterday that the Prime Minister's closest adviser and long-time friend, Gerry Butts, met with Meilleur before she was even nominated. She admitted that this was an unfair advantage. I guess it is still who you know in the PMO.Officers of Parliament do not work for the Prime Minister, and they certainly do not work for the Prime Minister's Office. They work for all members of Parliament on behalf of Canadians. A watchdog cannot do their job with a cloud of patronage and partisanship hanging over their head.Out of respect for this position, will the Liberals do the right thing and withdraw her name from consideration?

Mr. Speaker, for two years the finance minister told the media that he was putting his shares in a blind trust. He told the same thing to his old company. Canadians and even fellow Liberal MPs lived this lie. His response two years later, I guess after making millions, is that now it is time to do the right thing. Talk about Liberal entitlement. Those guys really know how to celebrate an anniversary. Too many Canadians already think that too many politicians are just in it for themselves, and now this.Does the finance minister simply not understand that his actions ruin the trust in our institutions? If he really wants to do the right thing, will he apologize for abusing the trust Canadians put in him?

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister prepares to play host to the G7, Canadians and many around the world are asking themselves, “What happened to this guy?” We all remember that great defender of the planet who promised to end fossil fuels subsidies. However, a new report shows that when it comes to the G7 and those same subsidies, Canada ranks seventh out of seven. That would be last. That would be after Donald Trump's America. Therefore, rather than eliminate the subsidies, the Prime Minister went out and bought a 65-year-old pipeline. When will he end this circle of hypocrisy and finally come clean with Canadians and keep his promise to them and to the world?

Mr. Speaker, here is a story. Imagine if we hired somebody, then after a while they said they were quitting, but then eight months later find out they are still taking a salary without having done a day's worth of work. Well, that is exactly what the MP for Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel has done. What kind of prime minister would condone this kind of behaviour? Can the Liberals not understand that it is exactly this sense of entitlement that drives Canadians crazy? Will the Liberals join us in calling for an investigation by the Ethics Commissioner into this deplorable action, yes or not?

Mr. Speaker, the contract has not, in fact, been signed. It is this government's decision. Its responsibility.Canada is going to completely miss the Conservatives' pathetic greenhouse gas targets. The Prime Minister talks a good talk on climate change, but the Liberals have the exact same targets as the Conservatives. A few days before the agreement is to be signed, they still have no plan.Will the Prime Minister finally present his action plan, or is his trip to New York just another one of those photo ops he loves so much?

Mr. Speaker, one of the great mysteries of political life in Canada is exactly how to get a Liberal to keep a Liberal promise. Well, now we have the answer.When Liberals have totally screwed up a small business tax plan, when they have attacked small businesses while ignoring their wealthy friends, when they are backed so deep into a corner they have nowhere else to go, then and only then will Liberals honour their commitments to Canadians.Why is keeping a promise the Liberal version of damage control?

Madam Speaker, let me get this. When the Liberals say their process is open, they mean closed. When they say it is transparent, they actually mean it is opaque. “Just trust us” does not cut it when it comes to the Liberals, because when they go it alone, we have noticed things tend to go badly. When they tried to appoint a Liberal partisan as language commissioner, it blew up. Their spectacularly bad and expensive MyDemocracy.ca fiasco and their $5.5 million backyard rink come to mind.The Ethics Commissioner is not only on her third extension under the government, she is also investigating the Prime Minister and the finance minister. I ask the Liberals to stop this mess, to work with all parties to do this right, not the mess they—

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister got elected on a clear promise that we can all recite by heart, that 2015 would be the last election under first past the post.When he betrayed this promise and said, “This was my choice to make and I chose to make it”, his awkward attempt to be strong showed him to be just plain wrong. News flash: it is not up to him. It is up to Parliament and Parliament alone to make this decision. Will Liberals stand up to make every vote count and keep their promise to their constituents, or will they follow the terrible example set by the Prime Minister and betray their commitment to Canada?

Mr. Speaker, governments in the past have chosen conflict over co-operation and have unilaterally changed voting rules in an often self-serving manner. With the commitment that October 19 was the last first-past-the-post election, we must now create a voting system that truly respects and reflects the wishes of Canadians. They expect that the committee tasked with this momentous responsibility must also respect and reflect their wishes.Will the minister agree to our proposal to work with the NDP, the Conservatives, the Bloc, and the Greens and seize this historic opportunity together?

Mr. Speaker, “conflict of ethics”: I think that is what they call guilty in a court of law.Only Liberals could find virtue in coming clean after they get caught. The Prime Minister says that putting their holdings in a blind trust is, in his words, the “gold standard”. The opposition, media, Canadians, even Liberals and the company Morneau Shepell, all believed that the finance minister had placed his wealth in a blind trust. He never once corrected the record.This is a clear question to the Prime Minister. Did he know, and if he did know, what did he do about it, or does he even care?

Mr. Speaker, when it comes to recycling, we can all get behind that, but when it comes to the Trans Mountain pipeline, the Liberal government has taken things to extremes, because the Prime Minister is recycling the same broken process that has already failed us. Indigenous leaders, environmental groups and local leaders have blasted his so-called new pipeline review, calling it “rigged” with “impossible” timelines.Thrown out by the courts, rejected by indigenous leaders and a clear threat to our coastline, the only real question is how much longer will he recycle his flawed, failed and flagrantly inept process before he just finally gives up on the whole thing?

Mr. Speaker, for two weeks now, the Heiltsuk Nation has been living their worst nightmare as diesel washed up on their shores, wiping out critical fish habitat and putting their entire economy at risk.The Heiltsuk deserve compensation from a government that did so little, so late, in their time of need. Instead of self-congratulatory “mission accomplished” from the fisheries minister, when is he going to actually compensate the families of Bella Bella who will lose their livelihoods this winter because of his department's incompetence?When will the Liberals finally follow through on their commitment to protect B.C.'s coast so that this nightmare never happens again?

Mr. Speaker, how sad it was to watch the minister, who admitted that the Liberals had won a false majority. Yet, she was the very one the Liberals sent out to break the very promise that would fix the problem. The Prime Minister promised to be different. He promised to bring more people into the democratic process. He promised to make every vote count, and he promised millions of Canadians that 2015 would be the last election under the outdated and unfair voting system. Will any Liberal from Vancouver, Edmonton, or Winnipeg find the integrity to stand up to this blatant betrayal of Canadians that the Prime Minister has made?

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals say they are committed, but I am committed to having a luscious, full head of hair and it is not happening, either. I am wondering when the Liberals are actually going to do something about it. There are a lot of things we disagree about in this place, and we should, yet there is one thing we should never disagree about, and that is how Canadians vote in our elections. The way Canadians vote is sacred and a foundation of our democracy. It is not a right or left issue; it is right or wrong. It was wrong when Stephen Harper forced the unfair elections act through Parliament, and it is wrong when the Liberals do the exact same thing.My question for the government is simple. Will it commit today, yes or no, to not move any changes to our election laws without multi-party—

Mr. Speaker, if that were the case we would have to ask why Liberals stacked Liberal members on the committee picking the new voting system. Details matter, and Liberals have proposed a system in which Liberals could unilaterally change our voting system. On the weekend, the minister said she is looking forward to, and I quote “broad support”. Two-thirds of the House were elected on a promise of electoral reform. Some have accused the minister of damaging the credibility of the process with her platitudes and vague answers to straightforward questions. Therefore, we implore the Liberals to answer this one simple question. Are the Liberals actually willing to go it alone and unilaterally change our voting system, or will they require the support of at least one recognized party in the House?

