2019-02-07

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister said earlier today, the allegations contained in The Globe and Mail article are false.

Mr. Speaker, this is still very troubling because when we look at the chain of events, we see that SNC-Lavalin illegally donated nearly $110,000 to the Liberal Party and its associations in 2006.Today, SNC-Lavalin needs help because it is in trouble. Therefore, the machinery was set in motion. SNC-Lavalin and the government have held more than 50 meetings in the past two years. Why? It is because SNC-Lavalin would like the Liberals to drop the fraud and corruption charges against the corporation. The minister of justice was fired and everyone was wondering why.Was she fired because, in the end, a crony is a crony?

Mr. Speaker, The Globe and Mail article raises serious allegations against the PMO about trying to politically intervene in the criminal prosecution of SNC-Lavelin, thereby interfering with the independence of the Public Prosecution Service of Canada.We all know what happened next. The Prime Minister fired the former attorney general, because, as she said, she “spoke truth to power”.Did the Prime Minister fire the former attorney general because she refused to do his dirty work, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, I said that the minister had not done his job. I have a letter from the chief, who wrote, “Your department was given ample time and information.” They have received nothing but unrelenting barriers, outright refusals from the representatives and roadblocks. Therefore, I would like to ask the minister to stop hiding beneath the desk, stand up, show some leadership and go to Cat Lake. Hell, I will take him there myself.

Mr. Speaker, I will repeat once again, as the Prime Minister has said, earlier today, these allegations in The Globe and Mail are false.

Mr. Speaker, it is a pillar of our democracy that our system of justice be free from even the perception of political interference and uphold the highest levels of public confidence. As such, it has always been my view that the Attorney General of Canada must be non-partisan, more transparent in the principles that are the basis of decisions and, in this respect, always willing to speak truth to power. Those are the words and principles of the former attorney general.Why did the Prime Minister fire her for refusing to break them?

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister fired his former attorney general for speaking truth to power. Now he is banning her from speaking at all. There would be no good reason for anyone in the PMO to be talking with anyone in the attorney general's office about the criminal prosecution of SNC-Lavalin. Will the Prime Minister allow his former attorney general to speak and answer: Did anyone in his office speak to anyone in her office about that prosecution?

Mr. Speaker, there is nothing personal in what I am about to say. With all due respect to the Minister of Justice, he is not the one being implicated in all this, but rather the person he replaced. He has been appointed Attorney General. Congratulations. I am very happy for him, but Canadians want to know what his predecessor was subjected to by the Prime Minister's Office.Let me say it again. My question is for the individual implicated in the scandal that all Canadians care about. Can the former attorney general tell us whether the Prime Minister's Office approached her about the scandal exposed in today's Globe and Mail?

Mr. Speaker, today The Globe and Mail reported that the former minister of justice was pressured by officials in the PMO to politically intervene in the criminal prosecution of SNC-Lavalin. Was the former minister of justice fired by the Prime Minister because she refused to do his dirty work? Did she pay the price for his mistakes?

Mr. Speaker, these are shocking allegations that the Prime Minister appears to have fired his attorney general for refusing to politically interfere in an ongoing criminal prosecution. Did her refusal to favour the Prime Minister's friends cost her her job? Canadians deserve clear answers to these serious allegations. Did the Prime Minister fire his attorney general because she spoke truth to power?

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister said earlier today, the allegations contained in the article are false.

Mr. Speaker, we understand how important bus transportation is to remote, rural and indigenous communities. That is why the second we learned about Greyhound's decision to withdraw from western Canada, the minister began working with private partners and the provinces. We have come to the table with funding for the provinces, but if the premiers of Saskatchewan and Manitoba are not willing to sit down, then they are leaving their own residents out in the cold.

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister said earlier today, neither the Prime Minister nor his office put my predecessor or myself under pressure nor gave any directives. These allegations contained in The Globe and Mail are false.

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the chair of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights.The Government of Quebec just tabled a bill requiring permanent residents in Quebec to learn French and Quebec values.Could the committee chair assure us that his committee will not do anything to thwart the Quebec legislation? I am asking him that because we know him. He thinks it is shameful to have a requirement to learn French.

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister dealt with this matter very clearly earlier today. He stated that neither he nor anyone in his office pressured my predecessor or myself to come to any particular decision in this matter. As the Prime Minister stated earlier today, the allegations contained in The Globe and Mail article are false.

Mr. Speaker, that was not the question. The question was whether or not anyone in the Prime Minister's Office, at any time, had communications with anyone in the former attorney general's office on the subject matter of the criminal prosecution of SNC-Lavalin. This is a yes or no answer. Which is it?

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, the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada's notes are looking a little worn. We know that he did not receive any directives. He has repeated that 20 times.Did the Prime Minister put pressure on the former attorney general of Canada to ask the director of public prosecutions to drop criminal proceedings? That seems fishy. Did the Prime Minister make her pay for his mistakes?

Mr. Speaker, the new Attorney General is trying to hide behind the Prime Minister's carefully scripted legal response this morning, but the question is quite simple. It is direct about dealings on the criminal prosecution of SNC-Lavalin. I will ask the attorney general again. Was he ever contacted by anyone in the Prime Minister's Office about this case before he was promoted to the position of attorney general?

Mr. Speaker, this evening, a Liberal motion to improve employment insurance sickness benefits will be moved in the House. It looks like the Liberals have finally seen the light and realized that 15 weeks to heal is not enough.I am very proud to have stood up with my NDP colleagues and hammered home the message that 15 weeks is not enough.My question is simple. Will the Liberals support their Liberal colleague and increase the 15 weeks of EI sickness benefits?

Mr. Speaker, as you know, we are going to pay $13.8 billion for the Trans Mountain project, the Americans' old pipeline that no one else wanted to buy. You also know that the $19-billion deficit has largely gone toward dirty oil and goodies for oil companies in western Canada.Like us, Mr. Speaker, you think it is time for the federal government to work as hard for Quebec as it does for the oil sands, with all due respect to my colleagues.When is the Minister of Finance going to start working for Quebeckers and stop handing out goodies to oil companies?

Mr. Speaker, I met a young mother in Cat Lake this week who wept as she told me that her 12-year-old was so disfigured from rashes and impetigo that she had quit school, she hid under a blanket and she would not let her own mother see her face. Last week, the minister offered to send up some light switch covers. That does not cut it in a country as rich as Canada.I am asking the minister if he will stand in the House and commit today to a full independent medical team to go into Cat Lake to assess every child living in those mould-infested shacks, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, Canadians want the facts and the truth from those directly affected by the scandal the Globe and Mail exposed today.With all due respect to the Minister of Justice, he is not the one in the hot seat here. The current Attorney General is not in the hot seat, but the person who just lost that job is.Will the Minister of Veterans Affairs, Canada's former attorney general, rise and tell Canadians if she was or was not pressured by the Prime Minister's Office? Was she pressured, yes or no?

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, Franco-Ontarians are proud of their language and culture. It is inconceivable that, even today, 50 years after the implementation of the Official Languages Act, we still have to fight to uphold our language rights.In November, Doug Ford's Conservative government launched a direct attack on Ontario's francophonie by eliminating the independent Office of the French Language Services Commissioner and cancelling funding for the French-language university.Can the Minister of Tourism, Official Languages and La Francophonie tell us here in the House how the government is helping Franco-Ontarians so that they can continue to assert their language rights?

Mr. Speaker, Canadians know that from the day the Liberals took office, from the Prime Minister down, the proclaimed ethical standards and the “go-beyond-the-letter-of-the law” ministerial mandate letters were simply window dressing, empty words. Every violation exposed by the Ethics Commissioner was sloughed off with, “The PM is working with the commissioner.”Today's revelations of alleged corruption in the highest office in Canada, attempted interference in criminal justice and punishment of a minister who resisted demand answers and accountability now.

Mr. Speaker, that question was for the former attorney general. It is clear that the Prime Minister has fired her, and now he is silencing her. Why will he not allow her to answer the question as to whether or not she received any communications between the Prime Minister's Office and her own regarding the criminal prosecution of SNC-Lavalin? Did those conversations happen, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, again, he cannot answer a simple yes or no question.I will ask him a slightly different question. According to the lobbyists registry, SNC-Lavalin lobbied the government dozens of times. In those meetings with senior officials, did the subject of its criminal prosecution ever come up, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, I would be happy to retract my use of the word that implicated the leader of the Conservative Party earlier and insert instead “fearmongering”, because that is exactly what he is—

Mr. Speaker, that was a carefully scripted response, but at the same time, pressure can come in many forms outside of merely direction. The evidence is mounting, and the Prime Minister's responses are not adding up. Actions speak louder than words, and Canadians deserve the truth. The former attorney general spoke truth to power, but maybe the Prime Minister cannot handle the truth. Did the Prime Minister fire the former attorney general for defending the independence of Canada's judiciary?

