2019-02-08

Mr. Speaker, something stinks. The Prime Minister's answers are vague and evasive. The former attorney general spoke truth to power, and she paid the price. In December, Gerald Butts discussed a special deal for SNC-Lavalin with the former attorney general, and a month later, she was fired. What was said at that meeting?

Mr. Speaker, seriously, that answer is shameful. Two Canadian children were kidnapped and taken to a foreign country, and that is the answer we get. In Shelley's own words, the only person who can do something is the Prime Minister, who so far has not cared enough to do anything for his own citizens. She says, “What do I have to do to be heard, become a donor?”Why will the Prime Minister not just pick up the phone and bring Liam and Mia home?

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals introduced the accountability-destroying, $7-billion vote 40 Liberal slush fund on the pretense that it would better align government spending. Now the PBO has once again reported that this measure has been an abject failure. The Liberals killed spending oversight in an election year so that they could spend on what they wanted with zero accountability.Will the new Treasury Board president listen to the Parliamentary Budget Officer and eliminate the vote 40 Liberal slush fund?

Mr. Speaker, Canadians expect Canada's attorney general to be independent and non-partisan. The former attorney general knows this. In her words, “It is a pillar of our democracy that our system of justice be free from even the perception of political interference”.All of these carefully crafted and legally vetted answers regarding the PMO interfering in a criminal investigation and the firing of the former attorney general are not sufficient. In December, Gerald Butts discussed a special deal for SNC-Lavalin with the former attorney general. A month later, she was fired. Who said what in that meeting?

Mr. Speaker, as you know, our government is committed to the care, health and well-being of our military personnel and their families.We recognize that we need to continually adapt the way we care for people with mental illness. That is exactly why the minister has asked the Standing Committee on National Defence to examine the issue of suicide and self-harm within the Canadian Armed Forces with a view to making recommendations to the government for dealing with these challenges.Looking after our soldiers, our veterans and their families is a priority for our government. These men and women are always at the centre of everything we do.

Mr. Speaker, The Globe and Mail alleges that the Prime Minister's Office interfered in order to try to get charges dropped in a massive fraud and bribery case. The corporation in question discussed law enforcement and justice with the Prime Minister's Office 14 times, including with PMO boss Gerald Butts. Did Mr. Butts ever discuss with SNC-Lavalin lobbyists the idea of giving the company a deal to avoid criminal prosecution?

Mr. Speaker, that was not the question.Gerald Butts is the boss at the PMO. The Prime Minister has told his caucus that anything that comes from Gerald Butts comes from the Prime Minister. In December, Mr. Butts talked about SNC-Lavalin's charges with the former attorney general. Again my question is very clear. What exactly did Gerald Butts say to the former attorney general in that December conversation?

Mr. Speaker, the Canadian Forces continue to lose more than one member per month to death by suicide, yet one of the barriers to serving members getting the help that they need is the fact that self-harm remains a disciplinary offence in the military code of conduct. Since the Liberal members ruled my amendment to fix this out of order at committee hearings on Bill C-77, let me ask the minister. Will the government now support removing self-harm as a disciplinary offence by agreeing to support my private member's bill, Bill C-426, and expedite its passage through the House?

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

Again, Mr. Speaker, that was not the question.The former attorney general said very clearly, “It is a pillar of our democracy that our system of justice be free from even the perception of political interference”, yet we know from the lobbyists commissioner that over a dozen times, SNC-Lavalin met with members of the Prime Minister's Office, including principal secretary Gerry Butts. The Prime Minister says that sunshine is the best disinfectant, so let us shine some sunlight on this issue. Did the Prime Minister's Office discuss a special deal for SNC-Lavalin with the former attorney general, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, the attorney general's responsibilities include upholding the rule of law and speaking truth to power. It is a pillar of our democracy that our system of justice be free from even the perception of political interference.Yesterday the Prime Minister's Office was accused of trying to interfere with a criminal prosecution against SNC-Lavalin. In December, Gerald Butts discussed a special deal for SNC-Lavalin with the former attorney general. A month later, she was fired.What was said in that meeting?

Mr. Speaker, the parliamentary secretary still has not answered the question. I want to quote the former attorney general. She stated that “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.” Shockingly, now it appears the Prime Minister fired the former attorney general for speaking truth to power.In December, Gerald Butts discussed a special deal for SNC-Lavalin with the former attorney general. A month later, she was fired. What was said in that meeting?

Mr. Speaker, in last year's budget implementation bill, the Liberals amended the Criminal Code. Companies accused of corruption can pursue out-of-court settlements, thus ensuring their continued eligibility for lucrative federal contracts.Which company has been accused of corruption in other countries many times over? SNC-Lavalin. Which company talked to the Prime Minister's Office 14 times? SNC-Lavalin.The Liberals are corporate puppets. Will the people ever find out just how much sway SNC-Lavalin holds over the Liberal government?

Mr. Speaker, I suggest that my colleague listen to the question so that he can give a real answer.This is worrisome. Yesterday the Globe and Mail published an article alleging that the Prime Minister's Office had interfered in a criminal proceeding.What about the principle of impartiality in our justice system? What about the principles of ethics and transparency?In December, Gerald Butts discussed a special deal for SNC-Lavalin with the former attorney general, who was then dismissed a month later.My question is simple. What was said at that meeting?

Mr. Speaker, that was not quite the answer that we needed, but the reports about the PMO's interference in a criminal prosecution are shocking. In December, Gerald Butts discussed a special deal for SNC-Lavalin with the former attorney general. A month later, she was demoted. What was said in that meeting? Canadians need to know.

Mr. Speaker, neither the current Minister of Justice nor the former minister of justice has been pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or anyone in the Prime Minister's Office to take a decision on this or any other matter. As the Prime Minister was very clear yesterday with the journalists gathered in Vaughan, Ontario, the allegations contained in The Globe and Mail article are false.

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister indicated that he would have talks with Quebec concerning immigration. The talks did not last long.The ink on Quebec's bill is not even dry and the government is already saying no. Last week, he refused to discuss knowledge of French as a condition for citizenship. This week, he is refusing to discuss knowledge of French as a condition in earlier steps in the immigration process. French is not a shameful disease.Why is the government refusing to discuss this? Why is it showing such contempt?

Mr. Speaker, it was over 20 years ago that the Liberals committed to introducing a universal drug plan, but they failed to act. In the meantime, Mr. Lorenzen, in my riding, has paid over $25,000 for prescription medication following a surgery.The Liberals lack the political will to get the job done. Enough with the studies. Enough with the expert panels. Enough with the rhetoric. Will the Liberals please tell Mr. Lorenzen, indeed all Canadians, if they are ready to end the empty promises and implement a fully public, national and universal pharmacare plan?

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister did not invent the expression, but he was right when he said that sunlight is the best disinfectant. However, when faced with evidence of a serious potential obstruction of justice, the Liberals can only deny and delay. A well-connected multinational company lobbies the Liberal government more than 50 times, shovels to it more than $100,000 in illegal donations and then gets changes to the Criminal Code to help it get out from under corruption and fraud charges. When the former AG does not bend to the will of the Prime Minister, she is fired.The Liberals should be working with us to get to the bottom of this mess. Instead, we get non-answers and resistance. Therefore, I have a very specific question for my friends. Will they support our call for an ethics investigation into this scandal, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, I will reiterate for the House that at no point has the current Minister of Justice or the former minister of justice been pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or anyone else in his office to make a decision on this or any other matter. As the Prime Minister said very clearly yesterday to the journalists gathered, the allegations contained in The Globe and Mail article are false.

Mr. Speaker, the former attorney general has been asked, point blank, if the Prime Minister's Office pressured her to make a deal letting SNC-Lavalin off bribery and corruption charges. Her answer was, “No comment”.The Prime Minister has the ability to waive attorney-client privilege and let her speak the truth. Will the Prime Minister let the former attorney general speak?

Mr. Speaker, I too have sat here attentively during the full hour of question period. I will say, again, that at no point were the current Minister of Justice or the former minister of justice pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or anyone in the Prime Minister's Office to make any decision on this or any other matter. As I have reiterated, the allegations contained in The Globe and Mail article, as the Prime Minister stated yesterday, are false.

Mr. Speaker, one day after the Globe and Mail broke the scandal involving the Prime Minister's Office potential interference in a criminal case, Canadians have not been reassured by what the government is telling them. The government is playing with words. Canadians want the facts.The question we are asking and will continue to ask until Canadians get an answer is very simple: Did the Prime Minister's Office have discussions with the former attorney general about SNC-Lavalin, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, let me first thank the member for Etobicoke Centre for his hard work in favour of the families and children in his community.Our government committed to working for the most vulnerable of all Canadians. That is because one homeless Canadian on the streets is one too many in our country. That is why reaching home, the new homelessness program, is going to increase the number of communities that will benefit from funding from the federal government. That is why I am calling upon all these communities to apply for additional funding. That is why, by working together, we can make sure we reduce homelessness by at least 50%.