That is coming from the party of the sponsorship scandal, Mr. Speaker. The Information Commissioner dropped a bombshell yesterday. The Liberals' new no access to information bill, Bill C-58, will make things even worse than they were under Stephen Harper and Jean Chrétien. Ethics, cash for access, and open government were all promises made, and all promises that were broken. From the sponsorship scandal to missing and murdered aboriginal women and girls, all of this came to light through access to information.Will the minister listen to civil society, immigration groups, and first nations, and fix this bad bill?

Madam Speaker, we also learned yesterday that the Prime Minister's closest adviser and long-time friend, Gerry Butts, met with Meilleur before she was even nominated. She admitted that this was an unfair advantage. I guess it is still who you know in the PMO.Officers of Parliament do not work for the Prime Minister, and they certainly do not work for the Prime Minister's Office. They work for all members of Parliament on behalf of Canadians. A watchdog cannot do their job with a cloud of patronage and partisanship hanging over their head.Out of respect for this position, will the Liberals do the right thing and withdraw her name from consideration?

They cannot answer how much, Mr. Speaker, because they do not know, yet a report out today shows that Canada ranks dead last in the G7. Imagine the irony. As devoted as Donald Trump is to the oil and gas sector, he has to tip his little red cap to the Liberals because they are even worse. These climate champions went out and bought a 65-year-old leaky pipeline for $4.5 billion of our money.Let us do some Liberal multiple choice: Was that money (a) a bailout, (b) a subsidy, (c) a really dumb idea, or (d) all of the above?

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals keep telling us how the environment and the economy must go hand in hand, but on the Trans Mountain disaster, the Liberals on the one hand are hammering the environment and on the other hand are hammering our finances. The PBO reports that the Prime Minister panicked, overpaid a Texas oil company by $1 billion and it is now costing Canadians an extra $700 million every year because the Liberals' flawed environmental assessment was tossed out of court.Will the Liberals just stop this nightmare, stop throwing good money after bad and finally start investing in the green economy, like they actually promised Canadians they would?

Mr. Speaker, it is not just the opposition that believed that the finance minister's massive investments were in a blind trust. That is what many Liberals believed as well. Earlier this month, the member for Spadina—Fort York tweeted that the finance minister's shares in Morneau Shepell “were put in an arms length blind trust [when] he was sworn in 2 years ago.” This is about a serious breach and potential conflict of interest. Will my friend the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Families, Children and Social Development stand in the House and explain when he was told this untruth and who told it to him?

Mr. Speaker, the minister says she respects the work of the all-party committee. Then we have to wonder why she spent the weekend on television undermining the work of that very same committee. The Liberals campaigned and were elected on the promise to make 2015 the last election under the unfair first-past-the-post system, but since forming government, this minister has increasingly backed away from this committee. This, when the all-party committee is just days away from issuing its report to all Canadians. Why is the minister undercutting the committee's work? Will she now clearly commit to implementing the recommendations of our committee?

My beating heart be still, Mr. Speaker. She is going to receive an alternative report.We are talking about the very heart and foundation of our democratic system. When Conservatives were in power, they shut down debate and did not seek support from other parties and used their false majority on committee to ram through changes to our electoral system. After promising to be different, Liberals proposed a process that has given themselves the power to change our democratic institutions without the support of any other party and use their false majority to do the exact same thing.Here is an opportunity for the minister. Will she commit today that her government will not act unilaterally to pass changes to our democracy, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, I wonder when this Prime Minister will finally take a bit of responsibility for this rather than trying to throw the Ethics Commissioner under the bus. Instead of selling millions in Morneau Shepell shares or even putting them in a blind trust, the finance minister chose to stuff them into a numbered company. He personally owns one-third of this company while the other two-thirds are owned by a second company. Who owns that second company? The finance minister does. What happens when you add one-third and two-thirds, other than a finance minister in a whole mess of trouble?

No, Mr. Speaker, that is not true. The Prime Minister had a deadline to fix the damage done by the previous Conservative government to our election laws, and for 18 months they did nothing. Now they are panicking and actually threatening to shut down debate in Parliament just hours after it started. New Democrats have made a proposal to properly study the bill, get out on the road to talk to Canadians, and still allow the passage of the bill to get Elections Canada doing its job for us. Let us find out which path the Prime Minister is going to choose. Is he willing to work with us, or is he going to follow the dangerous one set by Stephen Harper?

Mr. Speaker, we can see what the Liberals are doing. A carefully crafted denial that is not a denial at all. The same company found guilty of corruption and fraud was also caught illegally donating more than $100,000 to those same Liberals. SNC-Lavalin was rewarded. When it faced corruption and fraud charges, the Liberals leaned on their own justice minister not to go to trial but to get a plea deal. Do Liberals seriously expect Canadians to believe that all of these illegal and troubling events implicating the Prime Minister's Office itself and the former justice minister are all somehow just a coincidence?

Mr. Speaker, that is said by a man who is under investigation by the Ethics Commissioner.The definition of insider trading is “the use of undisclosed material information for profit”. Here are the facts. The finance minister told the National Post he sold $10 million in Morneau Shepell shares in December 2015. Six days later he introduced a tax change that would have lost someone selling $10 million in shares half a million dollars. Just minutes ago, the finance minister refused to tell reporters if it was he who in fact had sold those shares.Given all of this, how can the Prime Minister still have confidence in his finance minister?

Mr. Speaker, the very last sentence says, and this is what I wish to table, “While answering the profile questions is optional, not answering these questions will result in your input not being included as part of the overall results of the study”. I am not sure what Liberals meant by participation and consultation, but—

Mr. Speaker, telling people what they will do and actually doing it is ironic, because if the finance minister had actually done what he told people he was going to do and had put his things in a blind trust, none of this would be an issue. The Prime Minister's instructions to the finance minister was that he “must avoid conflict of interest, the appearance of conflict of interest and situations that have the potential to involve conflicts of interest.” The finance minister has failed to live up to that standard, and because the Prime Minister has failed to enforce the standard, we had to once again write the Ethics Commissioner. If all of this is not a conflict of interest to the Prime Minister, what exactly is?

Mr. Speaker, the world is facing a plastic waste crisis that is filling up our oceans and clogging our landfills. There is over one tonne of plastic waste for every person on the planet. In our lifetime, there will be more plastic than fish by volume in our oceans. Canada's recycling program is not doing the job. Over 90% of what we put in our blue boxes actually ends up in landfills. However, we have a solution. A citizen-inspired bill, the zero waste packaging act, would require all plastic packaging to be recyclable or compostable. If Liberals are truly serious about dealing with the plastic waste crisis, will they support our bill?

Mr. Speaker, after losing what was the worst and most expensive game of Texas Hold'em in history, we now learn that the company the Liberals bought their pipeline from may have falsified evidence to the NEB.For Coldwater first nations, 90% of their drinking water is threatened by this pipeline. Do members know what their backup plan is? They have a fire truck. Chief Lee Spahan said that this Prime Minister “is saying he wants to implement” the UN declaration, “he wants to stop boiling water advisories” for first nations, yet he won't look at the impact of a pipeline that “goes right through our aquifer.”Will the Prime Minister have the courage to actually visit Coldwater to see the impacts of his mad scheme to build a pipeline where it is not wanted and not needed?