Mr. Speaker, since the Prime Minister cannot answer these questions, I will answer part of that for him. At least 14 times, according to the lobbyists registry, meetings with SNC-Lavalin touched on the subjects of “justice” and “law enforcement”.In those meetings where “justice” and “law enforcement” were brought up, were subject matters dealing with the criminal prosecution of SNC-Lavalin ever touched upon, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, that was not the question. We have heard the Prime Minister's very carefully scripted legalistic answer.However, the question is: Did anyone in the Prime Minister's Office, at any time, communicate with anyone in the former attorney general's office on the matter of the criminal prosecution of SNC-Lavalin, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, my Atlantic colleagues and the member for St. John's East know well that to overcome our demographic challenges and grow our economy, immigration is essential. Immigration expands economic opportunities for all Atlantic Canadians. Since its launch, the Atlantic immigration pilot has matched 1,700 employers with over 1,800 newcomers and their families who are putting their skills to work to grow local businesses.While the Conservatives are busy Scheer-mongering, our government is busy accepting newcomers who are growing Atlantic Canada--

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Transport finally heard the NDP's call. He acknowledged a 79% service gap in Saskatchewan's intercity public transportation and agrees with us that the situation is urgent and more important than partisan politics. However, offering $10 million to the Saskatchewan Party government is not a solution if it is not willing to share the cost to tackle the crisis. Why was this minister's funding conditional, when the Saskatchewan Party has made it clear that offering reliable transit to people is not its priority?

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister said earlier today, those allegations are false. Neither the Prime Minister nor his office put my predecessor or me under pressure or gave any directives.

Mr. Speaker, he said “no” earlier today, so we know he is able to answer at least one yes or no question. I want him to answer this one. According to the lobbyists registry, SNC-Lavalin met with the Prime Minister's Office on 14 different occasions to discuss justice and law enforcement. This is a construction company, by the way. In any of those meetings, was the subject of the criminal prosecution of that company ever discussed, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, let's talk about his predecessor. As we know, the simplest explanation is often the best one.SNC-Lavalin and the Liberal Party have very close ties, so close that illegal donations have been made. SNC-Lavalin needs help, and the Prime Minister's Office seems keen to lend the company a hand. The PMO put pressure on the minister of justice to overlook accusations of fraud and corruption against the company. She refused and got sacked. Now we see why, in her farewell letter, she said, “It is a pillar of our democracy that our system of justice be free from even the perception of political interference and uphold the highest levels of public confidence.”Who in the Prime Minister's Office put—

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, yesterday the response I got from the Prime Minister on my call for urgent action on first nations was met with platitudes. The federal government is ignoring communities like Garden Hill that do not even have running water, but the crisis continues. Today in Mathias Colomb, over 500 students cannot go to school because it is shut down because of mould contamination: mould contaminated housing, schools, and no running water. When is the federal government, the Prime Minister, going to stop the empty words about reconciliation and relationships and urgently work with first nations to deal with the serious crisis they are facing right now?

Mr. Speaker, the prosecution in question is being handled by the Public Prosecution Service of Canada. The counsel for the Attorney General of Canada is fulfilling all of its obligations with respect to third party records applications. It is improper for me to comment further on this issue as the matter is before the courts.

Mr. Speaker, Canada still does not have a youth policy; in fact, it seems the file has fallen through the cracks. Consultations were launched one year ago and an 80-page report was tabled. Nothing has happened since.There is no longer anyone in charge of the youth file in the Prime Minister's Office. The budget for Privy Council's Youth Secretariat was cut by 33% between 2016 and 2019. This looks like a first class funeral.Will the Prime Minister and Minister of Youth keep his promise and implement a youth policy, or have the efforts of his Youth Council been in vain?

Mr. Speaker, Atlantic Canada's economic success depends on our ability to attract and retain skilled workers, and workers stay when their families put down roots. These new Canadians not only help good businesses grow and succeed but also enrich the cultural fabric of our region.Can the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship update the House on the Atlantic immigration pilot and its progress in addressing labour shortages and growing the economy in our region?

Mr. Speaker, the way the Prime Minister has treated the former attorney general is criminal, perhaps literally. Is the Prime Minister proud of the fact that he has now joined the list of international leaders who have fired their attorneys general for failing to follow their political orders?

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister has said, earlier today, these allegations are false.

Mr. Speaker, he might not have been “directed to”, but he was certainly promoted based on his willingness to go along with the PMO on this.Let me try this again.SNC-Lavalin met with the Prime Minister's Office at least 14 times on the subjects of justice and law enforcement. Some of the meetings were with the PMO principal secretary.Did the subject of the criminal prosecution of SNC-Lavalin come up during the meetings at the Prime Minister's Office, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister can shout from rooftops all over the world that he is a champion of climate action, but that does not make it true. The truth is that the big oil sands polluters have the government—and the official opposition, as well—in their pockets. My question is the following.Does the Minister of the Environment think that investing $19 billion of public money in dirty oil is a good way to combat climate change?

Mr. Speaker, I was not privy to those conversations. As the Prime Minister has said, earlier today, these allegations are false.

Mr. Speaker, the question was not about pressure or direction. The question was whether or not the subject of the criminal prosecution of SNC-Lavalin came up in any conversations between staff members of the PMO and the attorney general's office. There would be no good reason for such conversations to occur, because prosecutions of that nature have nothing to do with the political office of the Prime Minister. Why can the minister not just rise today and tell us, yes or no: Was the matter ever discussed between the PMO and the attorney general's office?

Mr. Speaker, I would like to point out that our government is taking the threat posed by climate change extraordinarily seriously because we know it is the fight of our times. In particular, we have made the largest investment in public transit in the history of our country. By 2030, 90% of our electricity is going to be generated by renewable resources. In fact, we are putting 50 commitments and more forward to combat climate change and we are putting a price on pollution. It is going to bring emissions down and put more money in the pockets of middle-class families.It is disappointing that the opposition cannot be as honest as the member for Beauce and admit that their plan is to do nothing.

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister talks about the rule of law, but he does not walk the talk. His office pressured the justice minister to let a company off the hook. His ambassador to China interfered in an extradition. The Prime Minister himself charged Admiral Norman before the RCMP did. The political interference of the Prime Minister and his office knows no bounds. Admiral Norman deserves a fair trial. Will the government commit today to immediately releasing all the court-mandated documents, including those on phones and devices, so that he can have a fair trial?

Mr. Speaker, perhaps the former attorney general can shed some light on this issue. It is quite clear that we are seeing the beginnings of a cover-up here. The former attorney general prided herself on speaking truth to power. She spoke truth to power behind closed doors and the Prime Minister fired her.Will she now speak truth to power in front of all Canadians and confirm whether or not she received any communication from the Prime Minister's Office regarding the criminal prosecution of SNC-Lavalin, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, we all share the member's concerns. Today we are in direct connect with the leadership of Cat Lake on all the challenges it is facing. We have heard very clearly from the community the serious concerns around health, safety and the quality of housing. Another meeting is taking place with the community leadership and partners, as we speak, to advance immediate action and long-term planning. We will continue to work directly with the community to address these issues.

Mr. Speaker, my colleague mentioned a deficit. We promised Canadians that we would make key investments in our infrastructure, because Stephen Harper's Conservative government left us with a massive deficit of investment and vision, especially with regard to infrastructure, science and reducing inequality in Canada. That is why Quebec has seen phenomenal growth over the past three years, as well as lower inequality. We have a lot to be proud of.

Mr. Speaker, the question was not about the Prime Minister's carefully-vetted answer this morning. The question was about himself. Yes, he may have been aware of this case, but the question was very specific. Was he ever contacted by anyone in the PMO about the criminal prosecution of SNC-Lavalin before he was named to his new post of Attorney General? Did those conversations happen, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, one of the most heart-wrenching and impactful experiences I have had as an MP was door-knocking in Parksville and meeting an elderly woman living on a fixed income. She told us that she had to choose between eating, paying rent and buying medicine, telling us she had no choice but to live in pain. This should not and does not have to happen in a country like ours. We need a universal pharmacare program for her and so that nobody else has to make these choices. How can the Liberal government drag its feet when people are unnecessarily living in pain?

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister said earlier today, neither my predecessor nor myself have received directives with respect to the dealing of this particular case.As the Attorney General of Canada, I take my responsibilities to give advice in the public interest to the government very seriously. I will continue to do so.

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the opposition House leader, I would like to ask the government House leader what the business before the House will be for the remainder of this week and the week after we return home to work in our constituencies.

Mr. Speaker, well, I am thankful that another minister had to stand up for the minister who is missing in action. I will tell members what the chief just wrote today—

Mr. Speaker, the answer is no.

Mr. Speaker, the Globe and Mail has published very troubling allegations about interference from the Prime Minister's Office and his staff in a criminal case.Can the Prime Minister confirm that neither he nor any member of his staff had communications with the former attorney general about the criminal prosecution of SNC-Lavalin?

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister said earlier today, neither he nor anyone in his office directed my predecessor or myself to come to any particular result in this case. As the Attorney General of Canada, I am the chief law officer of the Crown and I provide legal service to the government, with a responsibility to act in the public interest. I take this responsibility very seriously.

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister said earlier today, there was no pressure on my predecessor and there were no directives. The same goes for me. I was not pressured and did not receive any directives from the Prime Minister or his office.

Mr. Speaker, when it comes to something as important as pharmacare, we certainly want to get it right, and we need a plan. That is why we have moved forward with the implementation of an advisory council on the implementation of a national pharmacare program. For this advisory council, we appointed a stellar group of experts in the field. They have had a national conversation with Canadians and also with experts in provinces and territories. I look forward to receiving their report in the spring of this year.

Mr. Speaker, at no point have I been pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or the Prime Minister's Office to make any decision on this or any other matter. As the Attorney General of Canada, I am the chief legal officer of the Crown. I have the responsibility to give legal advice to the government based on the public interest. I take this responsibility very seriously.