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Justice and the former minister of justice have not been pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or anyone in the Prime Minister's cabinet on this or any other matter.As the Prime Minister said very clearly yesterday in front of a media scrum, the allegations contained in The Globe and Mail article are false.

Mr. Speaker, again, all through question period today, we have asked a very simple question of the attorney general and of his parliamentary secretary. We still have not had an answer. We know that Gerald Butts met with the former attorney general to discuss the SNC-Lavalin issue. The very simple question for the attorney general is this. Did that discussion include a special deal for the SNC-Lavalin company, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, former Liberal Ontario attorney general Michael Bryant has made his opinion known as to how serious these allegations are and the impacts they are having on our democracy and the judicial system.We found out this morning from The Globe and Mail that the Prime Minister's principal secretary, Mr. Butts, spoke to Ms. Wilson-Raybould about the SNC-Lavalin remediation case, according to the Prime Minister's deputy communications director. The question is simple and requires a straightforward answer for Canadians. Did the Prime Minister's Office discuss a special deal for SNC-Lavalin with the former attorney general, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, that is more Liberal obfuscation.Canada needs a federal child care program. CCPA's “Development Milestones” report reveals that the distressingly high cost of child care burdens Canadian families. Child care costs are 10 times higher in Toronto than in Montreal. In fact, universal child care in Quebec pays for itself. It has actually created revenue.What will it take for the Liberal government to smarten up and implement a national child care program for all Canadian families so everyone wins?

Mr. Speaker, on Monday, our leader travelled to Willowdale to hear from families and small business owners who are struggling to get by under the current Liberal government's policies. There, he met pharmacist Mr. Tamer Farag, who voiced his concerns about how the Prime Minister's tax changes are costing him and his community.We know the Prime Minister cannot relate to these stories because he has never had to balance a budget or meet a payroll, but in the rest of Canada, people are paying for his mistakes with their hard-earned money. When will the Prime Minister give hard-working Canadians, like Mr. Farag, a break?

Mr. Speaker, again no surprise, that was not the answer to the question that was asked. These reports of PMO interference in a criminal prosecution are deeply troubling. It is no wonder the Prime Minister fired his former attorney general when she called for principled independence and transparency. She said, “It is a pillar of our democracy that our system of justice be free from even the perception of political interference”. The pillars of ethics, principles and transparency have been absent from the government.In December, Gerald Butts discussed a special deal for SNC-Lavalin with the former attorney general. A month later, she was fired. What was said in that meeting?

Mr. Speaker, that was not the question. That carefully crafted answer falls short of what Canadians expect.As the former attorney general said, “The role of the Attorney General of Canada carries with it unique responsibilities to uphold the rule of law and the administration of justice, and as such demands a measure of principled independence.” Apparently the Prime Minister thinks otherwise. In December, Gerald Butts discussed a special deal for SNC-Lavalin with the former attorney general. A month later, she was fired. What was said in that meeting?

Mr. Speaker, that was not the question.Given that the Attorney General of Canada has unique responsibilities in relation to upholding the rule of law and the administration of justice, and that our justice system must be free of any political interference and maintain the highest level of public confidence, that position should never be tainted by partisanship and must always be absolutely transparent.The question is simple. Did the Prime Minister's Office discuss a special deal for SNC-Lavalin with the former attorney general?

Mr. Speaker, I thank the parliamentary secretary, and I commend him on his French, but he did not answer my question. My question was perfectly simple, especially since the Globe and Mail published an added detail today. It seems that the Prime Minister's principal secretary, the infamous Gerald Butts, had a conversation with the former attorney general of Canada in December, and a month later, she got the boot from that important post. I will repeat the question that is on all Canadians' minds and that they want a clear answer to. Were there discussions between the Prime Minister's Office and the former attorney general regarding the SNC-Lavalin scandal? Yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, the Canadian Armed Forces offer people unique opportunities to challenge themselves and develop skills that will serve them well their whole lives.Members of the reserve forces live and work in their home communities and safeguard them, such as when natural disasters occur.Can the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence inform the House how the government is partnering with communities to support our reservists and allow them to serve at home and abroad without the stress of repercussions in their full-time civilian roles?

Mr. Speaker, at absolutely no point has the previous minister or the current minister been pressured or directed by the Prime Minister himself or any members of his office to make any decision on this or any other matter. As the Prime Minister said clearly yesterday to the gathered journalists, the allegations contained in the original media article are false.

Mr. Speaker, every question feels like Groundhog Day.The RCM of Vaudreuil-Soulanges asked the National Energy Board, the NEB, to provide a list of compliance issues and information on monitoring carried out in relation to Enbridge's line 9B. The NEB declined to answer.I also tried to get this information by submitting a written question. Here is what I got in response: ...producing and validating a comprehensive response to this question is not possible in the time allotted and could lead to the disclosure of incomplete and misleading information. Do the NEB and the Liberals have something to hide?

Mr. Speaker, eight-year-old Liam and nine-year-old Mia Tarabichi were kidnapped. They were taken to a foreign country. The Prime Minister has done nothing to bring them home. The only hope of ever having these children brought home to their mom Shelley is if the Prime Minister calls the President and the Prime Minister of Lebanon and asks for them to intervene. These two Canadian children need to be home here in Canada with their mom.Why has the Prime Minister not called President Aoun and Prime Minister Hariri?

Mr. Speaker, let's not pretend that we have never seen rich corporations buy off politicians with illegal contributions. After decades of Liberal governments in Ottawa, we have been down that road before.Whether we are talking about KPMG, Kinder Morgan or SNC-Lavalin, it is the same old story. When it comes time to lend a hand to their millionaire friends, the Liberals take their marching orders from the powerful. If the Liberals think they have absolutely nothing to hide, why do they not ask the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner to investigate and shed some light on this scandal?

Mr. Speaker, we agree that Canadians are paying too much for their prescription medicines, but unlike the NDP, we are doing our homework. When it comes to something as big and important as pharmacare, we want to get it right. Unlike the NDP, we want to know how much something costs before we implement it. What the NDP unveiled yesterday is not a plan. They cannot call something a plan when it has nothing about costing or how it will be implemented. Unlike the NDP, we do not do a nation-building policy of pharmacare on the back of a napkin. This is an issue far too serious for half-baked, no-detail plans.

Mr. Speaker, shoreline erosion is not a new phenomenon, but the situation is getting worse. Some of my constituents are now concerned that their houses might literally fall into the St. Lawrence.Municipalities like Saint-Ignace have long been calling on the federal government to invest in maintaining retaining walls along the St. Lawrence and enforcing speed limits on the waterway. This problem is real, and people want the federal government to take action now.Will the Liberals do what needs to be done and take concrete steps to address this urgent problem?

Mr. Speaker, there is a 60% increase in rejections of disability tax credit applications. The Liberals are not delivering the services needed by thousands of people with severe and prolonged impairments. The disability savings they qualified for as far back as 10 years ago are also being clawed back. Nearly 80% of appeals win and it makes us wonder if this is intentional. The Liberals take care of their friends on Bay Street and people with disabilities are being ripped off.Will the Liberal government fix this problem now?

Mr. Speaker, our government has always been guided by the view that parliamentarians have the right to know where public funds are going and how they are being spent. For the very first time, parliamentarians have at their disposal a detailed reconciliation between the budget and the main estimates. They never had that before. That means when they are studying the main estimates, parliamentarians will now be able to study a document that is relevant and complete for that year. This is a major improvement over previous years, when the main estimates were rendered obsolete soon after they were tabled because they did not reconcile with the budget.

Mr. Speaker, this morning, the Prime Minister said “no”. He closed the door.Quebec's immigration bill was tabled only yesterday. It will be debated by the National Assembly and the public, which is only natural because that is how democracy works.However, this morning, the government decided that it could not care less about that process and that, whatever happens, it will say “no”.Does the government realize that, by so doing, it is attacking the sovereignty of the National Assembly and its capacity to pass effective legislation?

Mr. Speaker, at no point has the current minister or his predecessor been pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or members of his office to make any decision in this or any other matter. Absolutely, the member opposite has it right. The attorney general is the chief law officer of the Crown. Absolutely, they provide legal advice to government and they have a responsibility to act in the public interest. That is something the minister takes very seriously.

Mr. Speaker, after she was shown the door, the former attorney general of Canada stated that the justice system must be free from any political interference, that she must always be ready to speak the truth and that anything less than the whole truth is unacceptable.Did the Prime Minister's Office discuss a special deal for SNC-Lavalin with the former attorney general of Canada, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, we realize the importance of immigration to address labour market shortages and enhance Quebec's economy. The Governments of Canada and Quebec have always collaborated for decades under the Canada-Quebec accord, and we intend to continue this important collaboration. Of course, we have some concerns about this bill, but we will be reviewing it with interest. We have to continue to work with the Government of Quebec to ensure we have an immigration system that continues to work for the best interests of Canadians and Quebecers.