Mr. Speaker, it was Stephen Harper who broke the record for shutting down debate in Parliament; yet in his darkest dreams, he never tried to stifle the voices of the opposition the way the Liberals are trying to do right now.It is the Liberal Prime Minister who wants to automatically limit debate on all government bills, and it is the Liberal Prime Minister who says he only has to show up one day a week to answer questions Canadians have for him.Newsflash: this House does not belong to the Liberal Party. It belongs to all Canadians, so will the Liberals step away from this disastrous and undemocratic plan, and work with us to make Parliament work again?

Mr. Speaker, the only thing Liberals understand is how access and cash go hand in hand. From the very start, all right-thinking people understood that the review of this pipeline was a cruel joke, everyone except the Liberals of course, who broke their promise to redo the process. Kinder Morgan shareholders passed a motion about first nations rights and concerns about the environment, and that these concerns were raising questions about the progress and prospects of the long-term viability.Taking money from Kinder Morgan lobbyists, breaking their promises on the environment, how bad has it gotten for Liberals that Kinder Morgan shareholders are more concerned about first nation rights and the environment than the Liberal government who swore to uphold them?

Madam Speaker, in the last campaign just a year ago, the Liberals promised to stop the terrible Conservative plan to strip Canadians overseas of their sacred right to vote, but yesterday we learned that the Liberals are actually continuing the Conservatives' fight at the Supreme Court of Canada against Canadians living abroad. The Liberal Party had the audacity to hit these very same Canadians up for a donation during the campaign. Someone once said “A Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian”, and I agree, so why would the Liberals take up Stephen Harper's scheme to rob 1.5 million Canadians of their right to vote?

Mr. Speaker, the finance minister seems so very forgetful these days. He forgot that cutting small business taxes was a promise that he ran on. He forgot he owned a luxury villa in France, but, hey, what middle-class Canadian has not? He also forgot to tell us that his vast wealth was not in fact in a blind trust, and he only comes clean when he is in a world of trouble.Why does this forgetful finance minister never remember his promises to Canadians but always remembers ways to protect his own wealth?

Mr. Speaker, for more than a year and a half, the Liberals knew that we had to hire a new Chief Electoral Officer and they did nothing. For more than a year and a half, the Liberals sat on a bill to undo the worst of Stephen Harper's unfair elections act and they did nothing. Now, with less than a year and a half to go before the next election, the Liberals are panicking. Rather than work with us, they sent us a letter a few weeks ago with just one name on it for a new Chief Electoral Officer. Then just last week, they sent us another letter with another name on it, but a different guy. Canadians want to know: what happened to the first guy? When it comes to our democratic rights, why do Liberals have such a hard time getting the job done?

Mr. Speaker, we would think the Prime Minister would at least have the decency to blush when he is breaking his promise to Canadians so blatantly, and could at least take that slightly smug look off his face. The way I was raised was that when people broke their word to Canadians, they would find the courage to apologize, which the Prime Minister has yet to do. Just eight weeks ago, the Prime Minister said, “I make promises because I believe in them”. On consensus, he said that he had heard “loudly and clearly that Canadians want a better system of governance”.After such obvious deception, how can anyone believe the Prime Minister ever again?

Mr. Speaker, have you ever been on one of those family vacations where your dad makes you take so many photos that just out of sheer desperation, you have to throw yourself on the ground? That is how Canadians felt watching the Prime Minister's terrible trip to India. Not only that, but he also managed to create a major international security incident in the process. Now, adding insult to injury, we learn that the Indian government is raising the tariff on Canadian chickpeas. My question is simple. Did the Prime Minister raise the issue of trade, and now that we have a problem, is he going to do something to help Canadian farmers who are being targeted?

Mr. Speaker, Canadians are seeing a very disturbing pattern here with the Liberals.A giant pharmaceutical company or a billionaire with his own island, the Prime Minister is at their beck and call, even if it means breaking the law. However, for regular Canadians struggling to pay the bills, struggling to pay for those overpriced medicines, the Liberals are just not that into them.If the Liberals will crawl across broken glass to answer the phone of the wealthy and well connected, when are they going to work half as hard for average Canadians who are just trying to follow the law and pay the bills?

Mr. Speaker, the minister might be a bit confused, because the environment commissioner's report has pointed out in black and white how flawed and in fact dangerous the current NEB process is. In more than half of the cases studied, the regulator does not even keep track of the conditions it imposes upon pipeline companies.The Prime Minister and his MPs made explicit promises to British Columbians. Let us now see if they will actually keep them. Will the government demand that the National Energy Board review Kinder Morgan and energy east under new and credible processes that Canadians can finally trust?

Mr. Speaker, Canadians were confused and shocked when the first indigenous justice minister was summarily fired without explanation. In her letter to Canadians, she warned that an attorney general must ”speak truth to power” and “It is a pillar of our democracy that our system of justice be free from even the perception of political interference.” In the bombshell report from The Globe and Mail, we now understand truly what she meant, because when the now former justice minister refused to drop the fraud and corruption trial against SNC-Lavalin, she was fired. Again, did anyone in the Prime Minister's Office communicate with the former justice minister about this case, yes or or no?

Mr. Speaker, there are 20,000 tweets mocking this minister's survey. The first rule of engagement the Liberals should learn is not to treat Canadians like they are stupid. Last week, the Minister of Democratic Institutions insulted our committee and the thousands of Canadians who participated with us in this process, because we were not specific enough for her. Yet today we see a pop-psych survey from this minister, and there is no mention of electoral systems whatsoever. Almost 90% of everyone who spoke to the committee recommended a proportional voting system. Yet the minister cannot even bring herself to put the word “proportional” in her survey.If the minister truly wants a clearer answer, why would she not simply ask the obvious questions?

Mr. Speaker, never once has the finance minister been straight with Canadians. Reporters had to dig to find out about his villa in France. Two years after telling everyone he had put his Morneau Shepell shares in a blind trust, he had to admit that it was not true. Now that he has been caught profiting from a bill that he himself introduced, he is trying to buy his way out of the problem. Maybe on Bay Street, when people commit a crime, they just ask the judge, “How much do I have to make the cheque out for?” However, it does not work that way in the House of Commons. This is an admission of guilt by no other means, so I ask the—

Mr. Speaker, it has been said that those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.Two and a half years ago, against the wishes of first nations and British Columbians, Stephen Harper approved the northern gateway bitumen pipeline. A year ago, B.C. helped—

Mr. Speaker, watch what the Liberals just did. They said they believe in indigenous rights and title, but only if indigenous people agree with them. They believe in this as a principle, but only when the principle works out for Liberals. What we have seen done through generations to indigenous peoples in this country is government pitting one group against another and respecting rights only when it is convenient for the government. In just a few minutes we are going to vote on the application of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples in this House. What are the Liberals actually going to do about it?

Mr. Speaker, I think the damage being done right now is by the Prime Minister to the faith that Canadians placed in him in the last election.Canadians expected better from this Prime Minister, yet last week he said the decision to turn his back on a solemn promise to fix our electoral system was “my decision to make”. I hate to break it to him, but it was not. That decision was made by the Canadian voters and only by the Canadian voters. When someone breaks a promise, they must first admit it, apologize for breaking faith, and work 10 times harder to regain the trust that has been lost.Will the Prime Minister do the right thing and at the very least apologize to Canadians for having broken his promise on electoral reform, yes or no?