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister said earlier today, neither he nor his office exerted any pressure or issued any directives in this matter.As Attorney General for Canada, I am the government's chief legal officer. I take my responsibilities very seriously.

Mr. Speaker, of course there is someone in charge of the youth file, and that is the Prime Minister of Canada.We are very proud of the outstanding and extraordinary work of our Youth Council. It has been working on the implementation of Canada's very first youth policy for two years.I will have some good news to share with my honourable colleague and the House in the weeks and months to come.

Mr. Speaker, globally, LGBTQ communities continue to face discrimination and injustice because of who they are. To help address this discrimination, our government has announced a new initiative of $30 million over five years, followed by $10 million per year ongoing, to advance human rights and improve socio-economic outcomes for LGBTQ2 people in developing countries.Our government continues to take concrete action to advance human rights, including LGBTQ2 rights, in Canada and around the world.

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister outlined today, he has not given directives to either my predecessor or myself on this matter.

Mr. Speaker, my question was for the chair of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human rights. Why did he not answer it?

Mr. Speaker, we know that immigration plays a key role in the economies of Quebec, Canada and all communities across the country.The Government of Canada and the Government of Quebec have been working together for decades under the Canada-Quebec agreement, and we intend to continue with that important collaboration.It is too early to comment on the content of the bill, but we look forward to examining it and will work with the Government of Quebec on this issue.

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister said earlier today, he did not give any directives to my predecessor. For my part, I can assure the House that I have received neither pressure nor direction from either the Prime Minister or Prime Minister's Office regarding any decisions on this matter. As the Attorney General of Canada, I take my responsibilities very seriously.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Ottawa—Vanier for her excellent work, her very good question and everything she does for Franco-Ontarians.We, on this side of the House, believe in the Canadian francophonie and particularly in the importance of bilingualism in Canada. We know that we still need to protect Canada's francophones and always will. We need to protect our linguistic minorities.We also know that Franco-Ontarians have the right to their university, and we are going to do everything in our power to make that a reality.

Mr. Speaker, at no point have I been directed or pressured by the Prime Minister or the Prime Minister's Office to make any decision in this or any other matter. As the Attorney General of Canada, I am the chief legal officer of the Crown and have the responsibility to give legal advice to the government in the public interest. I take these responsibilities very seriously—

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister said earlier today, no direction was given to my predecessor. No direction has been given to myself in regard to this decision. As the Attorney General of Canada, I am the chief legal officer of the Crown. I take my responsibility to give advice, in the public interest, to the government very seriously.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank all members of the House for being sensitive to the major struggles all too often faced by our families.I also want to thank all members of the House for understanding that we have taken meaningful steps since 2016. We made the five EI special benefits that were already in place when we took office more flexible and more generous. We also introduced two other benefits, namely the caregiving benefits and the parental sharing benefit, which will be rolled out in the coming weeks.We know there is still a lot of work to do, and we are raring to go.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his congratulations.As the Prime Minister said earlier today, there was no pressure, there were no directives, not from him or from his office on this matter.

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister stated today, he has not given directives to my predecessor, nor did he pressure her. For my part, as Attorney General of Canada, I can assure the House that I have received neither pressure nor direction from either the Prime Minister's Office or the Prime Minister himself.

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister said earlier today, no such direction was given to my predecessor. I can say that no such direction has been given to me to come to any particular conclusion in this matter. As Attorney General for Canada, I am the chief legal officer of the Crown. I provide legal services to the government, with a responsibility to act in the public interest. I take these responsibilities very seriously.

Mr. Speaker, as I have said, I have received neither pressure nor direction from either the Prime Minister or the Prime Minister's Office with respect to the decision that could be made in this particular file.As a Quebec member of Parliament who reads the newspapers, I did know about this case, but it does not transfer into my role as Attorney General.

Mr. Speaker, all children deserve a safe and healthy environment to learn in. Work is currently under way to remediate mould at the school, and it is anticipated that it will be complete by the end of the week. We will be following this work as it progresses, and I look forward to working with the hon. member as we go forward.

Mr. Speaker, at no point have I been pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or the Prime Minister's Office to make any decision on this or any other matter.As the Attorney General of Canada, I am the government's senior legal advisor. I provide legal advice to the government and must act in the public interest. I take these responsibilities very seriously.

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister has said earlier today, no such direction was given, no such pressure was made with respect to my predecessor. Certainly I can say from direct experience that I have received neither pressure nor direction from the Prime Minister or the Prime Minister's Office.

Mr. Speaker, this afternoon we will continue with the second reading debate of Bill C-91, the indigenous languages act. We hope to see that referred to committee by the end of the day so that the committee can do its important work. We understand that we have a lot of support, but we do need to consider amendments.Tomorrow we will start debate at report stage and third reading stage of Bill C-85, the Canada-Israel free trade agreement.Next week we will be working with our constituents in our ridings.I would like to note that Tuesday, February 19 will be an allotted day.On Wednesday, we will begin consideration at report stage and third reading of Bill C-77, on the Canadian Victims Bill of Rights.

Mr. Speaker, as I think is clear, I was not privy to those discussions. As the Prime Minister has said, earlier today, directions were not given either to my predecessor or myself with regard to any decision in this matter.

Mr. Speaker, as we have said, we are working directly with the community of Cat Lake. The minister is in contact with the chief and another meeting is taking place today with senior officials. We are accelerating work on needed repairs. We are accelerating the construction currently under way on new homes. We are establishing a task force with the community leadership and the Windigo tribal council. We continue to work diligently with Cat Lake to solve these issues.

Mr. Speaker, I do and I retract my use of the word, but the—

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister has said, no such direction was given to my predecessor. No such direction has been given to me. Once again, as the Attorney General of Canada and the chief legal officer of the Crown, I provide legal advice to the government based on the public interest. I take these responsibilities very seriously.

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister said, no direction was given to my predecessor in regard to this decision. I can say that no such direction has been given to me, nor has there been any pressure from the Prime Minister or the Prime Minister's Office. As Attorney General for Canada, I will continue to give legal advice to the government as its chief legal officer, based solely on the public interest.

Mr. Speaker, all people deserve to live with dignity, feel safe, and have their rights respected, regardless of their identity.Our government is committed to defending the fundamental human rights of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, two-spirit and intersex community in Canada and around the world.Could the Minister of International Development tell the House what tangible steps she is taking on this critical issue outside of Canada?

Mr. Speaker, since the Prime Minister cannot answer these questions, I will answer part of that for him. At least 14 times, according to the lobbyists registry, meetings with SNC-Lavalin touched on the subjects of “justice” and “law enforcement”.In those meetings where “justice” and “law enforcement” were brought up, were subject matters dealing with the criminal prosecution of SNC-Lavalin ever touched upon, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, these are shocking allegations that the Prime Minister appears to have fired his attorney general for refusing to politically interfere in an ongoing criminal prosecution. Did her refusal to favour the Prime Minister's friends cost her her job? Canadians deserve clear answers to these serious allegations. Did the Prime Minister fire his attorney general because she spoke truth to power?

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister has said, earlier today, these allegations are false.

Mr. Speaker, I will repeat once again, as the Prime Minister has said, earlier today, these allegations in The Globe and Mail are false.

Mr. Speaker, I was not privy to those conversations. As the Prime Minister has said, earlier today, these allegations are false.

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister said earlier today, those allegations are false. Neither the Prime Minister nor his office put my predecessor or me under pressure or gave any directives.

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister said earlier today, neither the Prime Minister nor his office put my predecessor or myself under pressure nor gave any directives. These allegations contained in The Globe and Mail are false.

Mr. Speaker, today The Globe and Mail reported that the former minister of justice was pressured by officials in the PMO to politically intervene in the criminal prosecution of SNC-Lavalin. Was the former minister of justice fired by the Prime Minister because she refused to do his dirty work? Did she pay the price for his mistakes?

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister said earlier today, the allegations contained in the article are false.

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister said earlier today, the allegations contained in The Globe and Mail article are false.

Mr. Speaker, he might not have been “directed to”, but he was certainly promoted based on his willingness to go along with the PMO on this.Let me try this again.SNC-Lavalin met with the Prime Minister's Office at least 14 times on the subjects of justice and law enforcement. Some of the meetings were with the PMO principal secretary.Did the subject of the criminal prosecution of SNC-Lavalin come up during the meetings at the Prime Minister's Office, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, again, he cannot answer a simple yes or no question.I will ask him a slightly different question. According to the lobbyists registry, SNC-Lavalin lobbied the government dozens of times. In those meetings with senior officials, did the subject of its criminal prosecution ever come up, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, that was not the question. The question was whether or not anyone in the Prime Minister's Office, at any time, had communications with anyone in the former attorney general's office on the subject matter of the criminal prosecution of SNC-Lavalin. This is a yes or no answer. Which is it?

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister said earlier today, he did not give any directives to my predecessor. For my part, I can assure the House that I have received neither pressure nor direction from either the Prime Minister or Prime Minister's Office regarding any decisions on this matter. As the Attorney General of Canada, I take my responsibilities very seriously.