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister told his caucus that any word coming from Gerald Butts should be considered as coming directly from the Prime Minister. The Globe and Mail reports, “In December, Mr. Butts spoke to [the former attorney general] about the SNC-Lavalin remediation case, according to [the Prime Minister's] deputy communications director.” Apparently, it did not go well. A month later, the Prime Minister fired his attorney general.What did Mr. Butts say to the former attorney general in that conversation?

Mr. Speaker, at no time was the current Minister of Justice or his predecessor pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or his office to make any decision on this or any other matter. As the Prime Minister said yesterday, these allegations are false.

Mr. Speaker, members will recall that the government refused to seriously discuss the immigration levels in Quebec on the pretext of addressing a labour shortage.Today, Quebec is legislating to deal with the labour shortage in the regions as quickly as possible, but Ottawa said no without any meetings or discussions.If the government believes that the labour shortage in the regions is a problem, why does it want to prevent Quebec from legislating in that regard?

Mr. Speaker, our government is working hard to help SMEs and especially to make it easier for them to do business.On January 1, 2019, we lowered the small business tax rate to 9%, allowing small businesses to keep $7,500 more. We also asked credit card companies to lower their rates, which translates into an extra $7,500 over five years. We promised small businesses that we would work for them, and that is what we will keep doing.

Mr. Speaker, we understand how important our transportation corridors are for getting goods across Canada to market and also for connecting people with other Canadians.When it comes to individual issues like this one, we are happy to work with all members to ensure that not only do our transportation corridors stay open but that our communities stay protected. I am happy to follow up with the member.

Mr. Speaker, our thoughts go out to the family at the centre of an abduction of Canadian children to Lebanon. Canadian consular officials are in direct contact with the family and are providing consular assistance and advice. Due to the provisions of the Privacy Act, no further information can be disclosed at this time.

Mr. Speaker, at no point has the current Minister of Justice or the former minister of justice been pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or anyone in the Prime Minister's Office to make any decision on this or any other matter.It does indeed warm my heart to now hear two Conservative colleagues talking about how important the rule of law is. I wish they would have recognized those kinds of concepts when they were openly criticizing Beverley McLachlin when she served as Chief Justice of Canada.

The questions we are asking, Mr. Speaker, are crystal clear. We are asking a very simple question that has not been answered. It was not answered yesterday and it has not been answered today. I am going to ask again, crystal clearly.Did the Prime Minister's Office discuss a special deal for SNC-Lavelin with the former Attorney General, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, at no point has the current Minister of Justice or the former minister of justice been pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or the Prime Minister's Office to make any decision on this or any other matter. I absolutely agree with my colleague across the way that the Attorney General of Canada is the chief law officer of the Crown and provides legal advice to the government, with a responsibility to act in the public interest, as the hon. member points out. The Attorney General takes those responsibilities very seriously.

Mr. Speaker, consular officials are in direct contact with the family. There is a whole host of security issues that surround such cases, and to further talk about the details in public may put lives in jeopardy.

Mr. Speaker, at no point has the current Minister of Justice or the former minister of justice been pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or anyone else in the Prime Minister's Office, and let me reiterate that, or anyone else in the Prime Minister's Office, to make any decision on this or any other matter. The Attorney General of Canada is the chief law officer of the Crown and provides legal advice to the entire Government of Canada. He has the responsibility to act in the public interest and that responsibility is one he takes very seriously.

Mr. Speaker, as regards the previous minister of justice and the current Minister of Justice, there has been absolutely no pressure or direction exercised upon either of those two individuals by the Prime Minister himself or by anyone in his cabinet, on this or any other matter. The allegations contained in the media articles that surfaced yesterday are false, as the Prime Minister stated clearly to journalists in Vaughan.

Mr. Speaker, we have been abundantly clear. At no point has the Minister of Justice or the former minister of justice been pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or the Prime Minister's Office to make any decision on this or any other matter.The Attorney General is the chief law officer of the Crown and provides legal advice to the Government of Canada, with a responsibility to act always in the public interest. He takes those responsibilities seriously.

Mr. Speaker, to be crystal clear, the principal secretary, like many others, is a member of the Prime Minister's Office. What I said is that the Minister of Justice and the previous minister of justice have not been pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or anyone else in the Prime Minister's Office to take any decision on this or any other matter.

Mr. Speaker, the current Minister of Justice and his predecessor have neither been pressured nor directed by the Prime Minister or anyone in the Prime Minister's Office to make a decision on this or any other matter. Clearly, the Attorney General is the chief law officer of the Crown and provides legal advice to government, with a responsibility to act in the public interest. The minister takes this responsibility very seriously.

Mr. Speaker, as I have said several times in this chamber today, at no point whatsoever were the current Minister of Justice or the former minister of justice pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or anyone in the Prime Minister's Office to make a decision on this or any other matter. I have been patient, but at least half a dozen times members opposite have said that the former minister was fired in the context of accepting the honour of taking on serving Canada's veterans. In terms of the men and women who have fought for this country and served so valiantly, that is actually an inappropriate statement to be making in the House and it should be addressed.

Mr. Speaker, pipeline regulation is the responsibility of the National Energy Board.Anyone with questions or concerns about pipeline safety should contact the NEB.

Mr. Speaker, that clearly was not the question. We are not talking about directing or influence. We are talking about discussions.The former attorney general was clear that “It is a pillar of our democracy that our system of justice be free from even the perception of political interference”. The Canadian public is not confident in the Prime Minister or that parliamentary secretary's answer. Was there any discussion of a special deal between the Prime Minister's Office and the former attorney general about SNC-Lavalin, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my hon. colleague for her great efforts in French.I thank the hon. member for Northumberland—Peterborough South for promoting such an important file.Our government understands the importance of the forestry sector and is providing $867 million through the softwood lumber action plan due to unfair duties levied by the U.S.I also attended the most recent PaperWeek conference in Montreal, where I met with industry professionals to exchange ideas and discuss new technologies. We will take steps to ensure the pulp and paper industry and the forest sector at large continue to thrive.

Mr. Speaker, at no point has the current Minister of Justice or the former minister of justice been directed or pressured by the Prime Minister or the Prime Minister's Office to make any decision on this or any other matter. The Attorney General of Canada is the chief law officer of the Crown and provides legal advice to the government, with a responsibility to act in the public interest. He takes those responsibilities very seriously.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the question. At no point has the current Minister of Justice or his predecessor been directed or pressured by the Prime Minister or the Prime Minister's Office to make a decision on this or any other matter. The Attorney General of Canada is the chief law officer of the Crown and provides legal advice to the government, with a responsibility to act in the public interest. He takes his responsibilities very seriously.

Mr. Speaker, at no point has the current Minister of Justice or the former minister of justice been pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or the Prime Minister's Office to make a decision in this or on any other matter.As the Prime Minister stated clearly yesterday, the allegations contained in the original article in The Globe and Mail are false.

Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to be able to answer this question, because we know that investments in affordable and quality child care make a big impact on improving workforce and labour force participation by women in particular, on making ends meet easier, on improving poverty reduction outcomes, on making gender equality more real in Canada and on investing in the development of our children.The good news is that we have announced a $7.5 billion investment, for the first time ever, in our daycare centres and early learning and child care. We are looking forward to implementing that over the next 10 years.

Mr. Speaker, immigration plays a key role in the Canadian economy and enriches our communities.The Governments of Canada and Quebec have been collaborating for decades under the Canada-Quebec accord, and we intend to continue this important collaboration. We have concerns about the bill, but it is too early to comment on specifics.

Mr. Speaker, immigration plays a key role in the Canadian economy and enriches our communities.The Governments of Canada and Quebec have been collaborating for decades under the Canada-Quebec accord, and we intend to continue this important collaboration. We have concerns about the bill, but it is too early to comment on specifics.

Mr. Speaker, at no point, N-O point, has the current Minister of Justice or the former minister of justice been pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or members of his cabinet.I take issue with the member opposite. The member opposite has construed this as not being about pressure or direction. That is exactly what is at issue here. That is exactly what I am saying on the record. There was no pressure and no direction given by the Prime Minister or members of his cabinet on this or any other matter.

Mr. Speaker, every community in Canada has to deal with the challenge of helping people living in homelessness. Canada's first-ever national housing strategy included a significant increase in funds for fighting homelessness. Last November, the Minister of Families, Children and Social Development announced that reaching home, the redesigned federal homelessness program, will be launching on April 1 of this year. The date is almost upon us. Could the minister update the House on reaching home's implementation?

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Mississauga—Lakeshore for his question.Our government supports our active and reserve military personnel.We enhanced job protection legislation with new provisions for military training leave and job protection when serving on deployment.I was in New Brunswick this week to congratulate the businesses and educators in our region who support our reservists and make it possible for them to serve. I thank the Canadian Forces Liaison Council and its partners for promoting the transferable skills of reservists for civilian jobs and for helping them balance their civilian lives while gaining valuable military experience that sets them up for success.

Mr. Speaker, at no point has the current Minister of Justice or his predecessor been pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or anyone in his office to make a decision on this or any other matter.

Mr. Speaker, to be crystal clear, at no point has the current Minister of Justice or the former minister of justice been pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or the Prime Minister's Office, including all employees therein, to make any decision on this or any other matter.The Attorney General is the chief law officer of the Crown, providing legal advice to the government. He takes that responsibility very seriously.