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

Mr. Speaker, we just wish he shared that enthusiasm for the electoral process.When it comes to Liberal promises about respecting our democracy, they are about as hollow as the pumpkins I put on the front step last night. These guys are all trick, no treat. The Liberals betrayed their promise to make 2015 the last election under first past the post. They broke their promise not to ram through an election bill, just like Stephen Harper did. Now the Prime Minister is holding these ridings hostage for his political games. He called by-elections just last year in less time than we have waited in York—Simcoe, Burnaby South and in Outremont. What is the problem—

Mr. Speaker, does anyone remember the Liberal promise to end the cash for access fiasco? The minister said at the time that it was always possible to raise the bar. No kidding. The only question in this game of Liberal ethical limbo is how low will the Liberals go. It turns out that after banning lobbyists from attending Liberal fundraisers, lobbyists from Kinder Morgan attended three Liberal fundraisers for the Prime Minister and finance minister. Why would the Liberals take a bunch of money from a Kinder Morgan lobbyist and how can they expect Canadians not to believe this is simply buying access to the Liberal Party?

Mr. Speaker, in December, at the climate change conference in Paris, Canada committed to a 1.5-degree rise in global temperature. Yesterday the minister announced pipeline reviews that would include climate tests but could not say what a pass or fail would actually look like. A test only matters if they know how they are being graded.The minister knows full well that current provincial efforts are not enough to meet the weak goal that Canada currently has. Canadians want to know the real impact a climate test could have for a government that does not even have a climate target.

Mr. Speaker, record-setting floods and storms, historically devastating forest fires and a melting Arctic, and rather than bold action, we get more platitudes from the Liberal government.If empty words and broken promises were going to solve climate change, the Liberals would have had this thing beat decades ago, but they adopted Stephen Harper's climate change targets, and they cannot even meet those. No wonder they were such experts on what Harper was thinking about. They have gone down the exact same path with the exact same result, which is the definition, by the way, of insanity.When is the Prime Minister going to wake up to the reality and stop repeating the failures of—

The voice of the out of touch 1%, Mr. Speaker.Has anyone ever tried to change the channel knowing that the batteries are dying in the remote and just been too lazy to get up to fix them? That is what the Liberals were doing yesterday, trying to change the channel. However, Canadians are not buying it. Rather than admit they screwed up and close the Morneau Shepell ethical loopholes, the Liberals actually voted against doing so.The Prime Minister must believe there are two sets of rules, one for him and his buddies and another set for everyone else.While Canadians are worried about protecting their pensions, why is the Prime Minister only worried about protecting his finance minister?

Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the minister has even read her own survey, because if we do not give the Liberals all that private information, all of our answers are thrown in the garbage.We received a call today from Janet, from Alberta. She said when she called the MyDemocracy hotline, she was told these survey questions were approved by the 12-member all-party committee.That is news to me. I sit on the committee, and we would never have insulted the intelligence of Canadians with such ridiculous questions.First, the minister threw the committee under the bus, and now the Liberals are trying to blame us for their terrible survey. Thank goodness the Privacy Commissioner is investigating.Here is a values question for the Prime Minister. Does he have the integrity to keep his own promise?

Mr. Speaker, it is such a remarkable moment to hear the Liberals talk about taking too much time to respect Parliament. That is a bit of a contradiction of things as Liberals are going through the process of disrespecting Parliament, as Liberals are going through the process of saying they want to change the rules that guide all parliamentary debates, that they want to change the rules by forcing bills to only have a certain amount of time for debate at their discretion and nobody else's, to not even have a vote on it, and that it should be built into all legislation so that they can curtail Parliament and shut down discussions so there will be less scrutiny over what it is they are doing. They want to be able to stand and say that omnibus bills are bad in a campaign and the Prime Minister says that he will not use them, which, by the way, is a quote, and then the government introduces an omnibus bill that does exactly what the Prime Minister said he would not do.Governments need to be held to account. Governments from time to time, as shocking as this might be for some of my Liberal colleagues to hear, need to be corrected and their power needs to be checked. The last I checked, in the last election, less than 40% of voting Canadians voted for that party. That means there is a majority of Canadians who did not. That means their voices need to be heard and their opinions need to be respected. That is the job of the opposition and that is what we will continue to do, despite these trickeries by the government.

Mr. Speaker, I am not sure he is listening, so let us try again. Let me repeat inside the House what I just said outside the House. According to Global News, regulatory filings show that William Morneau Sr. sold 200,000 shares in Morneau Shepell before December 3, 2015. Four days later, the finance minister introduced tax changes that dropped the value of Morneau Shepell shares by approximately 5%. My question for the finance minister is clear and important. Did anyone have knowledge of this tax change and its timing prior to it being made public?

Mr. Speaker, Canadians were stunned to watch this climate-fighting Prime Minister promise to end fossil fuel subsidies and then go out and buy himself a used pipeline, a 65-year-old pipeline, with our money. These geniuses paid eight times the price that it was bought for just a few years ago. Adding insult to injury in this public bailout, it includes a $3-million bonus to Kinder Morgan executives. “Sorry, not sorry” is not going to cut it this time.Will the Liberals come clean and table the deal on the Kinder Morgan bailout so all Canadians can see how they ripped us off?

Mr. Speaker, exactly no one in first nation communities believes what the minister just said. Liberals seem to have invented a whole new game. It is called “Ethics Bingo”. How many Liberals have secret numbered companies they have not told Canadians about? Is it one? Yes, there is one. Is it two? Oh yes, at least two. Is it three? Tell me when I get to the right one and we can all yell “bingo” together. Enough with the games. Here are the Prime Minister's pre-end zone instructions to his ministers: ...you must uphold the highest standards of honesty and impartiality...and the arrangement of your private affairs should bear the closest public scrutiny. When are they actually going to live up to those words, or are they just meaningless words written on paper?

Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with my good friend from Kootenay—Columbia.It is indeed a privilege to rise today and speak in my best efforts on behalf of the people of Skeena—Bulkley Valley, the beautiful northwest of this great country. I use the word “privilege” very specifically. I wonder if some of my Liberal colleagues might take their conversations elsewhere. It is a little distracting.

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

Mr. Speaker, for months Liberals have been asking for ideas about how best to change our democracy, yet every time I, my friend from Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, and New Democrats have offered solutions, the Liberals have rejected them.Canadians are growing concerned and expect that when Parliament passes any new voting system, it must have the support of other parties in this place.Today, will the minister take a first and important step and agree to change the Liberal-dominated committee to one that is fair to all members of Parliament and the millions of Canadians we represent?

I guess he is on the clock, Mr. Speaker.For the Prime Minister, some good advice is that the best thing about telling the truth is that it is easy to repeat because it does not change. However, this Prime Minister treats the truth like his socks: He has a different version for every day of the week. His most trusted adviser has resigned under a cloud of controversy. In an attempt to change the channel, the Prime Minister's Office ran what many saw as a sexist and racist smear campaign against the former attorney general. In my experience, powerful people do not quit their powerful jobs because they are innocent. Will the Liberals finally work with us to get the answers that Canadians rightly deserve?