Mr. Speaker, The Globe and Mail article raises serious allegations against the PMO about trying to politically intervene in the criminal prosecution of SNC-Lavelin, thereby interfering with the independence of the Public Prosecution Service of Canada.We all know what happened next. The Prime Minister fired the former attorney general, because, as she said, she “spoke truth to power”.Did the Prime Minister fire the former attorney general because she refused to do his dirty work, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, that was not the question. We have heard the Prime Minister's very carefully scripted legalistic answer.However, the question is: Did anyone in the Prime Minister's Office, at any time, communicate with anyone in the former attorney general's office on the matter of the criminal prosecution of SNC-Lavalin, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, as you know, we are going to pay $13.8 billion for the Trans Mountain project, the Americans' old pipeline that no one else wanted to buy. You also know that the $19-billion deficit has largely gone toward dirty oil and goodies for oil companies in western Canada.Like us, Mr. Speaker, you think it is time for the federal government to work as hard for Quebec as it does for the oil sands, with all due respect to my colleagues.When is the Minister of Finance going to start working for Quebeckers and stop handing out goodies to oil companies?

Mr. Speaker, the question was not about pressure or direction. The question was whether or not the subject of the criminal prosecution of SNC-Lavalin came up in any conversations between staff members of the PMO and the attorney general's office. There would be no good reason for such conversations to occur, because prosecutions of that nature have nothing to do with the political office of the Prime Minister. Why can the minister not just rise today and tell us, yes or no: Was the matter ever discussed between the PMO and the attorney general's office?

Mr. Speaker, the Globe and Mail has published very troubling allegations about interference from the Prime Minister's Office and his staff in a criminal case.Can the Prime Minister confirm that neither he nor any member of his staff had communications with the former attorney general about the criminal prosecution of SNC-Lavalin?

Mr. Speaker, Canadians know that from the day the Liberals took office, from the Prime Minister down, the proclaimed ethical standards and the “go-beyond-the-letter-of-the law” ministerial mandate letters were simply window dressing, empty words. Every violation exposed by the Ethics Commissioner was sloughed off with, “The PM is working with the commissioner.”Today's revelations of alleged corruption in the highest office in Canada, attempted interference in criminal justice and punishment of a minister who resisted demand answers and accountability now.

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister fired his former attorney general for speaking truth to power. Now he is banning her from speaking at all. There would be no good reason for anyone in the PMO to be talking with anyone in the attorney general's office about the criminal prosecution of SNC-Lavalin. Will the Prime Minister allow his former attorney general to speak and answer: Did anyone in his office speak to anyone in her office about that prosecution?

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, the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada's notes are looking a little worn. We know that he did not receive any directives. He has repeated that 20 times.Did the Prime Minister put pressure on the former attorney general of Canada to ask the director of public prosecutions to drop criminal proceedings? That seems fishy. Did the Prime Minister make her pay for his mistakes?

Mr. Speaker, he said “no” earlier today, so we know he is able to answer at least one yes or no question. I want him to answer this one. According to the lobbyists registry, SNC-Lavalin met with the Prime Minister's Office on 14 different occasions to discuss justice and law enforcement. This is a construction company, by the way. In any of those meetings, was the subject of the criminal prosecution of that company ever discussed, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister dealt with this matter very clearly earlier today. He stated that neither he nor anyone in his office pressured my predecessor or myself to come to any particular decision in this matter. As the Prime Minister stated earlier today, the allegations contained in The Globe and Mail article are false.

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, well, I am thankful that another minister had to stand up for the minister who is missing in action. I will tell members what the chief just wrote today—

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister said earlier today, neither he nor his office exerted any pressure or issued any directives in this matter.As Attorney General for Canada, I am the government's chief legal officer. I take my responsibilities very seriously.

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister said earlier today, neither my predecessor nor myself have received directives with respect to the dealing of this particular case.As the Attorney General of Canada, I take my responsibilities to give advice in the public interest to the government very seriously. I will continue to do so.

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister said earlier today, no direction was given to my predecessor. No direction has been given to myself in regard to this decision. As the Attorney General of Canada, I am the chief legal officer of the Crown. I take my responsibility to give advice, in the public interest, to the government very seriously.

Mr. Speaker, perhaps the former attorney general can shed some light on this issue. It is quite clear that we are seeing the beginnings of a cover-up here. The former attorney general prided herself on speaking truth to power. She spoke truth to power behind closed doors and the Prime Minister fired her.Will she now speak truth to power in front of all Canadians and confirm whether or not she received any communication from the Prime Minister's Office regarding the criminal prosecution of SNC-Lavalin, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, the new Attorney General is trying to hide behind the Prime Minister's carefully scripted legal response this morning, but the question is quite simple. It is direct about dealings on the criminal prosecution of SNC-Lavalin. I will ask the attorney general again. Was he ever contacted by anyone in the Prime Minister's Office about this case before he was promoted to the position of attorney general?

Mr. Speaker, this is still very troubling because when we look at the chain of events, we see that SNC-Lavalin illegally donated nearly $110,000 to the Liberal Party and its associations in 2006.Today, SNC-Lavalin needs help because it is in trouble. Therefore, the machinery was set in motion. SNC-Lavalin and the government have held more than 50 meetings in the past two years. Why? It is because SNC-Lavalin would like the Liberals to drop the fraud and corruption charges against the corporation. The minister of justice was fired and everyone was wondering why.Was she fired because, in the end, a crony is a crony?

Mr. Speaker, at no point have I been pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or the Prime Minister's Office to make any decision on this or any other matter.As the Attorney General of Canada, I am the government's senior legal advisor. I provide legal advice to the government and must act in the public interest. I take these responsibilities very seriously.

Mr. Speaker, at no point have I been pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or the Prime Minister's Office to make any decision on this or any other matter. As the Attorney General of Canada, I am the chief legal officer of the Crown. I have the responsibility to give legal advice to the government based on the public interest. I take this responsibility very seriously.

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister said earlier today, neither he nor anyone in his office directed my predecessor or myself to come to any particular result in this case. As the Attorney General of Canada, I am the chief law officer of the Crown and I provide legal service to the government, with a responsibility to act in the public interest. I take this responsibility very seriously.

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister outlined today, he has not given directives to either my predecessor or myself on this matter.

Mr. Speaker, the answer is no.

Mr. Speaker, I said that the minister had not done his job. I have a letter from the chief, who wrote, “Your department was given ample time and information.” They have received nothing but unrelenting barriers, outright refusals from the representatives and roadblocks. Therefore, I would like to ask the minister to stop hiding beneath the desk, stand up, show some leadership and go to Cat Lake. Hell, I will take him there myself.

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister said earlier today, there was no pressure on my predecessor and there were no directives. The same goes for me. I was not pressured and did not receive any directives from the Prime Minister or his office.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his congratulations.As the Prime Minister said earlier today, there was no pressure, there were no directives, not from him or from his office on this matter.

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the chair of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights.The Government of Quebec just tabled a bill requiring permanent residents in Quebec to learn French and Quebec values.Could the committee chair assure us that his committee will not do anything to thwart the Quebec legislation? I am asking him that because we know him. He thinks it is shameful to have a requirement to learn French.

Mr. Speaker, my question was for the chair of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human rights. Why did he not answer it?

Mr. Speaker, I do and I retract my use of the word, but the—

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the opposition House leader, I would like to ask the government House leader what the business before the House will be for the remainder of this week and the week after we return home to work in our constituencies.

Mr. Speaker, that was a carefully scripted response, but at the same time, pressure can come in many forms outside of merely direction. The evidence is mounting, and the Prime Minister's responses are not adding up. Actions speak louder than words, and Canadians deserve the truth. The former attorney general spoke truth to power, but maybe the Prime Minister cannot handle the truth. Did the Prime Minister fire the former attorney general for defending the independence of Canada's judiciary?

Mr. Speaker, we understand how important bus transportation is to remote, rural and indigenous communities. That is why the second we learned about Greyhound's decision to withdraw from western Canada, the minister began working with private partners and the provinces. We have come to the table with funding for the provinces, but if the premiers of Saskatchewan and Manitoba are not willing to sit down, then they are leaving their own residents out in the cold.

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister has said, no such direction was given to my predecessor. No such direction has been given to me. Once again, as the Attorney General of Canada and the chief legal officer of the Crown, I provide legal advice to the government based on the public interest. I take these responsibilities very seriously.

Mr. Speaker, the question was not about the Prime Minister's carefully-vetted answer this morning. The question was about himself. Yes, he may have been aware of this case, but the question was very specific. Was he ever contacted by anyone in the PMO about the criminal prosecution of SNC-Lavalin before he was named to his new post of Attorney General? Did those conversations happen, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the response I got from the Prime Minister on my call for urgent action on first nations was met with platitudes. The federal government is ignoring communities like Garden Hill that do not even have running water, but the crisis continues. Today in Mathias Colomb, over 500 students cannot go to school because it is shut down because of mould contamination: mould contaminated housing, schools, and no running water. When is the federal government, the Prime Minister, going to stop the empty words about reconciliation and relationships and urgently work with first nations to deal with the serious crisis they are facing right now?

Mr. Speaker, the prosecution in question is being handled by the Public Prosecution Service of Canada. The counsel for the Attorney General of Canada is fulfilling all of its obligations with respect to third party records applications. It is improper for me to comment further on this issue as the matter is before the courts.

Mr. Speaker, we all share the member's concerns. Today we are in direct connect with the leadership of Cat Lake on all the challenges it is facing. We have heard very clearly from the community the serious concerns around health, safety and the quality of housing. Another meeting is taking place with the community leadership and partners, as we speak, to advance immediate action and long-term planning. We will continue to work directly with the community to address these issues.