Mr. Speaker, the remediation agreements the member opposite is referencing are something that were widely consulted upon by the Government of Canada. That process was led by PSPC. That consultation concluded during the year 2017. There was an announcement made in the budget. There was a press release. There was a study done at committee. The government has been entirely transparent with respect to amendments we have made to the laws of Canada with respect to remediation.

Mr. Speaker, as I have already said, at no point was the current Minister of Justice or his predecessor pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or his office to make a decision on this or any other matter.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the comments of my colleague opposite. I work very hard to stand up for both official languages in the House. At no point has the Minister of Justice or the former minister of justice been pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or the Prime Minister's Office to make any decision on this or any other matter.

Mr. Speaker, at no point has the current Minister of Justice or the former minister of justice been pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or anyone in the Prime Minister's Office, including the individual just mentioned by the member for Carleton, to make any decision on this or any other matter. The Attorney General is the chief law officer of the Crown and provides legal advice to the government, with a responsibility to act in the public interest. The Attorney General takes this issue very seriously.

Mr. Speaker, the pulp and paper industry has changed dramatically over the past two decades.Between 1990 and 2012, the industry has led the way in reducing pollution by more than 60%. The industry will play a key role in fighting pollution, driving innovation, creating jobs and advancing indigenous reconciliation.While stressing the importance of the future of Canadian industry, can the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Natural Resources give us an update on the pulp and paper industry?

Mr. Speaker, The Globe and Mail alleges that the Prime Minister's Office interfered in order to try to get charges dropped in a massive fraud and bribery case. The corporation in question discussed law enforcement and justice with the Prime Minister's Office 14 times, including with PMO boss Gerald Butts. Did Mr. Butts ever discuss with SNC-Lavalin lobbyists the idea of giving the company a deal to avoid criminal prosecution?

Mr. Speaker, at no time was the current Minister of Justice or his predecessor pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or his office to make any decision on this or any other matter. As the Prime Minister said yesterday, these allegations are false.

Mr. Speaker, members will recall that the government refused to seriously discuss the immigration levels in Quebec on the pretext of addressing a labour shortage.Today, Quebec is legislating to deal with the labour shortage in the regions as quickly as possible, but Ottawa said no without any meetings or discussions.If the government believes that the labour shortage in the regions is a problem, why does it want to prevent Quebec from legislating in that regard?

Mr. Speaker, that was not quite the answer that we needed, but the reports about the PMO's interference in a criminal prosecution are shocking. In December, Gerald Butts discussed a special deal for SNC-Lavalin with the former attorney general. A month later, she was demoted. What was said in that meeting? Canadians need to know.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the comments of my colleague opposite. I work very hard to stand up for both official languages in the House. At no point has the Minister of Justice or the former minister of justice been pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or the Prime Minister's Office to make any decision on this or any other matter.

Mr. Speaker, on Monday, our leader travelled to Willowdale to hear from families and small business owners who are struggling to get by under the current Liberal government's policies. There, he met pharmacist Mr. Tamer Farag, who voiced his concerns about how the Prime Minister's tax changes are costing him and his community.We know the Prime Minister cannot relate to these stories because he has never had to balance a budget or meet a payroll, but in the rest of Canada, people are paying for his mistakes with their hard-earned money. When will the Prime Minister give hard-working Canadians, like Mr. Farag, a break?

Mr. Speaker, as regards the previous minister of justice and the current Minister of Justice, there has been absolutely no pressure or direction exercised upon either of those two individuals by the Prime Minister himself or by anyone in his cabinet, on this or any other matter. The allegations contained in the media articles that surfaced yesterday are false, as the Prime Minister stated clearly to journalists in Vaughan.

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Justice and the former minister of justice have not been pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or anyone in the Prime Minister's cabinet on this or any other matter.As the Prime Minister said very clearly yesterday in front of a media scrum, the allegations contained in The Globe and Mail article are false.

Mr. Speaker, something stinks. The Prime Minister's answers are vague and evasive. The former attorney general spoke truth to power, and she paid the price. In December, Gerald Butts discussed a special deal for SNC-Lavalin with the former attorney general, and a month later, she was fired. What was said at that meeting?

Mr. Speaker, I will reiterate for the House that at no point has the current Minister of Justice or the former minister of justice been pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or anyone else in his office to make a decision on this or any other matter. As the Prime Minister said very clearly yesterday to the journalists gathered, the allegations contained in The Globe and Mail article are false.

Mr. Speaker, neither the current Minister of Justice nor the former minister of justice has been pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or anyone in the Prime Minister's Office to take a decision on this or any other matter. As the Prime Minister was very clear yesterday with the journalists gathered in Vaughan, Ontario, the allegations contained in The Globe and Mail article are false.

Mr. Speaker, our government is working hard to help SMEs and especially to make it easier for them to do business.On January 1, 2019, we lowered the small business tax rate to 9%, allowing small businesses to keep $7,500 more. We also asked credit card companies to lower their rates, which translates into an extra $7,500 over five years. We promised small businesses that we would work for them, and that is what we will keep doing.

Mr. Speaker, one day after the Globe and Mail broke the scandal involving the Prime Minister's Office potential interference in a criminal case, Canadians have not been reassured by what the government is telling them. The government is playing with words. Canadians want the facts.The question we are asking and will continue to ask until Canadians get an answer is very simple: Did the Prime Minister's Office have discussions with the former attorney general about SNC-Lavalin, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, as I have said several times in this chamber today, at no point whatsoever were the current Minister of Justice or the former minister of justice pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or anyone in the Prime Minister's Office to make a decision on this or any other matter. I have been patient, but at least half a dozen times members opposite have said that the former minister was fired in the context of accepting the honour of taking on serving Canada's veterans. In terms of the men and women who have fought for this country and served so valiantly, that is actually an inappropriate statement to be making in the House and it should be addressed.

Mr. Speaker, at no point has the current Minister of Justice or his predecessor been pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or anyone in his office to make a decision on this or any other matter.

Mr. Speaker, as I have already said, at no point was the current Minister of Justice or his predecessor pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or his office to make a decision on this or any other matter.

Mr. Speaker, eight-year-old Liam and nine-year-old Mia Tarabichi were kidnapped. They were taken to a foreign country. The Prime Minister has done nothing to bring them home. The only hope of ever having these children brought home to their mom Shelley is if the Prime Minister calls the President and the Prime Minister of Lebanon and asks for them to intervene. These two Canadian children need to be home here in Canada with their mom.Why has the Prime Minister not called President Aoun and Prime Minister Hariri?

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the question. At no point has the current Minister of Justice or his predecessor been directed or pressured by the Prime Minister or the Prime Minister's Office to make a decision on this or any other matter. The Attorney General of Canada is the chief law officer of the Crown and provides legal advice to the government, with a responsibility to act in the public interest. He takes his responsibilities very seriously.

Mr. Speaker, at absolutely no point has the previous minister or the current minister been pressured or directed by the Prime Minister himself or any members of his office to make any decision on this or any other matter. As the Prime Minister said clearly yesterday to the gathered journalists, the allegations contained in the original media article are false.

Mr. Speaker, at no point has the current Minister of Justice or the former minister of justice been directed or pressured by the Prime Minister or the Prime Minister's Office to make any decision on this or any other matter. The Attorney General of Canada is the chief law officer of the Crown and provides legal advice to the government, with a responsibility to act in the public interest. He takes those responsibilities very seriously.

Mr. Speaker, at no point has the current Minister of Justice or the former minister of justice been pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or anyone else in the Prime Minister's Office, and let me reiterate that, or anyone else in the Prime Minister's Office, to make any decision on this or any other matter. The Attorney General of Canada is the chief law officer of the Crown and provides legal advice to the entire Government of Canada. He has the responsibility to act in the public interest and that responsibility is one he takes very seriously.

Mr. Speaker, it was over 20 years ago that the Liberals committed to introducing a universal drug plan, but they failed to act. In the meantime, Mr. Lorenzen, in my riding, has paid over $25,000 for prescription medication following a surgery.The Liberals lack the political will to get the job done. Enough with the studies. Enough with the expert panels. Enough with the rhetoric. Will the Liberals please tell Mr. Lorenzen, indeed all Canadians, if they are ready to end the empty promises and implement a fully public, national and universal pharmacare plan?

Mr. Speaker, the remediation agreements the member opposite is referencing are something that were widely consulted upon by the Government of Canada. That process was led by PSPC. That consultation concluded during the year 2017. There was an announcement made in the budget. There was a press release. There was a study done at committee. The government has been entirely transparent with respect to amendments we have made to the laws of Canada with respect to remediation.

Mr. Speaker, to be crystal clear, at no point has the current Minister of Justice or the former minister of justice been pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or the Prime Minister's Office, including all employees therein, to make any decision on this or any other matter.The Attorney General is the chief law officer of the Crown, providing legal advice to the government. He takes that responsibility very seriously.