Mr. Speaker, when watching the Kinder Morgan saga, a lot of Canadians are asking themselves, “How the heck did we get here?” Let us review.First, Stephen Harper guts the environmental review process and ignores first nations consultation. Then the Liberals get elected, promising to do better and have a legitimate review. They betray that promise, and now we find out why. They got a call from the CEO of Kinder Morgan telling them to hurry up and rush the process.Exactly who is in charge over there, a Texas billionaire or the Prime Minister of Canada?

Mr. Speaker, there is no way he even believes that anymore. This whole fiasco of an approval process is looking more rigged than a Russian election. The Prime Minister promised the people of Alberta a credible process. He broke that promise. He promised the people of British Columbia meaningful consultation with first nations. He broke that promise too. Many people suspected the fix was in from the beginning, that the decision had already been made, and now we have the proof from leaked papers from his own administration. If the Prime Minister wants to regain a scintilla of trust that he once commanded in the country, will he reveal all the Kinder Morgan papers once and for all?

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege arising out of Question Period.In answer to important and direct questions about the ethical behaviour of members of the Liberal caucus, rather than answering those questions, time and again both the Liberal House Leader and the Prime Minister have threatened members of the opposition with lawsuits. Allow me to quote from Bosc and Gagnon, at page 107: ...threatening...a Member during a proceeding of Parliament, or while the Member is circulating within the Parliamentary Precinct, is a violation of the rights of Parliament. Any form of intimidation of a Member with respect to the Member's actions during a proceeding in Parliament could amount to contempt. It goes on. Speaker Bosley noted in 1986 the following: ...that [if] he or she has been threatened, intimidated, or in any way...influenced, there would be a case for the Chair to consider. This is an important issue, as we as members of Parliament have within our duties the important task of holding the government to account. If every time we attempt to do that and garner from the government the answers Canadians deserve, we are threatened with lawsuits, if in response to the questions we ask both here in the House and in public, the threats continue, that is a form of intimidation of our rights and a violation of our privilege as members of Parliament to perform our jobs on behalf of all Canadians.I ask you, Mr. Speaker, to seek a prima facie case of privilege. If you do so, I would be happy to move the appropriate motion.

Mr. Speaker, I guess that imitation is the best form of flattery as the Liberals are being sued by a first nation.When it comes to paying for oil spills, many Canadians want to know who picks up the costs of the environment and the economy. The City of Vancouver has been waiting three years for the federal government to show up and force the company to pay for the damage done there. Rather than blowing billions of taxpayer dollars subsidizing more pipelines and more risks, will the Liberals finally show up and force the company to pay or is this actually the Liberal oil strategy, to simply privatize the profits while socializing the risk?

Mr. Speaker, many Canadians are asking themselves what happened to that shiny, progressive, climate-fighting Prime Minister. He was the guy who once said, “No relationship is more important to me...than the [relationship] with Indigenous Peoples”,“governments grant permits...[but] only communities grant permission”, and this classic, “We have a chance to build...economies that are clean,...growing,...and forward-looking.” Then he bought a $4.5-billion, 65-year-old leaky pipeline.For all those people who thought he was progressive, thought he believed in the new economy, and thought he was going to fight climate change, whatever happened to that guy?

Madam Speaker, the lengths these Liberals will go to help out their friends: A lifelong Liberal and donor to the Prime Minister's own leadership campaign is their surprise choice for an independent commissioner.This Prime Minister has been under more investigations than any other prime minister in Canadian history, including Harper, Chrétien, and even Brian Mulroney somehow.Yesterday, Madam Meilleur admitted that she may have to recuse herself from investigating the Prime Minister because of these donations. Imagine, a commissioner who cannot investigate. Was this the Liberal plan all along, or just some happy coincidence?

Mr. Speaker, British Columbia's north coast is an incredibly beautiful place, famous for the power of its people. The Prime Minister and his transport minister, twice, joined with us and the people of British Columbia to ban all oil supertankers off that coast. Asked about the threat posed by Enbridge northern gateway, he said, “I will not be approving this pipeline”.Will he now stand in his place and finally tell British Columbians when he will finally introduce a legislated tanker ban off our beautiful coast?

Mr. Speaker, as you are well aware, it is a convention in this place that in question period, when the opposition asks a question of the government through a minister of the Crown, the minister should seek to answer it. Throughout question period, we directed numerous questions to the Minister of Veterans Affairs and repeatedly the Attorney General answered instead, and not on her behalf. This convention is important because as the Prime Minister once said, “sunlight is the best disinfectant”. In order to get the answers required in Parliament on behalf of the public we represent, we need the government to be accountable. Ministerial accountability does not end when a member is no longer the minister of a particular office. The questions we asked were pertinent to the time period when the member who is now Minister of Veterans Affairs was the Attorney General.I seek some clarification from you regarding the government's obligation to be accountable to Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, I smile because only Conservatives could call a proposal we made in public four months ago in a debate that we had on the floor of the House of Commons “a backroom deal”.After eight months of political impasse and a discredited process from the government, New Democrats were proud to put forward a motion to engage all parties in Parliament to create a process that is fair for the millions of Canadians we represent.Now that the logjam has been cleared, what is the government going to do to ensure that all MPs have the resources and tools available so that all Canadians can participate in this historic process?

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister prepares to play host to the G7, Canadians and many around the world are asking themselves, “What happened to this guy?” We all remember that great defender of the planet who promised to end fossil fuels subsidies. However, a new report shows that when it comes to the G7 and those same subsidies, Canada ranks seventh out of seven. That would be last. That would be after Donald Trump's America. Therefore, rather than eliminate the subsidies, the Prime Minister went out and bought a 65-year-old pipeline. When will he end this circle of hypocrisy and finally come clean with Canadians and keep his promise to them and to the world?

Mr. Speaker, on the very day that 180 Liberals broke their promise to Canadians to make every vote count, they chose that day to promise to fix the cash for access mess. Who created this mess in the first place? It was the Liberals. Bill C-50 has a Liberal loophole so big we could drive a limo through it. Wealthy Liberal Laurier club donors can drop their cash at a Liberal convention and the bill does not apply. That is good news for the wealthy and the well connected.Where did the Liberals summon the political courage for such breathtaking cynicism?

Mr. Speaker, do you see what they are doing? Do you see how they are trying to pit one first nation group against another?

Mr. Speaker, because that answer was so gosh darn convincing, I have another one for the minister.Her Liberal government is refusing to reveal to Canadians important information about tax cheats, even after the minister's promise to reveal important information about tax cheats. The minister's office now says that it is not its responsibility to release this information. Really? It is not the responsibility of the minister's office to tackle tax evasion and keep the minister's own promises?If the minister is not running her department, could she tell us who the heck is? If she will not do her job, will she at least find somebody who can?

Mr. Speaker, it is fascinating that the minister threw a committee of the House of Commons under the bus while she made these announcements on this bill.She is supposed to be the minister of democratic reform, not the minister for undermining democratic reform. Perhaps we should remind the minister that her single most important job was to make good on the Liberal promise that 2015 was the last election under first past the post. The committee has heard from hundreds of experts and thousands of Canadians who have told us overwhelmingly that the current system distorts the democratic will of Canadians. When the committee is working so hard to build a compromise, when so many Canadians are saying yes to reform, why has this minister become the voice of no?