Mr. Speaker, there is nothing personal in what I am about to say. With all due respect to the Minister of Justice, he is not the one being implicated in all this, but rather the person he replaced. He has been appointed Attorney General. Congratulations. I am very happy for him, but Canadians want to know what his predecessor was subjected to by the Prime Minister's Office.Let me say it again. My question is for the individual implicated in the scandal that all Canadians care about. Can the former attorney general tell us whether the Prime Minister's Office approached her about the scandal exposed in today's Globe and Mail?

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister said earlier today, no such direction was given to my predecessor. I can say that no such direction has been given to me to come to any particular conclusion in this matter. As Attorney General for Canada, I am the chief legal officer of the Crown. I provide legal services to the government, with a responsibility to act in the public interest. I take these responsibilities very seriously.

Mr. Speaker, one of the most heart-wrenching and impactful experiences I have had as an MP was door-knocking in Parksville and meeting an elderly woman living on a fixed income. She told us that she had to choose between eating, paying rent and buying medicine, telling us she had no choice but to live in pain. This should not and does not have to happen in a country like ours. We need a universal pharmacare program for her and so that nobody else has to make these choices. How can the Liberal government drag its feet when people are unnecessarily living in pain?

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister stated today, he has not given directives to my predecessor, nor did he pressure her. For my part, as Attorney General of Canada, I can assure the House that I have received neither pressure nor direction from either the Prime Minister's Office or the Prime Minister himself.

Mr. Speaker, as I think is clear, I was not privy to those discussions. As the Prime Minister has said, earlier today, directions were not given either to my predecessor or myself with regard to any decision in this matter.

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister has said earlier today, no such direction was given, no such pressure was made with respect to my predecessor. Certainly I can say from direct experience that I have received neither pressure nor direction from the Prime Minister or the Prime Minister's Office.

Mr. Speaker, globally, LGBTQ communities continue to face discrimination and injustice because of who they are. To help address this discrimination, our government has announced a new initiative of $30 million over five years, followed by $10 million per year ongoing, to advance human rights and improve socio-economic outcomes for LGBTQ2 people in developing countries.Our government continues to take concrete action to advance human rights, including LGBTQ2 rights, in Canada and around the world.

Mr. Speaker, that question was for the former attorney general. It is clear that the Prime Minister has fired her, and now he is silencing her. Why will he not allow her to answer the question as to whether or not she received any communications between the Prime Minister's Office and her own regarding the criminal prosecution of SNC-Lavalin? Did those conversations happen, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, the way the Prime Minister has treated the former attorney general is criminal, perhaps literally. Is the Prime Minister proud of the fact that he has now joined the list of international leaders who have fired their attorneys general for failing to follow their political orders?

Mr. Speaker, Canadians want the facts and the truth from those directly affected by the scandal the Globe and Mail exposed today.With all due respect to the Minister of Justice, he is not the one in the hot seat here. The current Attorney General is not in the hot seat, but the person who just lost that job is.Will the Minister of Veterans Affairs, Canada's former attorney general, rise and tell Canadians if she was or was not pressured by the Prime Minister's Office? Was she pressured, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, as we have said, we are working directly with the community of Cat Lake. The minister is in contact with the chief and another meeting is taking place today with senior officials. We are accelerating work on needed repairs. We are accelerating the construction currently under way on new homes. We are establishing a task force with the community leadership and the Windigo tribal council. We continue to work diligently with Cat Lake to solve these issues.

Mr. Speaker, my Atlantic colleagues and the member for St. John's East know well that to overcome our demographic challenges and grow our economy, immigration is essential. Immigration expands economic opportunities for all Atlantic Canadians. Since its launch, the Atlantic immigration pilot has matched 1,700 employers with over 1,800 newcomers and their families who are putting their skills to work to grow local businesses.While the Conservatives are busy Scheer-mongering, our government is busy accepting newcomers who are growing Atlantic Canada--

Mr. Speaker, I would like to point out that our government is taking the threat posed by climate change extraordinarily seriously because we know it is the fight of our times. In particular, we have made the largest investment in public transit in the history of our country. By 2030, 90% of our electricity is going to be generated by renewable resources. In fact, we are putting 50 commitments and more forward to combat climate change and we are putting a price on pollution. It is going to bring emissions down and put more money in the pockets of middle-class families.It is disappointing that the opposition cannot be as honest as the member for Beauce and admit that their plan is to do nothing.

Mr. Speaker, at no point have I been directed or pressured by the Prime Minister or the Prime Minister's Office to make any decision in this or any other matter. As the Attorney General of Canada, I am the chief legal officer of the Crown and have the responsibility to give legal advice to the government in the public interest. I take these responsibilities very seriously—

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister said, no direction was given to my predecessor in regard to this decision. I can say that no such direction has been given to me, nor has there been any pressure from the Prime Minister or the Prime Minister's Office. As Attorney General for Canada, I will continue to give legal advice to the government as its chief legal officer, based solely on the public interest.

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister can shout from rooftops all over the world that he is a champion of climate action, but that does not make it true. The truth is that the big oil sands polluters have the government—and the official opposition, as well—in their pockets. My question is the following.Does the Minister of the Environment think that investing $19 billion of public money in dirty oil is a good way to combat climate change?

Mr. Speaker, as I have said, I have received neither pressure nor direction from either the Prime Minister or the Prime Minister's Office with respect to the decision that could be made in this particular file.As a Quebec member of Parliament who reads the newspapers, I did know about this case, but it does not transfer into my role as Attorney General.

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Transport finally heard the NDP's call. He acknowledged a 79% service gap in Saskatchewan's intercity public transportation and agrees with us that the situation is urgent and more important than partisan politics. However, offering $10 million to the Saskatchewan Party government is not a solution if it is not willing to share the cost to tackle the crisis. Why was this minister's funding conditional, when the Saskatchewan Party has made it clear that offering reliable transit to people is not its priority?

Mr. Speaker, it is a pillar of our democracy that our system of justice be free from even the perception of political interference and uphold the highest levels of public confidence. As such, it has always been my view that the Attorney General of Canada must be non-partisan, more transparent in the principles that are the basis of decisions and, in this respect, always willing to speak truth to power. Those are the words and principles of the former attorney general.Why did the Prime Minister fire her for refusing to break them?

Mr. Speaker, my colleague mentioned a deficit. We promised Canadians that we would make key investments in our infrastructure, because Stephen Harper's Conservative government left us with a massive deficit of investment and vision, especially with regard to infrastructure, science and reducing inequality in Canada. That is why Quebec has seen phenomenal growth over the past three years, as well as lower inequality. We have a lot to be proud of.

Mr. Speaker, all people deserve to live with dignity, feel safe, and have their rights respected, regardless of their identity.Our government is committed to defending the fundamental human rights of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, two-spirit and intersex community in Canada and around the world.Could the Minister of International Development tell the House what tangible steps she is taking on this critical issue outside of Canada?

Mr. Speaker, this afternoon we will continue with the second reading debate of Bill C-91, the indigenous languages act. We hope to see that referred to committee by the end of the day so that the committee can do its important work. We understand that we have a lot of support, but we do need to consider amendments.Tomorrow we will start debate at report stage and third reading stage of Bill C-85, the Canada-Israel free trade agreement.Next week we will be working with our constituents in our ridings.I would like to note that Tuesday, February 19 will be an allotted day.On Wednesday, we will begin consideration at report stage and third reading of Bill C-77, on the Canadian Victims Bill of Rights.

Mr. Speaker, I would be happy to retract my use of the word that implicated the leader of the Conservative Party earlier and insert instead “fearmongering”, because that is exactly what he is—

Mr. Speaker, we know that immigration plays a key role in the economies of Quebec, Canada and all communities across the country.The Government of Canada and the Government of Quebec have been working together for decades under the Canada-Quebec agreement, and we intend to continue with that important collaboration.It is too early to comment on the content of the bill, but we look forward to examining it and will work with the Government of Quebec on this issue.

Mr. Speaker, let's talk about his predecessor. As we know, the simplest explanation is often the best one.SNC-Lavalin and the Liberal Party have very close ties, so close that illegal donations have been made. SNC-Lavalin needs help, and the Prime Minister's Office seems keen to lend the company a hand. The PMO put pressure on the minister of justice to overlook accusations of fraud and corruption against the company. She refused and got sacked. Now we see why, in her farewell letter, she said, “It is a pillar of our democracy that our system of justice be free from even the perception of political interference and uphold the highest levels of public confidence.”Who in the Prime Minister's Office put—

Mr. Speaker, all children deserve a safe and healthy environment to learn in. Work is currently under way to remediate mould at the school, and it is anticipated that it will be complete by the end of the week. We will be following this work as it progresses, and I look forward to working with the hon. member as we go forward.

Mr. Speaker, Atlantic Canada's economic success depends on our ability to attract and retain skilled workers, and workers stay when their families put down roots. These new Canadians not only help good businesses grow and succeed but also enrich the cultural fabric of our region.Can the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship update the House on the Atlantic immigration pilot and its progress in addressing labour shortages and growing the economy in our region?

Mr. Speaker, Franco-Ontarians are proud of their language and culture. It is inconceivable that, even today, 50 years after the implementation of the Official Languages Act, we still have to fight to uphold our language rights.In November, Doug Ford's Conservative government launched a direct attack on Ontario's francophonie by eliminating the independent Office of the French Language Services Commissioner and cancelling funding for the French-language university.Can the Minister of Tourism, Official Languages and La Francophonie tell us here in the House how the government is helping Franco-Ontarians so that they can continue to assert their language rights?