Mr. Speaker, the current Minister of Justice and his predecessor have neither been pressured nor directed by the Prime Minister or anyone in the Prime Minister's Office to make a decision on this or any other matter. Clearly, the Attorney General is the chief law officer of the Crown and provides legal advice to government, with a responsibility to act in the public interest. The minister takes this responsibility very seriously.

Mr. Speaker, at no point has the current Minister of Justice or the former minister of justice been pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or anyone in the Prime Minister's Office, including the individual just mentioned by the member for Carleton, to make any decision on this or any other matter. The Attorney General is the chief law officer of the Crown and provides legal advice to the government, with a responsibility to act in the public interest. The Attorney General takes this issue very seriously.

Mr. Speaker, we have been abundantly clear. At no point has the Minister of Justice or the former minister of justice been pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or the Prime Minister's Office to make any decision on this or any other matter.The Attorney General is the chief law officer of the Crown and provides legal advice to the Government of Canada, with a responsibility to act always in the public interest. He takes those responsibilities seriously.

Mr. Speaker, shoreline erosion is not a new phenomenon, but the situation is getting worse. Some of my constituents are now concerned that their houses might literally fall into the St. Lawrence.Municipalities like Saint-Ignace have long been calling on the federal government to invest in maintaining retaining walls along the St. Lawrence and enforcing speed limits on the waterway. This problem is real, and people want the federal government to take action now.Will the Liberals do what needs to be done and take concrete steps to address this urgent problem?

Mr. Speaker, at no point has the current Minister of Justice or the former minister of justice been pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or the Prime Minister's Office to make a decision in this or on any other matter.As the Prime Minister stated clearly yesterday, the allegations contained in the original article in The Globe and Mail are false.

Mr. Speaker, our thoughts go out to the family at the centre of an abduction of Canadian children to Lebanon. Canadian consular officials are in direct contact with the family and are providing consular assistance and advice. Due to the provisions of the Privacy Act, no further information can be disclosed at this time.

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister indicated that he would have talks with Quebec concerning immigration. The talks did not last long.The ink on Quebec's bill is not even dry and the government is already saying no. Last week, he refused to discuss knowledge of French as a condition for citizenship. This week, he is refusing to discuss knowledge of French as a condition in earlier steps in the immigration process. French is not a shameful disease.Why is the government refusing to discuss this? Why is it showing such contempt?

Mr. Speaker, at no point has the current Minister of Justice or the former minister of justice been pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or the Prime Minister's Office to make any decision on this or any other matter. I absolutely agree with my colleague across the way that the Attorney General of Canada is the chief law officer of the Crown and provides legal advice to the government, with a responsibility to act in the public interest, as the hon. member points out. The Attorney General takes those responsibilities very seriously.

Mr. Speaker, every question feels like Groundhog Day.The RCM of Vaudreuil-Soulanges asked the National Energy Board, the NEB, to provide a list of compliance issues and information on monitoring carried out in relation to Enbridge's line 9B. The NEB declined to answer.I also tried to get this information by submitting a written question. Here is what I got in response: ...producing and validating a comprehensive response to this question is not possible in the time allotted and could lead to the disclosure of incomplete and misleading information. Do the NEB and the Liberals have something to hide?

Mr. Speaker, pipeline regulation is the responsibility of the National Energy Board.Anyone with questions or concerns about pipeline safety should contact the NEB.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the parliamentary secretary, and I commend him on his French, but he did not answer my question. My question was perfectly simple, especially since the Globe and Mail published an added detail today. It seems that the Prime Minister's principal secretary, the infamous Gerald Butts, had a conversation with the former attorney general of Canada in December, and a month later, she got the boot from that important post. I will repeat the question that is on all Canadians' minds and that they want a clear answer to. Were there discussions between the Prime Minister's Office and the former attorney general regarding the SNC-Lavalin scandal? Yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, as you know, our government is committed to the care, health and well-being of our military personnel and their families.We recognize that we need to continually adapt the way we care for people with mental illness. That is exactly why the minister has asked the Standing Committee on National Defence to examine the issue of suicide and self-harm within the Canadian Armed Forces with a view to making recommendations to the government for dealing with these challenges.Looking after our soldiers, our veterans and their families is a priority for our government. These men and women are always at the centre of everything we do.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Mississauga—Lakeshore for his question.Our government supports our active and reserve military personnel.We enhanced job protection legislation with new provisions for military training leave and job protection when serving on deployment.I was in New Brunswick this week to congratulate the businesses and educators in our region who support our reservists and make it possible for them to serve. I thank the Canadian Forces Liaison Council and its partners for promoting the transferable skills of reservists for civilian jobs and for helping them balance their civilian lives while gaining valuable military experience that sets them up for success.

Mr. Speaker, the former attorney general has been asked, point blank, if the Prime Minister's Office pressured her to make a deal letting SNC-Lavalin off bribery and corruption charges. Her answer was, “No comment”.The Prime Minister has the ability to waive attorney-client privilege and let her speak the truth. Will the Prime Minister let the former attorney general speak?

Mr. Speaker, the parliamentary secretary still has not answered the question. I want to quote the former attorney general. She stated that “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.” Shockingly, now it appears the Prime Minister fired the former attorney general for speaking truth to power.In December, Gerald Butts discussed a special deal for SNC-Lavalin with the former attorney general. A month later, she was fired. What was said in that meeting?

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

Mr. Speaker, in last year's budget implementation bill, the Liberals amended the Criminal Code. Companies accused of corruption can pursue out-of-court settlements, thus ensuring their continued eligibility for lucrative federal contracts.Which company has been accused of corruption in other countries many times over? SNC-Lavalin. Which company talked to the Prime Minister's Office 14 times? SNC-Lavalin.The Liberals are corporate puppets. Will the people ever find out just how much sway SNC-Lavalin holds over the Liberal government?

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals introduced the accountability-destroying, $7-billion vote 40 Liberal slush fund on the pretense that it would better align government spending. Now the PBO has once again reported that this measure has been an abject failure. The Liberals killed spending oversight in an election year so that they could spend on what they wanted with zero accountability.Will the new Treasury Board president listen to the Parliamentary Budget Officer and eliminate the vote 40 Liberal slush fund?

Mr. Speaker, I suggest that my colleague listen to the question so that he can give a real answer.This is worrisome. Yesterday the Globe and Mail published an article alleging that the Prime Minister's Office had interfered in a criminal proceeding.What about the principle of impartiality in our justice system? What about the principles of ethics and transparency?In December, Gerald Butts discussed a special deal for SNC-Lavalin with the former attorney general, who was then dismissed a month later.My question is simple. What was said at that meeting?

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister told his caucus that any word coming from Gerald Butts should be considered as coming directly from the Prime Minister. The Globe and Mail reports, “In December, Mr. Butts spoke to [the former attorney general] about the SNC-Lavalin remediation case, according to [the Prime Minister's] deputy communications director.” Apparently, it did not go well. A month later, the Prime Minister fired his attorney general.What did Mr. Butts say to the former attorney general in that conversation?

Mr. Speaker, I too have sat here attentively during the full hour of question period. I will say, again, that at no point were the current Minister of Justice or the former minister of justice pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or anyone in the Prime Minister's Office to make any decision on this or any other matter. As I have reiterated, the allegations contained in The Globe and Mail article, as the Prime Minister stated yesterday, are false.

Mr. Speaker, at no point has the current minister or his predecessor been pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or members of his office to make any decision in this or any other matter. Absolutely, the member opposite has it right. The attorney general is the chief law officer of the Crown. Absolutely, they provide legal advice to government and they have a responsibility to act in the public interest. That is something the minister takes very seriously.

Mr. Speaker, Canadians expect Canada's attorney general to be independent and non-partisan. The former attorney general knows this. In her words, “It is a pillar of our democracy that our system of justice be free from even the perception of political interference”.All of these carefully crafted and legally vetted answers regarding the PMO interfering in a criminal investigation and the firing of the former attorney general are not sufficient. In December, Gerald Butts discussed a special deal for SNC-Lavalin with the former attorney general. A month later, she was fired. Who said what in that meeting?

Mr. Speaker, again no surprise, that was not the answer to the question that was asked. These reports of PMO interference in a criminal prosecution are deeply troubling. It is no wonder the Prime Minister fired his former attorney general when she called for principled independence and transparency. She said, “It is a pillar of our democracy that our system of justice be free from even the perception of political interference”. The pillars of ethics, principles and transparency have been absent from the government.In December, Gerald Butts discussed a special deal for SNC-Lavalin with the former attorney general. A month later, she was fired. What was said in that meeting?

Mr. Speaker, at no point, N-O point, has the current Minister of Justice or the former minister of justice been pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or members of his cabinet.I take issue with the member opposite. The member opposite has construed this as not being about pressure or direction. That is exactly what is at issue here. That is exactly what I am saying on the record. There was no pressure and no direction given by the Prime Minister or members of his cabinet on this or any other matter.