Mr. Speaker, it would be $3.2 billion to provide safe drinking water for every kid living on reserve in this country; it is $4.5 billion to buy a 65-year-old pipeline. We have to ask ourselves what kind of priorities the Liberals actually have. When a Texas oil company shows up and needs a bailout, the Liberals cannot find a shovel big enough to pitch in. It will not stop first nations in court and it will not stop people in the street. When exactly did the Liberals decide to trump first nations' rights and title, and protecting our coast, all in favour of some Texas oil company they want to help out?

Mr. Speaker, two days before the Liberals bought a 65-year-old pipeline for $4.5 billion, that pipeline sprang a leak, but do not worry, said Kinder Morgan, it is just 100 litres. It turns out that the oil spill was 48 times larger than that, and thank God it did not happen over water, because these guys still do not know how to clean it up. Did anyone ever buy a used car and turn it on and it sounded real strange, but the seller cranked up the radio and said not to worry about it? That is exactly what the Liberals just did, maybe buying the biggest lemon in Canadian history. What kind of climate leader goes out and buys a 65-year-old, leaky pipeline anyway?

Mr. Speaker, when it comes to going after rich tax cheats, the motto of the Liberals seems to be “hear no evil, see no evil”. When the sweetheart amnesty deal was exposed, the one between the Liberal government and KPMG, the Liberals refused to even condemn it. When we tried to get key documents from KPMG at committee, the Liberals blocked it. However, now the Minister of National Revenue is speculating that charges may in fact be brought: “you know, one day, maybe, wink, wink”. Canadians are tired of having to pick up the tab for rich tax deadbeats.Which is it? Will the Liberals be pressing charges in the KPMG scam, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, officers of Parliament perform some of the most important roles in Canadian democracy. They run our elections, they police lobbying, and they enforce our ethical rules. The Liberals have completely botched the process of hiring these watchdogs. I do not know about everyone else, but when I am hiring somebody, I never pick from a list of one candidate. That is exactly what the Liberals are trying to force on Parliament. It is not consultation they are doing, it is an insult to this Parliament.Newsflash for the Liberals: these watchdogs do not work for them. They work on behalf of this whole place and on behalf of Canadians. If they want to work with us, appoint the right watchdogs, use the right process, and end this sham.

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has claimed that climate change is the fight of his life. He has claimed that there is no relationship more important to him than that with indigenous peoples and he has claimed that he really, really cares about protecting our west coast.When the National Energy Board said that the Trans Mountain pipeline will, one, have major impacts on our climate; two, significantly damage indigenous rights and title; and three, potentially wipe out the southern resident killer whale population, it seems like this decision would be a no-brainer. This is a test for the Prime Minister. Between the principles he claims to hold and a pipeline he so desperately wants to build, what is it going to be?

Mr. Speaker, repeating the same scripted non-answer only raises the suspicion of Canadians that the Liberal government is hiding something. The Prime Minister promised to set the bar on ethics high. He said that we “must avoid conflict of interest, the appearance of a conflict of interest”.The Liberal MP for Brampton East was appointed to the finance committee by the Prime Minister, where he asked troubling questions of senior law enforcement officials about how to avoid detection. This raised red flags with the RCMP. How do Liberals expect us to believe they saw nothing to worry about and that the media somehow know more about this scandal that the Prime Minister's own office does?

But he would never take personal cheap shots at anybody in this place.Mr. Speaker, the Liberal ethics saga continues, with even more information coming out about the finance minister's clear conflict of interest with Bill C-27. Let us go through the facts.As CEO of Morneau Shepell, he took over Mercer Canada, which manages the pensions of 93,000 Canada Post workers and retirees. Guess who stands to benefit if Bill C-27 becomes law. Well, Morneau Shepell, owned by our finance minister. I guess he stood to make boatloads of money. He knew exactly what he was doing when he took this benefit.Now that the Prime Minister knows the same thing, will he stop defending—?

Mr. Speaker, if the government wants to ensure that, then putting proportionality in as one of the principles would be the best way to do it. As we build this new system, we must enshrine the very best principles and values. Virtually every successful democracy around the world has put proportionality into its system, yet the minister's eight principles are missing this key element. Canadians want an end to false majorities whereby a minority of voters give a party 100% of the power. It has been six months, and Liberals have been dragging their heels while experts warn us that we are running out of time. At the very least, will the Liberals give up their false majority on the committee so that we can work together on behalf of all Canadians to come up with a good and proportional system in the next election?

Mr. Speaker, this question and response left me with some concern and confusion as well. My understanding is that any member of Parliament who seeks to resign has to notify one person in one office in writing, and that is your office, Mr. Speaker, to officially resign that seat. We have a Liberal member from Montreal who has had some problems doing that since the spring. We had this recent case just last week. The member for Brampton East indicated it through the Prime Minister's official site and I believe also through the government House leader's comments here today that “it was agreed that his decision to resign...was the right one.” Mr. Speaker, first, could you clarify for us if you have received notice from the member for Brampton East that he in fact has resigned that seat, and if he has not resigned that seat, could you call upon the government House leader to clarify the record from the beginning of this very concerning affair that now involves an Ethics Commissioner investigation and a RCMP investigation? The government has had difficulty being consistent and truthful to Canadians about this very worrisome affair. Continuing to contribute to that confusion does not help anyone, and it certainly does not help us get closer to the truth in this matter. I call upon you, Mr. Speaker, to clarify the reality for all Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister kept calling this a “conflict of ethics”, so I wonder how many sets of ethics the Liberals actually have for them to have a conflict between one set and another. He said he is focused on what he thinks is important. Well, a finance minister setting up a numbered company to exploit an ethics loophole is important to Canadians. He says this finance minister's breaking of his own ethics code is “petty politics”. We think protecting Canadian pensions is important and do not think a conflict of ethics is petty politics.When is he going to apologize for his dismissive remarks and finally take some action about this blatant abuse of public office?

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is now promising to finally meaningfully consult indigenous peoples on the Trans Mountain pipeline proposal. No, seriously, this time he really means it. Here is his problem. He has already made up his mind about the project. Therefore, asking indigenous peoples for their opinion, but refusing to hear the word “no” is the very definition of paternalism. How about this? Why does the Prime Minister not go and sit with indigenous leaders so they can teach him what free, prior and informed consent actually means or does he only agree with indigenous rights and title when indigenous people agree with him?