Mr. Speaker, I met a young mother in Cat Lake this week who wept as she told me that her 12-year-old was so disfigured from rashes and impetigo that she had quit school, she hid under a blanket and she would not let her own mother see her face. Last week, the minister offered to send up some light switch covers. That does not cut it in a country as rich as Canada.I am asking the minister if he will stand in the House and commit today to a full independent medical team to go into Cat Lake to assess every child living in those mould-infested shacks, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, Canada still does not have a youth policy; in fact, it seems the file has fallen through the cracks. Consultations were launched one year ago and an 80-page report was tabled. Nothing has happened since.There is no longer anyone in charge of the youth file in the Prime Minister's Office. The budget for Privy Council's Youth Secretariat was cut by 33% between 2016 and 2019. This looks like a first class funeral.Will the Prime Minister and Minister of Youth keep his promise and implement a youth policy, or have the efforts of his Youth Council been in vain?

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 want to thank all members of the House for being sensitive to the major struggles all too often faced by our families.I also want to thank all members of the House for understanding that we have taken meaningful steps since 2016. We made the five EI special benefits that were already in place when we took office more flexible and more generous. We also introduced two other benefits, namely the caregiving benefits and the parental sharing benefit, which will be rolled out in the coming weeks.We know there is still a lot of work to do, and we are raring to go.

Mr. Speaker, when it comes to something as important as pharmacare, we certainly want to get it right, and we need a plan. That is why we have moved forward with the implementation of an advisory council on the implementation of a national pharmacare program. For this advisory council, we appointed a stellar group of experts in the field. They have had a national conversation with Canadians and also with experts in provinces and territories. I look forward to receiving their report in the spring of this year.

Mr. Speaker, this evening, a Liberal motion to improve employment insurance sickness benefits will be moved in the House. It looks like the Liberals have finally seen the light and realized that 15 weeks to heal is not enough.I am very proud to have stood up with my NDP colleagues and hammered home the message that 15 weeks is not enough.My question is simple. Will the Liberals support their Liberal colleague and increase the 15 weeks of EI sickness benefits?

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister talks about the rule of law, but he does not walk the talk. His office pressured the justice minister to let a company off the hook. His ambassador to China interfered in an extradition. The Prime Minister himself charged Admiral Norman before the RCMP did. The political interference of the Prime Minister and his office knows no bounds. Admiral Norman deserves a fair trial. Will the government commit today to immediately releasing all the court-mandated documents, including those on phones and devices, so that he can have a fair trial?

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Ottawa—Vanier for her excellent work, her very good question and everything she does for Franco-Ontarians.We, on this side of the House, believe in the Canadian francophonie and particularly in the importance of bilingualism in Canada. We know that we still need to protect Canada's francophones and always will. We need to protect our linguistic minorities.We also know that Franco-Ontarians have the right to their university, and we are going to do everything in our power to make that a reality.

Mr. Speaker, of course there is someone in charge of the youth file, and that is the Prime Minister of Canada.We are very proud of the outstanding and extraordinary work of our Youth Council. It has been working on the implementation of Canada's very first youth policy for two years.I will have some good news to share with my honourable colleague and the House in the weeks and months to come.

Mr. Speaker, of course there is someone in charge of the youth file, and that is the Prime Minister of Canada.We are very proud of the outstanding and extraordinary work of our Youth Council. It has been working on the implementation of Canada's very first youth policy for two years.I will have some good news to share with my honourable colleague and the House in the weeks and months to come.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Ottawa—Vanier for her excellent work, her very good question and everything she does for Franco-Ontarians.We, on this side of the House, believe in the Canadian francophonie and particularly in the importance of bilingualism in Canada. We know that we still need to protect Canada's francophones and always will. We need to protect our linguistic minorities.We also know that Franco-Ontarians have the right to their university, and we are going to do everything in our power to make that a reality.

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister talks about the rule of law, but he does not walk the talk. His office pressured the justice minister to let a company off the hook. His ambassador to China interfered in an extradition. The Prime Minister himself charged Admiral Norman before the RCMP did. The political interference of the Prime Minister and his office knows no bounds. Admiral Norman deserves a fair trial. Will the government commit today to immediately releasing all the court-mandated documents, including those on phones and devices, so that he can have a fair trial?

Mr. Speaker, this evening, a Liberal motion to improve employment insurance sickness benefits will be moved in the House. It looks like the Liberals have finally seen the light and realized that 15 weeks to heal is not enough.I am very proud to have stood up with my NDP colleagues and hammered home the message that 15 weeks is not enough.My question is simple. Will the Liberals support their Liberal colleague and increase the 15 weeks of EI sickness benefits?

Mr. Speaker, when it comes to something as important as pharmacare, we certainly want to get it right, and we need a plan. That is why we have moved forward with the implementation of an advisory council on the implementation of a national pharmacare program. For this advisory council, we appointed a stellar group of experts in the field. They have had a national conversation with Canadians and also with experts in provinces and territories. I look forward to receiving their report in the spring of this year.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank all members of the House for being sensitive to the major struggles all too often faced by our families.I also want to thank all members of the House for understanding that we have taken meaningful steps since 2016. We made the five EI special benefits that were already in place when we took office more flexible and more generous. We also introduced two other benefits, namely the caregiving benefits and the parental sharing benefit, which will be rolled out in the coming weeks.We know there is still a lot of work to do, and we are raring to go.

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, Canada still does not have a youth policy; in fact, it seems the file has fallen through the cracks. Consultations were launched one year ago and an 80-page report was tabled. Nothing has happened since.There is no longer anyone in charge of the youth file in the Prime Minister's Office. The budget for Privy Council's Youth Secretariat was cut by 33% between 2016 and 2019. This looks like a first class funeral.Will the Prime Minister and Minister of Youth keep his promise and implement a youth policy, or have the efforts of his Youth Council been in vain?

Mr. Speaker, I met a young mother in Cat Lake this week who wept as she told me that her 12-year-old was so disfigured from rashes and impetigo that she had quit school, she hid under a blanket and she would not let her own mother see her face. Last week, the minister offered to send up some light switch covers. That does not cut it in a country as rich as Canada.I am asking the minister if he will stand in the House and commit today to a full independent medical team to go into Cat Lake to assess every child living in those mould-infested shacks, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, Franco-Ontarians are proud of their language and culture. It is inconceivable that, even today, 50 years after the implementation of the Official Languages Act, we still have to fight to uphold our language rights.In November, Doug Ford's Conservative government launched a direct attack on Ontario's francophonie by eliminating the independent Office of the French Language Services Commissioner and cancelling funding for the French-language university.Can the Minister of Tourism, Official Languages and La Francophonie tell us here in the House how the government is helping Franco-Ontarians so that they can continue to assert their language rights?

Mr. Speaker, Atlantic Canada's economic success depends on our ability to attract and retain skilled workers, and workers stay when their families put down roots. These new Canadians not only help good businesses grow and succeed but also enrich the cultural fabric of our region.Can the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship update the House on the Atlantic immigration pilot and its progress in addressing labour shortages and growing the economy in our region?

Mr. Speaker, all children deserve a safe and healthy environment to learn in. Work is currently under way to remediate mould at the school, and it is anticipated that it will be complete by the end of the week. We will be following this work as it progresses, and I look forward to working with the hon. member as we go forward.

Mr. Speaker, let's talk about his predecessor. As we know, the simplest explanation is often the best one.SNC-Lavalin and the Liberal Party have very close ties, so close that illegal donations have been made. SNC-Lavalin needs help, and the Prime Minister's Office seems keen to lend the company a hand. The PMO put pressure on the minister of justice to overlook accusations of fraud and corruption against the company. She refused and got sacked. Now we see why, in her farewell letter, she said, “It is a pillar of our democracy that our system of justice be free from even the perception of political interference and uphold the highest levels of public confidence.”Who in the Prime Minister's Office put—

Mr. Speaker, we know that immigration plays a key role in the economies of Quebec, Canada and all communities across the country.The Government of Canada and the Government of Quebec have been working together for decades under the Canada-Quebec agreement, and we intend to continue with that important collaboration.It is too early to comment on the content of the bill, but we look forward to examining it and will work with the Government of Quebec on this issue.

Mr. Speaker, I would be happy to retract my use of the word that implicated the leader of the Conservative Party earlier and insert instead “fearmongering”, because that is exactly what he is—

Mr. Speaker, this afternoon we will continue with the second reading debate of Bill C-91, the indigenous languages act. We hope to see that referred to committee by the end of the day so that the committee can do its important work. We understand that we have a lot of support, but we do need to consider amendments.Tomorrow we will start debate at report stage and third reading stage of Bill C-85, the Canada-Israel free trade agreement.Next week we will be working with our constituents in our ridings.I would like to note that Tuesday, February 19 will be an allotted day.On Wednesday, we will begin consideration at report stage and third reading of Bill C-77, on the Canadian Victims Bill of Rights.

Mr. Speaker, all people deserve to live with dignity, feel safe, and have their rights respected, regardless of their identity.Our government is committed to defending the fundamental human rights of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, two-spirit and intersex community in Canada and around the world.Could the Minister of International Development tell the House what tangible steps she is taking on this critical issue outside of Canada?

Mr. Speaker, it is a pillar of our democracy that our system of justice be free from even the perception of political interference and uphold the highest levels of public confidence. As such, it has always been my view that the Attorney General of Canada must be non-partisan, more transparent in the principles that are the basis of decisions and, in this respect, always willing to speak truth to power. Those are the words and principles of the former attorney general.Why did the Prime Minister fire her for refusing to break them?