Mr. Speaker, the attorney general's responsibilities include upholding the rule of law and speaking truth to power. It is a pillar of our democracy that our system of justice be free from even the perception of political interference.Yesterday the Prime Minister's Office was accused of trying to interfere with a criminal prosecution against SNC-Lavalin. In December, Gerald Butts discussed a special deal for SNC-Lavalin with the former attorney general. A month later, she was fired.What was said in that meeting?

Mr. Speaker, consular officials are in direct contact with the family. There is a whole host of security issues that surround such cases, and to further talk about the details in public may put lives in jeopardy.

Mr. Speaker, this morning, the Prime Minister said “no”. He closed the door.Quebec's immigration bill was tabled only yesterday. It will be debated by the National Assembly and the public, which is only natural because that is how democracy works.However, this morning, the government decided that it could not care less about that process and that, whatever happens, it will say “no”.Does the government realize that, by so doing, it is attacking the sovereignty of the National Assembly and its capacity to pass effective legislation?

Mr. Speaker, former Liberal Ontario attorney general Michael Bryant has made his opinion known as to how serious these allegations are and the impacts they are having on our democracy and the judicial system.We found out this morning from The Globe and Mail that the Prime Minister's principal secretary, Mr. Butts, spoke to Ms. Wilson-Raybould about the SNC-Lavalin remediation case, according to the Prime Minister's deputy communications director. The question is simple and requires a straightforward answer for Canadians. Did the Prime Minister's Office discuss a special deal for SNC-Lavalin with the former attorney general, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, that was not the question. That carefully crafted answer falls short of what Canadians expect.As the former attorney general said, “The role of the Attorney General of Canada carries with it unique responsibilities to uphold the rule of law and the administration of justice, and as such demands a measure of principled independence.” Apparently the Prime Minister thinks otherwise. In December, Gerald Butts discussed a special deal for SNC-Lavalin with the former attorney general. A month later, she was fired. What was said in that meeting?

Mr. Speaker, the pulp and paper industry has changed dramatically over the past two decades.Between 1990 and 2012, the industry has led the way in reducing pollution by more than 60%. The industry will play a key role in fighting pollution, driving innovation, creating jobs and advancing indigenous reconciliation.While stressing the importance of the future of Canadian industry, can the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Natural Resources give us an update on the pulp and paper industry?

Mr. Speaker, again, all through question period today, we have asked a very simple question of the attorney general and of his parliamentary secretary. We still have not had an answer. We know that Gerald Butts met with the former attorney general to discuss the SNC-Lavalin issue. The very simple question for the attorney general is this. Did that discussion include a special deal for the SNC-Lavalin company, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister did not invent the expression, but he was right when he said that sunlight is the best disinfectant. However, when faced with evidence of a serious potential obstruction of justice, the Liberals can only deny and delay. A well-connected multinational company lobbies the Liberal government more than 50 times, shovels to it more than $100,000 in illegal donations and then gets changes to the Criminal Code to help it get out from under corruption and fraud charges. When the former AG does not bend to the will of the Prime Minister, she is fired.The Liberals should be working with us to get to the bottom of this mess. Instead, we get non-answers and resistance. Therefore, I have a very specific question for my friends. Will they support our call for an ethics investigation into this scandal, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, that clearly was not the question. We are not talking about directing or influence. We are talking about discussions.The former attorney general was clear that “It is a pillar of our democracy that our system of justice be free from even the perception of political interference”. The Canadian public is not confident in the Prime Minister or that parliamentary secretary's answer. Was there any discussion of a special deal between the Prime Minister's Office and the former attorney general about SNC-Lavalin, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, to be crystal clear, the principal secretary, like many others, is a member of the Prime Minister's Office. What I said is that the Minister of Justice and the previous minister of justice have not been pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or anyone else in the Prime Minister's Office to take any decision on this or any other matter.

Mr. Speaker, that was not the question.Gerald Butts is the boss at the PMO. The Prime Minister has told his caucus that anything that comes from Gerald Butts comes from the Prime Minister. In December, Mr. Butts talked about SNC-Lavalin's charges with the former attorney general. Again my question is very clear. What exactly did Gerald Butts say to the former attorney general in that December conversation?

Mr. Speaker, let's not pretend that we have never seen rich corporations buy off politicians with illegal contributions. After decades of Liberal governments in Ottawa, we have been down that road before.Whether we are talking about KPMG, Kinder Morgan or SNC-Lavalin, it is the same old story. When it comes time to lend a hand to their millionaire friends, the Liberals take their marching orders from the powerful. If the Liberals think they have absolutely nothing to hide, why do they not ask the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner to investigate and shed some light on this scandal?

Mr. Speaker, let me first thank the member for Etobicoke Centre for his hard work in favour of the families and children in his community.Our government committed to working for the most vulnerable of all Canadians. That is because one homeless Canadian on the streets is one too many in our country. That is why reaching home, the new homelessness program, is going to increase the number of communities that will benefit from funding from the federal government. That is why I am calling upon all these communities to apply for additional funding. That is why, by working together, we can make sure we reduce homelessness by at least 50%.

The questions we are asking, Mr. Speaker, are crystal clear. We are asking a very simple question that has not been answered. It was not answered yesterday and it has not been answered today. I am going to ask again, crystal clearly.Did the Prime Minister's Office discuss a special deal for SNC-Lavelin with the former Attorney General, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, we agree that Canadians are paying too much for their prescription medicines, but unlike the NDP, we are doing our homework. When it comes to something as big and important as pharmacare, we want to get it right. Unlike the NDP, we want to know how much something costs before we implement it. What the NDP unveiled yesterday is not a plan. They cannot call something a plan when it has nothing about costing or how it will be implemented. Unlike the NDP, we do not do a nation-building policy of pharmacare on the back of a napkin. This is an issue far too serious for half-baked, no-detail plans.

Mr. Speaker, after she was shown the door, the former attorney general of Canada stated that the justice system must be free from any political interference, that she must always be ready to speak the truth and that anything less than the whole truth is unacceptable.Did the Prime Minister's Office discuss a special deal for SNC-Lavalin with the former attorney general of Canada, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, seriously, that answer is shameful. Two Canadian children were kidnapped and taken to a foreign country, and that is the answer we get. In Shelley's own words, the only person who can do something is the Prime Minister, who so far has not cared enough to do anything for his own citizens. She says, “What do I have to do to be heard, become a donor?”Why will the Prime Minister not just pick up the phone and bring Liam and Mia home?

Mr. Speaker, the Canadian Forces continue to lose more than one member per month to death by suicide, yet one of the barriers to serving members getting the help that they need is the fact that self-harm remains a disciplinary offence in the military code of conduct. Since the Liberal members ruled my amendment to fix this out of order at committee hearings on Bill C-77, let me ask the minister. Will the government now support removing self-harm as a disciplinary offence by agreeing to support my private member's bill, Bill C-426, and expedite its passage through the House?

Mr. Speaker, every community in Canada has to deal with the challenge of helping people living in homelessness. Canada's first-ever national housing strategy included a significant increase in funds for fighting homelessness. Last November, the Minister of Families, Children and Social Development announced that reaching home, the redesigned federal homelessness program, will be launching on April 1 of this year. The date is almost upon us. Could the minister update the House on reaching home's implementation?

Mr. Speaker, that was not the question.Given that the Attorney General of Canada has unique responsibilities in relation to upholding the rule of law and the administration of justice, and that our justice system must be free of any political interference and maintain the highest level of public confidence, that position should never be tainted by partisanship and must always be absolutely transparent.The question is simple. Did the Prime Minister's Office discuss a special deal for SNC-Lavalin with the former attorney general?

Mr. Speaker, at no point has the current Minister of Justice or the former minister of justice been pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or anyone in the Prime Minister's Office to make any decision on this or any other matter.It does indeed warm my heart to now hear two Conservative colleagues talking about how important the rule of law is. I wish they would have recognized those kinds of concepts when they were openly criticizing Beverley McLachlin when she served as Chief Justice of Canada.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my hon. colleague for her great efforts in French.I thank the hon. member for Northumberland—Peterborough South for promoting such an important file.Our government understands the importance of the forestry sector and is providing $867 million through the softwood lumber action plan due to unfair duties levied by the U.S.I also attended the most recent PaperWeek conference in Montreal, where I met with industry professionals to exchange ideas and discuss new technologies. We will take steps to ensure the pulp and paper industry and the forest sector at large continue to thrive.

Mr. Speaker, the Canadian Armed Forces offer people unique opportunities to challenge themselves and develop skills that will serve them well their whole lives.Members of the reserve forces live and work in their home communities and safeguard them, such as when natural disasters occur.Can the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence inform the House how the government is partnering with communities to support our reservists and allow them to serve at home and abroad without the stress of repercussions in their full-time civilian roles?

Mr. Speaker, immigration plays a key role in the Canadian economy and enriches our communities.The Governments of Canada and Quebec have been collaborating for decades under the Canada-Quebec accord, and we intend to continue this important collaboration. We have concerns about the bill, but it is too early to comment on specifics.