Mr. Speaker, it is a distinct honour for me to rise today to address my friend, the member for Langley—Aldergrove, and Diane, his wife, to say a few words.First of all, I want to wish my friend a happy birthday. The humour, strength and courage with which he came to the House today is remarkable, for those who do not know him. However, for those who have been blessed to have had time with him, it is no surprise and only confirms my feelings and thoughts toward him. I am not sure I have ever liked someone so much whom I have agreed with so little over the issues of the day and what we have grappled with. We first came to know each other when he was the parliamentary secretary to the minister of environment under Stephen Harper and I was the NDP's environment critic. We agreed on little, and our relationship of respect and mutual admiration was based on our ability to disagree without being disagreeable toward one another.We are the class of '04. We have spent some time traversing this country, from British Columbia to Ottawa and back again. In some of those moments, we have been able to share the costs, not to us but to our families, of being away and being apart. I have taken my friend's counsel over the years on this.Although I am not sure he will remember it, I will reflect on a time when a constituent of mine, Mark Penninga, who was running ARPA at the time, invited me to an ARPA meeting on the Hill. It was here in West Block. We had been here a long time, and we knew West Block before this.I recall that the meeting was at the end of a long hallway. I bumped into my friend at the very beginning of the hallway, and we exchanged pleasantries as we were on our way to the ARPA meeting. ARPA is a Christian group that represents Christian values. There were many meeting rooms along the way, and I felt that my friend expected me to peel off at some point and go to some other meeting. I knew where he was going, and I was going to the same place. He said, “Well, have a nice evening” and I said, “You too. Let's go in.” Seeing the shock on some of the faces of colleagues from various parties in the House that I had entered that room for that conversation was quite pleasurable, actually. I quite enjoyed the conversation and the shock.We come from opposite sides on many debates and many issues, but he has always approached those conversations with deep honesty and respect. I have taken exception to some of his ideas on things, and I will take exception to his assessment regarding the good looks of the member for Abbotsford. I worry about him and his ability to see clearly. However, I understand that emotions take over at certain points, so I will allow him that clear mistake in judgment regarding the good looks of our friend.It has been said that politics at its best is a vocation, a true calling. Those who enter politics merely for ego, personal ambition or power often do it badly. Those of us who seek office as a calling have a better shot at doing well by the people we seek to speak on behalf of.We all know that the member squeaked by in his five elections, with only, I believe, the support of 53% of his constituents, which is incredible. I think he represented them well. I think he represented them with integrity.To Diane, his five children and 10 grandchildren, who he refuses to ever shut up about, constantly telling us what is going on in their lives, we owe a great debt for the time we have had with Mark.I hope my friend understands that the shortness of my words here is in direct contrast to the depth and length of my admiration and love for him.Thank you, Mark.

Mr. Speaker, somewhere, quietly to himself, Paul Calandra is smiling.Just a year ago, the Liberals were chanting a new way of listening to Canadians, but little did Canadians know, they needed $1,500 to get their ear.This is the season for stories, so here is one. There was once a young prince, with luscious locks and looks to charm. He told the good people of this land that he would bring fairness to their democracy and make each and every vote count. Canadians are suddenly waking up, and they want to know, will the government actually bring in a fair proportional voting system, or is that all just a fairy tale?

Mr. Speaker, has anyone ever noticed that when the Prime Minister talks about the economy and the environment going hand in hand, it is always the environment that gets screwed?The recent report from the United Nations has sounded the alarm on catastrophic climate change, but rather than waking up from their decades- long slumber, the Liberals are hitting the snooze button: “Five more minutes, ma, please.”The Liberals promised to end fossil fuel subsidies. Instead, they dumped $4.5 billion on a leaky old pipeline. Will the Liberals listen to 6,000 climate scientists and finally end their plan to spend billions more on yet another oil pipeline?

Mr. Speaker, it seems that the Prime Minister will walk across broken glass to defend his ethically embattled finance minister, but will not lift a finger to help out Canadian pensioners. Bill C-27 is not only a clear attack on workers' pensions, it is also a massive conflict of interest. The opposition hears it and raises concerns, and the Liberals refuse to. Canadians see it, and the Liberals ignore it. The Ethics Commissioner is speaking about it, but the Liberals will not even mention it. She has launched an official investigation into this minister and this bill. Therefore, will the Prime Minister maybe update his hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil ethics code?

Mr. Speaker, I think it was the last comment from my friend from Kootenay—Columbia that talked about how we got here. Canadians will wonder, and the government will hold itself up and ask why there is such discord, having this almost oblivious attitude toward its own actions in getting us here.If the government wants to see the House functioning well and if it wants to see committees functioning well, it should ask itself how it is unable to do that with the majority that it has been given by Canadians. The simple request from the opposition is that in order to change the rules that conduct us here in Parliament, we should respect the long-held tradition that all parties agree to those rule changes, so that the power and balance of power that goes on between opposition and government is maintained with some dignity.Ultimately, is that not at the heart of the problem, and why so many things have fallen off the rails, and why the government seems incapable of actually passing legislation? This is probably one of the lightest legislative agendas we have seen in 50 years. It is incredible how little the government has been able to get done, outside of selfies, of course, because it does a lot of those.

Mr. Speaker, we all remember when the Prime Minister, hand on heart, looked longingly into the eyes of Canadians and promised them all that he would be different, that he was not like the old Liberal Party, promising anything to get elected but then once in, betraying that very promise. What ever happened to that guy? We hardly even got to know him. All the evidence shows that proportional representation not only ensures that every vote counts, it helps elect more women and encourages parties to work together in the national interest.When will the Prime Minister finally stop all the fearmongering and admit what everybody knows to be true, that the only reason he broke his promise to Canadians on electoral reform was because it was not in the interest of the Liberal Party?

Mr. Speaker, this is a newsflash for the Prime Minister. We have said all of these exact things outside the House as well as inside. The Prime Minister's own clear promise to Canadians was that he and his ministers must not be in a conflict of interest or even in “the appearance of a conflict of interest.” The Prime Minister said that he would be different. He said that he would answer questions. Let us test that promise. Has the Prime Minister asked his finance minister if he cleared the sale of $10 million of shares with the Ethics Commissioner before he introduced major changes to the tax code? By not holding his finance minister accountable, how would he expect any Canadian to believe anything he has to say?

Mr. Speaker, you have to wonder which first nations they are engaging with, because the first nations actually impacted by this mega-dam cannot even get their letters returned from the government. It seems to me that there are two Liberal Parties: one that is in campaign and makes sacred promises to first nations people, and one that governs to break them.The question comes for the Liberal government here and now. Right now they are in the position of authorizing this mega-dam in northeastern British Columbia. First nations have pleaded with the government not to do so, to pause the process and allow the consultation the government promised to actually take place.Which Liberal Party are we actually going to see?

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the leaders of the NDP, the Conservatives, the Greens and the Bloc all wrote the Prime Minister to insist that he do the honourable thing and respect the more than 300,000 Canadians who did not have a representative and call the by-elections.I am not sure these leaders could agree on what time of day it is, but they do agree that every Canadian deserves a voice in Parliament. The only one who does not agree is the Prime Minister. Let us remind him that this place does not belong to him, that the voices of all Canadians are due respect and are deserving of a representative here.When is the Prime Minister going to do the right thing and call the by-elections?

Mr. Speaker, if Canadians had a nickel for every empty answer they got on electoral reform, they might be able to afford to go to one of those Liberal fundraisers. Enough with the doublespeak.We have an historic opportunity to rise above narrow partisan interests and make every vote count. Here is one more chance for the Liberals to live up to their promise to Canadians. Will they drop the excuses, pick up a pen, and work with all of the parties to create a new and fair voting system where each and every vote counts, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, parliamentary privilege is a powerful tool afforded to all members of Parliament so we can do our jobs. However, the Liberal member for Brampton East used his privilege to ask senior law enforcement officials troubling questions about money laundering. After the Prime Minister told us that the member was quitting, that MP reversed his decision, maintaining his parliamentary privilege, which protects him from being subpoenaed by the House of Commons and also from being forced to testify in court against someone who, say, is accused of money laundering.Is the Prime Minister actually okay with the scenario, and if he is not, what is he going to do about it?