Mr. Speaker, my colleague mentioned a deficit. We promised Canadians that we would make key investments in our infrastructure, because Stephen Harper's Conservative government left us with a massive deficit of investment and vision, especially with regard to infrastructure, science and reducing inequality in Canada. That is why Quebec has seen phenomenal growth over the past three years, as well as lower inequality. We have a lot to be proud of.

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Transport finally heard the NDP's call. He acknowledged a 79% service gap in Saskatchewan's intercity public transportation and agrees with us that the situation is urgent and more important than partisan politics. However, offering $10 million to the Saskatchewan Party government is not a solution if it is not willing to share the cost to tackle the crisis. Why was this minister's funding conditional, when the Saskatchewan Party has made it clear that offering reliable transit to people is not its priority?

Mr. Speaker, as I have said, I have received neither pressure nor direction from either the Prime Minister or the Prime Minister's Office with respect to the decision that could be made in this particular file.As a Quebec member of Parliament who reads the newspapers, I did know about this case, but it does not transfer into my role as Attorney General.

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister can shout from rooftops all over the world that he is a champion of climate action, but that does not make it true. The truth is that the big oil sands polluters have the government—and the official opposition, as well—in their pockets. My question is the following.Does the Minister of the Environment think that investing $19 billion of public money in dirty oil is a good way to combat climate change?

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister said, no direction was given to my predecessor in regard to this decision. I can say that no such direction has been given to me, nor has there been any pressure from the Prime Minister or the Prime Minister's Office. As Attorney General for Canada, I will continue to give legal advice to the government as its chief legal officer, based solely on the public interest.

Mr. Speaker, at no point have I been directed or pressured by the Prime Minister or the Prime Minister's Office to make any decision in this or any other matter. As the Attorney General of Canada, I am the chief legal officer of the Crown and have the responsibility to give legal advice to the government in the public interest. I take these responsibilities very seriously—

Mr. Speaker, I would like to point out that our government is taking the threat posed by climate change extraordinarily seriously because we know it is the fight of our times. In particular, we have made the largest investment in public transit in the history of our country. By 2030, 90% of our electricity is going to be generated by renewable resources. In fact, we are putting 50 commitments and more forward to combat climate change and we are putting a price on pollution. It is going to bring emissions down and put more money in the pockets of middle-class families.It is disappointing that the opposition cannot be as honest as the member for Beauce and admit that their plan is to do nothing.

Mr. Speaker, my Atlantic colleagues and the member for St. John's East know well that to overcome our demographic challenges and grow our economy, immigration is essential. Immigration expands economic opportunities for all Atlantic Canadians. Since its launch, the Atlantic immigration pilot has matched 1,700 employers with over 1,800 newcomers and their families who are putting their skills to work to grow local businesses.While the Conservatives are busy Scheer-mongering, our government is busy accepting newcomers who are growing Atlantic Canada--

Mr. Speaker, as we have said, we are working directly with the community of Cat Lake. The minister is in contact with the chief and another meeting is taking place today with senior officials. We are accelerating work on needed repairs. We are accelerating the construction currently under way on new homes. We are establishing a task force with the community leadership and the Windigo tribal council. We continue to work diligently with Cat Lake to solve these issues.

Mr. Speaker, Canadians want the facts and the truth from those directly affected by the scandal the Globe and Mail exposed today.With all due respect to the Minister of Justice, he is not the one in the hot seat here. The current Attorney General is not in the hot seat, but the person who just lost that job is.Will the Minister of Veterans Affairs, Canada's former attorney general, rise and tell Canadians if she was or was not pressured by the Prime Minister's Office? Was she pressured, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, the way the Prime Minister has treated the former attorney general is criminal, perhaps literally. Is the Prime Minister proud of the fact that he has now joined the list of international leaders who have fired their attorneys general for failing to follow their political orders?

Mr. Speaker, that question was for the former attorney general. It is clear that the Prime Minister has fired her, and now he is silencing her. Why will he not allow her to answer the question as to whether or not she received any communications between the Prime Minister's Office and her own regarding the criminal prosecution of SNC-Lavalin? Did those conversations happen, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, globally, LGBTQ communities continue to face discrimination and injustice because of who they are. To help address this discrimination, our government has announced a new initiative of $30 million over five years, followed by $10 million per year ongoing, to advance human rights and improve socio-economic outcomes for LGBTQ2 people in developing countries.Our government continues to take concrete action to advance human rights, including LGBTQ2 rights, in Canada and around the world.

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister has said earlier today, no such direction was given, no such pressure was made with respect to my predecessor. Certainly I can say from direct experience that I have received neither pressure nor direction from the Prime Minister or the Prime Minister's Office.

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister stated today, he has not given directives to my predecessor, nor did he pressure her. For my part, as Attorney General of Canada, I can assure the House that I have received neither pressure nor direction from either the Prime Minister's Office or the Prime Minister himself.

Mr. Speaker, as I think is clear, I was not privy to those discussions. As the Prime Minister has said, earlier today, directions were not given either to my predecessor or myself with regard to any decision in this matter.

Mr. Speaker, one of the most heart-wrenching and impactful experiences I have had as an MP was door-knocking in Parksville and meeting an elderly woman living on a fixed income. She told us that she had to choose between eating, paying rent and buying medicine, telling us she had no choice but to live in pain. This should not and does not have to happen in a country like ours. We need a universal pharmacare program for her and so that nobody else has to make these choices. How can the Liberal government drag its feet when people are unnecessarily living in pain?

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister said earlier today, no such direction was given to my predecessor. I can say that no such direction has been given to me to come to any particular conclusion in this matter. As Attorney General for Canada, I am the chief legal officer of the Crown. I provide legal services to the government, with a responsibility to act in the public interest. I take these responsibilities very seriously.

Mr. Speaker, there is nothing personal in what I am about to say. With all due respect to the Minister of Justice, he is not the one being implicated in all this, but rather the person he replaced. He has been appointed Attorney General. Congratulations. I am very happy for him, but Canadians want to know what his predecessor was subjected to by the Prime Minister's Office.Let me say it again. My question is for the individual implicated in the scandal that all Canadians care about. Can the former attorney general tell us whether the Prime Minister's Office approached her about the scandal exposed in today's Globe and Mail?

Mr. Speaker, we all share the member's concerns. Today we are in direct connect with the leadership of Cat Lake on all the challenges it is facing. We have heard very clearly from the community the serious concerns around health, safety and the quality of housing. Another meeting is taking place with the community leadership and partners, as we speak, to advance immediate action and long-term planning. We will continue to work directly with the community to address these issues.

Mr. Speaker, the prosecution in question is being handled by the Public Prosecution Service of Canada. The counsel for the Attorney General of Canada is fulfilling all of its obligations with respect to third party records applications. It is improper for me to comment further on this issue as the matter is before the courts.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the response I got from the Prime Minister on my call for urgent action on first nations was met with platitudes. The federal government is ignoring communities like Garden Hill that do not even have running water, but the crisis continues. Today in Mathias Colomb, over 500 students cannot go to school because it is shut down because of mould contamination: mould contaminated housing, schools, and no running water. When is the federal government, the Prime Minister, going to stop the empty words about reconciliation and relationships and urgently work with first nations to deal with the serious crisis they are facing right now?

Mr. Speaker, the question was not about the Prime Minister's carefully-vetted answer this morning. The question was about himself. Yes, he may have been aware of this case, but the question was very specific. Was he ever contacted by anyone in the PMO about the criminal prosecution of SNC-Lavalin before he was named to his new post of Attorney General? Did those conversations happen, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister has said, no such direction was given to my predecessor. No such direction has been given to me. Once again, as the Attorney General of Canada and the chief legal officer of the Crown, I provide legal advice to the government based on the public interest. I take these responsibilities very seriously.

Mr. Speaker, we understand how important bus transportation is to remote, rural and indigenous communities. That is why the second we learned about Greyhound's decision to withdraw from western Canada, the minister began working with private partners and the provinces. We have come to the table with funding for the provinces, but if the premiers of Saskatchewan and Manitoba are not willing to sit down, then they are leaving their own residents out in the cold.

Mr. Speaker, that was a carefully scripted response, but at the same time, pressure can come in many forms outside of merely direction. The evidence is mounting, and the Prime Minister's responses are not adding up. Actions speak louder than words, and Canadians deserve the truth. The former attorney general spoke truth to power, but maybe the Prime Minister cannot handle the truth. Did the Prime Minister fire the former attorney general for defending the independence of Canada's judiciary?

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister outlined today, he has not given directives to either my predecessor or myself on this matter.

Mr. Speaker, the answer is no.

Mr. Speaker, I said that the minister had not done his job. I have a letter from the chief, who wrote, “Your department was given ample time and information.” They have received nothing but unrelenting barriers, outright refusals from the representatives and roadblocks. Therefore, I would like to ask the minister to stop hiding beneath the desk, stand up, show some leadership and go to Cat Lake. Hell, I will take him there myself.

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister said earlier today, there was no pressure on my predecessor and there were no directives. The same goes for me. I was not pressured and did not receive any directives from the Prime Minister or his office.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his congratulations.As the Prime Minister said earlier today, there was no pressure, there were no directives, not from him or from his office on this matter.