Mr. Speaker, immigration plays a key role in the Canadian economy and enriches our communities.The Governments of Canada and Quebec have been collaborating for decades under the Canada-Quebec accord, and we intend to continue this important collaboration. We have concerns about the bill, but it is too early to comment on specifics.

Mr. Speaker, our government has always been guided by the view that parliamentarians have the right to know where public funds are going and how they are being spent. For the very first time, parliamentarians have at their disposal a detailed reconciliation between the budget and the main estimates. They never had that before. That means when they are studying the main estimates, parliamentarians will now be able to study a document that is relevant and complete for that year. This is a major improvement over previous years, when the main estimates were rendered obsolete soon after they were tabled because they did not reconcile with the budget.

Mr. Speaker, there is a 60% increase in rejections of disability tax credit applications. The Liberals are not delivering the services needed by thousands of people with severe and prolonged impairments. The disability savings they qualified for as far back as 10 years ago are also being clawed back. Nearly 80% of appeals win and it makes us wonder if this is intentional. The Liberals take care of their friends on Bay Street and people with disabilities are being ripped off.Will the Liberal government fix this problem now?

Mr. Speaker, that is more Liberal obfuscation.Canada needs a federal child care program. CCPA's “Development Milestones” report reveals that the distressingly high cost of child care burdens Canadian families. Child care costs are 10 times higher in Toronto than in Montreal. In fact, universal child care in Quebec pays for itself. It has actually created revenue.What will it take for the Liberal government to smarten up and implement a national child care program for all Canadian families so everyone wins?

Again, Mr. Speaker, that was not the question.The former attorney general said very clearly, “It is a pillar of our democracy that our system of justice be free from even the perception of political interference”, yet we know from the lobbyists commissioner that over a dozen times, SNC-Lavalin met with members of the Prime Minister's Office, including principal secretary Gerry Butts. The Prime Minister says that sunshine is the best disinfectant, so let us shine some sunlight on this issue. Did the Prime Minister's Office discuss a special deal for SNC-Lavalin with the former attorney general, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, we understand how important our transportation corridors are for getting goods across Canada to market and also for connecting people with other Canadians.When it comes to individual issues like this one, we are happy to work with all members to ensure that not only do our transportation corridors stay open but that our communities stay protected. I am happy to follow up with the member.

Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to be able to answer this question, because we know that investments in affordable and quality child care make a big impact on improving workforce and labour force participation by women in particular, on making ends meet easier, on improving poverty reduction outcomes, on making gender equality more real in Canada and on investing in the development of our children.The good news is that we have announced a $7.5 billion investment, for the first time ever, in our daycare centres and early learning and child care. We are looking forward to implementing that over the next 10 years.

Mr. Speaker, we realize the importance of immigration to address labour market shortages and enhance Quebec's economy. The Governments of Canada and Quebec have always collaborated for decades under the Canada-Quebec accord, and we intend to continue this important collaboration. Of course, we have some concerns about this bill, but we will be reviewing it with interest. We have to continue to work with the Government of Quebec to ensure we have an immigration system that continues to work for the best interests of Canadians and Quebecers.

Mr. Speaker, we realize the importance of immigration to address labour market shortages and enhance Quebec's economy. The Governments of Canada and Quebec have always collaborated for decades under the Canada-Quebec accord, and we intend to continue this important collaboration. Of course, we have some concerns about this bill, but we will be reviewing it with interest. We have to continue to work with the Government of Quebec to ensure we have an immigration system that continues to work for the best interests of Canadians and Quebecers.

Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to be able to answer this question, because we know that investments in affordable and quality child care make a big impact on improving workforce and labour force participation by women in particular, on making ends meet easier, on improving poverty reduction outcomes, on making gender equality more real in Canada and on investing in the development of our children.The good news is that we have announced a $7.5 billion investment, for the first time ever, in our daycare centres and early learning and child care. We are looking forward to implementing that over the next 10 years.

Mr. Speaker, we understand how important our transportation corridors are for getting goods across Canada to market and also for connecting people with other Canadians.When it comes to individual issues like this one, we are happy to work with all members to ensure that not only do our transportation corridors stay open but that our communities stay protected. I am happy to follow up with the member.

Again, Mr. Speaker, that was not the question.The former attorney general said very clearly, “It is a pillar of our democracy that our system of justice be free from even the perception of political interference”, yet we know from the lobbyists commissioner that over a dozen times, SNC-Lavalin met with members of the Prime Minister's Office, including principal secretary Gerry Butts. The Prime Minister says that sunshine is the best disinfectant, so let us shine some sunlight on this issue. Did the Prime Minister's Office discuss a special deal for SNC-Lavalin with the former attorney general, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, that is more Liberal obfuscation.Canada needs a federal child care program. CCPA's “Development Milestones” report reveals that the distressingly high cost of child care burdens Canadian families. Child care costs are 10 times higher in Toronto than in Montreal. In fact, universal child care in Quebec pays for itself. It has actually created revenue.What will it take for the Liberal government to smarten up and implement a national child care program for all Canadian families so everyone wins?

Mr. Speaker, there is a 60% increase in rejections of disability tax credit applications. The Liberals are not delivering the services needed by thousands of people with severe and prolonged impairments. The disability savings they qualified for as far back as 10 years ago are also being clawed back. Nearly 80% of appeals win and it makes us wonder if this is intentional. The Liberals take care of their friends on Bay Street and people with disabilities are being ripped off.Will the Liberal government fix this problem now?

Mr. Speaker, our government has always been guided by the view that parliamentarians have the right to know where public funds are going and how they are being spent. For the very first time, parliamentarians have at their disposal a detailed reconciliation between the budget and the main estimates. They never had that before. That means when they are studying the main estimates, parliamentarians will now be able to study a document that is relevant and complete for that year. This is a major improvement over previous years, when the main estimates were rendered obsolete soon after they were tabled because they did not reconcile with the budget.

Mr. Speaker, immigration plays a key role in the Canadian economy and enriches our communities.The Governments of Canada and Quebec have been collaborating for decades under the Canada-Quebec accord, and we intend to continue this important collaboration. We have concerns about the bill, but it is too early to comment on specifics.

Mr. Speaker, immigration plays a key role in the Canadian economy and enriches our communities.The Governments of Canada and Quebec have been collaborating for decades under the Canada-Quebec accord, and we intend to continue this important collaboration. We have concerns about the bill, but it is too early to comment on specifics.

Mr. Speaker, the Canadian Armed Forces offer people unique opportunities to challenge themselves and develop skills that will serve them well their whole lives.Members of the reserve forces live and work in their home communities and safeguard them, such as when natural disasters occur.Can the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence inform the House how the government is partnering with communities to support our reservists and allow them to serve at home and abroad without the stress of repercussions in their full-time civilian roles?

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my hon. colleague for her great efforts in French.I thank the hon. member for Northumberland—Peterborough South for promoting such an important file.Our government understands the importance of the forestry sector and is providing $867 million through the softwood lumber action plan due to unfair duties levied by the U.S.I also attended the most recent PaperWeek conference in Montreal, where I met with industry professionals to exchange ideas and discuss new technologies. We will take steps to ensure the pulp and paper industry and the forest sector at large continue to thrive.

Mr. Speaker, at no point has the current Minister of Justice or the former minister of justice been pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or anyone in the Prime Minister's Office to make any decision on this or any other matter.It does indeed warm my heart to now hear two Conservative colleagues talking about how important the rule of law is. I wish they would have recognized those kinds of concepts when they were openly criticizing Beverley McLachlin when she served as Chief Justice of Canada.

Mr. Speaker, that was not the question.Given that the Attorney General of Canada has unique responsibilities in relation to upholding the rule of law and the administration of justice, and that our justice system must be free of any political interference and maintain the highest level of public confidence, that position should never be tainted by partisanship and must always be absolutely transparent.The question is simple. Did the Prime Minister's Office discuss a special deal for SNC-Lavalin with the former attorney general?

Mr. Speaker, every community in Canada has to deal with the challenge of helping people living in homelessness. Canada's first-ever national housing strategy included a significant increase in funds for fighting homelessness. Last November, the Minister of Families, Children and Social Development announced that reaching home, the redesigned federal homelessness program, will be launching on April 1 of this year. The date is almost upon us. Could the minister update the House on reaching home's implementation?

Mr. Speaker, the Canadian Forces continue to lose more than one member per month to death by suicide, yet one of the barriers to serving members getting the help that they need is the fact that self-harm remains a disciplinary offence in the military code of conduct. Since the Liberal members ruled my amendment to fix this out of order at committee hearings on Bill C-77, let me ask the minister. Will the government now support removing self-harm as a disciplinary offence by agreeing to support my private member's bill, Bill C-426, and expedite its passage through the House?

Mr. Speaker, seriously, that answer is shameful. Two Canadian children were kidnapped and taken to a foreign country, and that is the answer we get. In Shelley's own words, the only person who can do something is the Prime Minister, who so far has not cared enough to do anything for his own citizens. She says, “What do I have to do to be heard, become a donor?”Why will the Prime Minister not just pick up the phone and bring Liam and Mia home?