Mr. Speaker, the revenue minister's list of greatest misses is truly impressive. First, she wanted to tax employee discounts, then she started rejecting Canadians who had been granted a disability tax credit. Now we learn from the Auditor General that her department does not just reject half the calls it receives but of those that actually make it through, 30% of Canadians get the wrong information. If the minister wants to win back just a little bit of credibility, will she make this promise today that no Canadian will face a fine or penalty if they followed the bad advice of her agency?

Mr. Speaker, does anyone want to buy a 65-year-old leaky pipeline? No? Wait, it is located next to schools and parks, and literally crosses hundreds of rivers.The Liberals do, and they somehow decided that paying $4.5 billion to buy an old pipeline, and not telling us how much it is going to cost to build some illusory new pipeline, is somehow a good “investment”.When did the Liberals decide that trampling over the rights of indigenous peoples and putting our coasts further at risk was somehow in the public interest?

Mr. Speaker, I have quick question for the pipeline-owning Prime Minister. How is that sale going on the $4.5 billion gem of an oil pipeline he picked up? What, no buyers? Is that why he is rushing the sale, to sell off an asset that Canadians spent $500 million in 2018 to build? Well, it is good the government is offering 5% to local first nations.Two critical questions remain. Given what just happened to Rona workers, will the Prime Minister guarantee that not a single worker will lose their job at Ridley Terminals? Will he also promise that no foreign government will be allowed to buy this strategic asset?

Mr. Speaker, no wonder the minister is looking so confused. He is looking for support in northern British Columbia for a pipeline that runs through the south of British Columbia.The Liberals were warned by their own officials that rushing the consultation would land them in court. Guess where the Liberals are: in court with first nations. The Texas billionaire has called again with an ultimatum of May 31. When he says, “Jump”, the only question the Liberals have is, “How high?” To get this pipeline built on Kinder Morgan's terms, the Liberals have mused about calling in the army. How many Canadians, how many elders and young people are the Liberals willing to arrest just to meet this Texas ultimatum?

Mr. Speaker, I would love to see this guy at an auction. He just keeps bidding against himself.The Liberals paid $4.5 billion for a 65-year-old pipeline, $700 million more lost every year because of their own failed review, and these clowns want to go out and spend another $15 billion building more pipelines and they do not even have a permit. What could possibly go wrong? It is like the Prime Minister went out to buy a house, overpaid for it, did not insist on a home inspection and now the roof is leaking. The Liberals panicked. They were fleeced by a Texas oil company and now we are on the hook for their failure. How many boil water advisories could be lifted? How many green jobs could be created? When are these guys—

Words are fine, Mr. Speaker, but they are only meaningful if they are backed up with action. Will the Prime Minister join with New Democrats, first nations leaders, and Canadians calling for the resignation of Senator Beyak? Senator Meredith has sexually targeted a 16-year-old girl by his own admission, and yet when asked to condemn this horrible act, the so-called feminist Prime Minister said, “It is not for me to weigh in.” That is simply not good enough.Does he at least have the dignity and decency to condemn this act, and does he have one good idea to make the Senate more accountable to Canadians? Just saying “It's not my fault” is not going to cut it.

Mr. Speaker, most anniversaries we like to celebrate, but today is a day that Liberals are hoping Canadians forget all about, because it was a year ago today that Liberals and their Prime Minister broke a sacred oath to Canadians to make 2015 the last election under first past the post. Despite this betrayal, hope is alive in Canada. All opposition parties in Quebec have promised to bring in proportional representation. Prince Edward Islanders voted for it. In my home province of British Columbia, Premier John Horgan will be campaigning for it in the fall. If the Liberals want to restore a little faith, help elect more women, and truly make every vote count, will they show just a little bit of contrition, apologize, and get to work on real electoral reform?

Mr. Speaker, when the Liberals bought a 65-year-old leaky pipeline, most Canadians thought they definitely would have a super-duper cleanup plan in case of an oil spill. Well, apparently not.Washington state is raising the alarm, saying the Liberals emergency plan has major “deficiencies in critical areas” to protect salmon and whales. It is like the Liberals went out and bought a 1972 Pinto, with no airbags, no seat belts, and said “Kids, hop in. Let's go for a ride.” No parent would do this.Why did the Liberals burden Canadians with this old pipeline? They did not even bother to keep the receipt for $4.5 billion, and they do not have an emergency plan to clean up a spill.

Mr. Speaker, there have been many interventions, as you know, regarding the now former member for Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel. I wish to point out two brief but important facts after having read through the Hansard records of our former colleague's intervention.The first point is that the former member for Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel made many accusations during that speech, many of the ad hominem nature, against my personal character. Those I will leave aside, but very importantly he accused me of having relied upon the interpretation of a speech he had made previously. He said I relied upon that interpretation to present my facts before the House. It is fine to go after members of Parliament for different points of view on the topics of the day, even sometimes character assassination, as in this case, but we must leave aside at all times the excellent, non-partisan and highest-quality nature of the interpretation services that happen for all of us here. We must not suggest there is any defence made available to members of Parliament because those interpreters do not do an excellent job on behalf of us all in what are oftentimes very difficult circumstances.The second point is that despite the insinuations that were made by our now former colleague against me, this was never a personal issue for me. I have no actual personal interactions with the former MP. This was personal for me, though, with respect to the House of Commons and the reputations of members of Parliament, which we must jealously guard because they are constantly under siege. Raising the issue of members of Parliament who claimed to be leaving their office and then did not for a number of months is an attempt to hold up and try to maintain what we can of the esteem of Canadians, on whose behalf we seek to speak. Now that the former member for Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel has resigned his seat, I can do nothing but wish him health in his future. The people in Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel will finally have representation again because they, like all Canadians, deserve no less.

Mr. Speaker, I have a great deal of respect for my friend, as I do for a number of folks on all sides of the House, who deeply enrich themselves with the knowledge and history of this place. It is important that all sides have members who dedicate themselves to that conversation, because we all are actors passing across the stage. We are here for a time, we never how long, and yet we must maintain and, I would argue, improve the quality of what Parliament does on behalf of Canadians. The issue we are debating now is the ability of members just to get into the House to vote on behalf of their constituents, a motion which, by the way, the Liberals tried to kill at one point in these proceedings, which is ironic to a detrimental level. We have been talking about the rules that govern us as members of Parliament representing our constituents and that the long-standing tradition by prime ministers throughout history was to never change those rules unless all parties agreed, simply because it is a good test. Otherwise, one could imagine a government with a majority, a false majority, in this case, changing the rules to its own advantage over the opposition. We all recognize that a majority government has enormous strength and power to pass through its agenda, yet the role of the opposition to hold it to account is central to everything we do.The Liberals are using the line that they would not give a veto to the Conservatives over one of the Liberal election pledges. Ironically, that did not stop them from breaking their pledge on electoral reform. They themselves broke that with no help from anybody else. However, this notion that it went from an election pledge to somehow override the long-standing and important tradition that we as parliamentarians try to make the place better seems to me a distortion of the power of a promise ill-defined and badly made at some point by some political leader in the middle of a campaign versus the strength and integrity of the House of Commons.I have a frank question for my friend, which I might ask in private but am asking in public. He mentioned the pattern we were seeing from the government, which came in with great promise to make Parliament better, to be more open and transparent about the way to conduct ourselves, yet has demonstrated its tendency to want to override the will of Parliament, to distort the power that already exists in its favour. Can that pattern be broken or has this ship simply sailed too far away to get it back to some level of sanity and decency?