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the chair of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights.The Government of Quebec just tabled a bill requiring permanent residents in Quebec to learn French and Quebec values.Could the committee chair assure us that his committee will not do anything to thwart the Quebec legislation? I am asking him that because we know him. He thinks it is shameful to have a requirement to learn French.

Mr. Speaker, my question was for the chair of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human rights. Why did he not answer it?

Mr. Speaker, I do and I retract my use of the word, but the—

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the opposition House leader, I would like to ask the government House leader what the business before the House will be for the remainder of this week and the week after we return home to work in our constituencies.

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister said earlier today, neither he nor anyone in his office directed my predecessor or myself to come to any particular result in this case. As the Attorney General of Canada, I am the chief law officer of the Crown and I provide legal service to the government, with a responsibility to act in the public interest. I take this responsibility very seriously.

Mr. Speaker, at no point have I been pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or the Prime Minister's Office to make any decision on this or any other matter.As the Attorney General of Canada, I am the government's senior legal advisor. I provide legal advice to the government and must act in the public interest. I take these responsibilities very seriously.

Mr. Speaker, at no point have I been pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or the Prime Minister's Office to make any decision on this or any other matter. As the Attorney General of Canada, I am the chief legal officer of the Crown. I have the responsibility to give legal advice to the government based on the public interest. I take this responsibility very seriously.

Mr. Speaker, this is still very troubling because when we look at the chain of events, we see that SNC-Lavalin illegally donated nearly $110,000 to the Liberal Party and its associations in 2006.Today, SNC-Lavalin needs help because it is in trouble. Therefore, the machinery was set in motion. SNC-Lavalin and the government have held more than 50 meetings in the past two years. Why? It is because SNC-Lavalin would like the Liberals to drop the fraud and corruption charges against the corporation. The minister of justice was fired and everyone was wondering why.Was she fired because, in the end, a crony is a crony?

Mr. Speaker, the new Attorney General is trying to hide behind the Prime Minister's carefully scripted legal response this morning, but the question is quite simple. It is direct about dealings on the criminal prosecution of SNC-Lavalin. I will ask the attorney general again. Was he ever contacted by anyone in the Prime Minister's Office about this case before he was promoted to the position of attorney general?

Mr. Speaker, perhaps the former attorney general can shed some light on this issue. It is quite clear that we are seeing the beginnings of a cover-up here. The former attorney general prided herself on speaking truth to power. She spoke truth to power behind closed doors and the Prime Minister fired her.Will she now speak truth to power in front of all Canadians and confirm whether or not she received any communication from the Prime Minister's Office regarding the criminal prosecution of SNC-Lavalin, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister said earlier today, no direction was given to my predecessor. No direction has been given to myself in regard to this decision. As the Attorney General of Canada, I am the chief legal officer of the Crown. I take my responsibility to give advice, in the public interest, to the government very seriously.

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister said earlier today, neither my predecessor nor myself have received directives with respect to the dealing of this particular case.As the Attorney General of Canada, I take my responsibilities to give advice in the public interest to the government very seriously. I will continue to do so.

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister said earlier today, neither he nor his office exerted any pressure or issued any directives in this matter.As Attorney General for Canada, I am the government's chief legal officer. I take my responsibilities very seriously.

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, well, I am thankful that another minister had to stand up for the minister who is missing in action. I will tell members what the chief just wrote today—

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister dealt with this matter very clearly earlier today. He stated that neither he nor anyone in his office pressured my predecessor or myself to come to any particular decision in this matter. As the Prime Minister stated earlier today, the allegations contained in The Globe and Mail article are false.

Mr. Speaker, he said “no” earlier today, so we know he is able to answer at least one yes or no question. I want him to answer this one. According to the lobbyists registry, SNC-Lavalin met with the Prime Minister's Office on 14 different occasions to discuss justice and law enforcement. This is a construction company, by the way. In any of those meetings, was the subject of the criminal prosecution of that company ever discussed, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada's notes are looking a little worn. We know that he did not receive any directives. He has repeated that 20 times.Did the Prime Minister put pressure on the former attorney general of Canada to ask the director of public prosecutions to drop criminal proceedings? That seems fishy. Did the Prime Minister make her pay for his mistakes?

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, the Prime Minister fired his former attorney general for speaking truth to power. Now he is banning her from speaking at all. There would be no good reason for anyone in the PMO to be talking with anyone in the attorney general's office about the criminal prosecution of SNC-Lavalin. Will the Prime Minister allow his former attorney general to speak and answer: Did anyone in his office speak to anyone in her office about that prosecution?

Mr. Speaker, Canadians know that from the day the Liberals took office, from the Prime Minister down, the proclaimed ethical standards and the “go-beyond-the-letter-of-the law” ministerial mandate letters were simply window dressing, empty words. Every violation exposed by the Ethics Commissioner was sloughed off with, “The PM is working with the commissioner.”Today's revelations of alleged corruption in the highest office in Canada, attempted interference in criminal justice and punishment of a minister who resisted demand answers and accountability now.

Mr. Speaker, the Globe and Mail has published very troubling allegations about interference from the Prime Minister's Office and his staff in a criminal case.Can the Prime Minister confirm that neither he nor any member of his staff had communications with the former attorney general about the criminal prosecution of SNC-Lavalin?

Mr. Speaker, the question was not about pressure or direction. The question was whether or not the subject of the criminal prosecution of SNC-Lavalin came up in any conversations between staff members of the PMO and the attorney general's office. There would be no good reason for such conversations to occur, because prosecutions of that nature have nothing to do with the political office of the Prime Minister. Why can the minister not just rise today and tell us, yes or no: Was the matter ever discussed between the PMO and the attorney general's office?

Mr. Speaker, as you know, we are going to pay $13.8 billion for the Trans Mountain project, the Americans' old pipeline that no one else wanted to buy. You also know that the $19-billion deficit has largely gone toward dirty oil and goodies for oil companies in western Canada.Like us, Mr. Speaker, you think it is time for the federal government to work as hard for Quebec as it does for the oil sands, with all due respect to my colleagues.When is the Minister of Finance going to start working for Quebeckers and stop handing out goodies to oil companies?

Mr. Speaker, that was not the question. We have heard the Prime Minister's very carefully scripted legalistic answer.However, the question is: Did anyone in the Prime Minister's Office, at any time, communicate with anyone in the former attorney general's office on the matter of the criminal prosecution of SNC-Lavalin, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, The Globe and Mail article raises serious allegations against the PMO about trying to politically intervene in the criminal prosecution of SNC-Lavelin, thereby interfering with the independence of the Public Prosecution Service of Canada.We all know what happened next. The Prime Minister fired the former attorney general, because, as she said, she “spoke truth to power”.Did the Prime Minister fire the former attorney general because she refused to do his dirty work, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister said earlier today, he did not give any directives to my predecessor. For my part, I can assure the House that I have received neither pressure nor direction from either the Prime Minister or Prime Minister's Office regarding any decisions on this matter. As the Attorney General of Canada, I take my responsibilities very seriously.

Mr. Speaker, that was not the question. The question was whether or not anyone in the Prime Minister's Office, at any time, had communications with anyone in the former attorney general's office on the subject matter of the criminal prosecution of SNC-Lavalin. This is a yes or no answer. Which is it?

Mr. Speaker, again, he cannot answer a simple yes or no question.I will ask him a slightly different question. According to the lobbyists registry, SNC-Lavalin lobbied the government dozens of times. In those meetings with senior officials, did the subject of its criminal prosecution ever come up, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, he might not have been “directed to”, but he was certainly promoted based on his willingness to go along with the PMO on this.Let me try this again.SNC-Lavalin met with the Prime Minister's Office at least 14 times on the subjects of justice and law enforcement. Some of the meetings were with the PMO principal secretary.Did the subject of the criminal prosecution of SNC-Lavalin come up during the meetings at the Prime Minister's Office, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister has said, earlier today, these allegations are false.

Mr. Speaker, I will repeat once again, as the Prime Minister has said, earlier today, these allegations in The Globe and Mail are false.

Mr. Speaker, I was not privy to those conversations. As the Prime Minister has said, earlier today, these allegations are false.

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister said earlier today, those allegations are false. Neither the Prime Minister nor his office put my predecessor or me under pressure or gave any directives.

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister said earlier today, neither the Prime Minister nor his office put my predecessor or myself under pressure nor gave any directives. These allegations contained in The Globe and Mail are false.

Mr. Speaker, today The Globe and Mail reported that the former minister of justice was pressured by officials in the PMO to politically intervene in the criminal prosecution of SNC-Lavalin. Was the former minister of justice fired by the Prime Minister because she refused to do his dirty work? Did she pay the price for his mistakes?

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister said earlier today, the allegations contained in the article are false.

Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister said earlier today, the allegations contained in The Globe and Mail article are false.

Mr. Speaker, these are shocking allegations that the Prime Minister appears to have fired his attorney general for refusing to politically interfere in an ongoing criminal prosecution. Did her refusal to favour the Prime Minister's friends cost her her job? Canadians deserve clear answers to these serious allegations. Did the Prime Minister fire his attorney general because she spoke truth to power?

Mr. Speaker, since the Prime Minister cannot answer these questions, I will answer part of that for him. At least 14 times, according to the lobbyists registry, meetings with SNC-Lavalin touched on the subjects of “justice” and “law enforcement”.In those meetings where “justice” and “law enforcement” were brought up, were subject matters dealing with the criminal prosecution of SNC-Lavalin ever touched upon, yes or no?