Mr. Speaker, after she was shown the door, the former attorney general of Canada stated that the justice system must be free from any political interference, that she must always be ready to speak the truth and that anything less than the whole truth is unacceptable.Did the Prime Minister's Office discuss a special deal for SNC-Lavalin with the former attorney general of Canada, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, we agree that Canadians are paying too much for their prescription medicines, but unlike the NDP, we are doing our homework. When it comes to something as big and important as pharmacare, we want to get it right. Unlike the NDP, we want to know how much something costs before we implement it. What the NDP unveiled yesterday is not a plan. They cannot call something a plan when it has nothing about costing or how it will be implemented. Unlike the NDP, we do not do a nation-building policy of pharmacare on the back of a napkin. This is an issue far too serious for half-baked, no-detail plans.

The questions we are asking, Mr. Speaker, are crystal clear. We are asking a very simple question that has not been answered. It was not answered yesterday and it has not been answered today. I am going to ask again, crystal clearly.Did the Prime Minister's Office discuss a special deal for SNC-Lavelin with the former Attorney General, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, let me first thank the member for Etobicoke Centre for his hard work in favour of the families and children in his community.Our government committed to working for the most vulnerable of all Canadians. That is because one homeless Canadian on the streets is one too many in our country. That is why reaching home, the new homelessness program, is going to increase the number of communities that will benefit from funding from the federal government. That is why I am calling upon all these communities to apply for additional funding. That is why, by working together, we can make sure we reduce homelessness by at least 50%.

Mr. Speaker, let's not pretend that we have never seen rich corporations buy off politicians with illegal contributions. After decades of Liberal governments in Ottawa, we have been down that road before.Whether we are talking about KPMG, Kinder Morgan or SNC-Lavalin, it is the same old story. When it comes time to lend a hand to their millionaire friends, the Liberals take their marching orders from the powerful. If the Liberals think they have absolutely nothing to hide, why do they not ask the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner to investigate and shed some light on this scandal?

Mr. Speaker, that was not the question.Gerald Butts is the boss at the PMO. The Prime Minister has told his caucus that anything that comes from Gerald Butts comes from the Prime Minister. In December, Mr. Butts talked about SNC-Lavalin's charges with the former attorney general. Again my question is very clear. What exactly did Gerald Butts say to the former attorney general in that December conversation?

Mr. Speaker, to be crystal clear, the principal secretary, like many others, is a member of the Prime Minister's Office. What I said is that the Minister of Justice and the previous minister of justice have not been pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or anyone else in the Prime Minister's Office to take any decision on this or any other matter.

Mr. Speaker, that clearly was not the question. We are not talking about directing or influence. We are talking about discussions.The former attorney general was clear that “It is a pillar of our democracy that our system of justice be free from even the perception of political interference”. The Canadian public is not confident in the Prime Minister or that parliamentary secretary's answer. Was there any discussion of a special deal between the Prime Minister's Office and the former attorney general about SNC-Lavalin, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister did not invent the expression, but he was right when he said that sunlight is the best disinfectant. However, when faced with evidence of a serious potential obstruction of justice, the Liberals can only deny and delay. A well-connected multinational company lobbies the Liberal government more than 50 times, shovels to it more than $100,000 in illegal donations and then gets changes to the Criminal Code to help it get out from under corruption and fraud charges. When the former AG does not bend to the will of the Prime Minister, she is fired.The Liberals should be working with us to get to the bottom of this mess. Instead, we get non-answers and resistance. Therefore, I have a very specific question for my friends. Will they support our call for an ethics investigation into this scandal, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, again, all through question period today, we have asked a very simple question of the attorney general and of his parliamentary secretary. We still have not had an answer. We know that Gerald Butts met with the former attorney general to discuss the SNC-Lavalin issue. The very simple question for the attorney general is this. Did that discussion include a special deal for the SNC-Lavalin company, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, the pulp and paper industry has changed dramatically over the past two decades.Between 1990 and 2012, the industry has led the way in reducing pollution by more than 60%. The industry will play a key role in fighting pollution, driving innovation, creating jobs and advancing indigenous reconciliation.While stressing the importance of the future of Canadian industry, can the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Natural Resources give us an update on the pulp and paper industry?

Mr. Speaker, that was not the question. That carefully crafted answer falls short of what Canadians expect.As the former attorney general said, “The role of the Attorney General of Canada carries with it unique responsibilities to uphold the rule of law and the administration of justice, and as such demands a measure of principled independence.” Apparently the Prime Minister thinks otherwise. In December, Gerald Butts discussed a special deal for SNC-Lavalin with the former attorney general. A month later, she was fired. What was said in that meeting?

Mr. Speaker, former Liberal Ontario attorney general Michael Bryant has made his opinion known as to how serious these allegations are and the impacts they are having on our democracy and the judicial system.We found out this morning from The Globe and Mail that the Prime Minister's principal secretary, Mr. Butts, spoke to Ms. Wilson-Raybould about the SNC-Lavalin remediation case, according to the Prime Minister's deputy communications director. The question is simple and requires a straightforward answer for Canadians. Did the Prime Minister's Office discuss a special deal for SNC-Lavalin with the former attorney general, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, this morning, the Prime Minister said “no”. He closed the door.Quebec's immigration bill was tabled only yesterday. It will be debated by the National Assembly and the public, which is only natural because that is how democracy works.However, this morning, the government decided that it could not care less about that process and that, whatever happens, it will say “no”.Does the government realize that, by so doing, it is attacking the sovereignty of the National Assembly and its capacity to pass effective legislation?

Mr. Speaker, consular officials are in direct contact with the family. There is a whole host of security issues that surround such cases, and to further talk about the details in public may put lives in jeopardy.

Mr. Speaker, the attorney general's responsibilities include upholding the rule of law and speaking truth to power. It is a pillar of our democracy that our system of justice be free from even the perception of political interference.Yesterday the Prime Minister's Office was accused of trying to interfere with a criminal prosecution against SNC-Lavalin. In December, Gerald Butts discussed a special deal for SNC-Lavalin with the former attorney general. A month later, she was fired.What was said in that meeting?

Mr. Speaker, at no point, N-O point, has the current Minister of Justice or the former minister of justice been pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or members of his cabinet.I take issue with the member opposite. The member opposite has construed this as not being about pressure or direction. That is exactly what is at issue here. That is exactly what I am saying on the record. There was no pressure and no direction given by the Prime Minister or members of his cabinet on this or any other matter.

Mr. Speaker, again no surprise, that was not the answer to the question that was asked. These reports of PMO interference in a criminal prosecution are deeply troubling. It is no wonder the Prime Minister fired his former attorney general when she called for principled independence and transparency. She said, “It is a pillar of our democracy that our system of justice be free from even the perception of political interference”. The pillars of ethics, principles and transparency have been absent from the government.In December, Gerald Butts discussed a special deal for SNC-Lavalin with the former attorney general. A month later, she was fired. What was said in that meeting?

Mr. Speaker, Canadians expect Canada's attorney general to be independent and non-partisan. The former attorney general knows this. In her words, “It is a pillar of our democracy that our system of justice be free from even the perception of political interference”.All of these carefully crafted and legally vetted answers regarding the PMO interfering in a criminal investigation and the firing of the former attorney general are not sufficient. In December, Gerald Butts discussed a special deal for SNC-Lavalin with the former attorney general. A month later, she was fired. Who said what in that meeting?

Mr. Speaker, at no point has the current minister or his predecessor been pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or members of his office to make any decision in this or any other matter. Absolutely, the member opposite has it right. The attorney general is the chief law officer of the Crown. Absolutely, they provide legal advice to government and they have a responsibility to act in the public interest. That is something the minister takes very seriously.

Mr. Speaker, I too have sat here attentively during the full hour of question period. I will say, again, that at no point were the current Minister of Justice or the former minister of justice pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or anyone in the Prime Minister's Office to make any decision on this or any other matter. As I have reiterated, the allegations contained in The Globe and Mail article, as the Prime Minister stated yesterday, are false.

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister told his caucus that any word coming from Gerald Butts should be considered as coming directly from the Prime Minister. The Globe and Mail reports, “In December, Mr. Butts spoke to [the former attorney general] about the SNC-Lavalin remediation case, according to [the Prime Minister's] deputy communications director.” Apparently, it did not go well. A month later, the Prime Minister fired his attorney general.What did Mr. Butts say to the former attorney general in that conversation?

Mr. Speaker, I suggest that my colleague listen to the question so that he can give a real answer.This is worrisome. Yesterday the Globe and Mail published an article alleging that the Prime Minister's Office had interfered in a criminal proceeding.What about the principle of impartiality in our justice system? What about the principles of ethics and transparency?In December, Gerald Butts discussed a special deal for SNC-Lavalin with the former attorney general, who was then dismissed a month later.My question is simple. What was said at that meeting?

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals introduced the accountability-destroying, $7-billion vote 40 Liberal slush fund on the pretense that it would better align government spending. Now the PBO has once again reported that this measure has been an abject failure. The Liberals killed spending oversight in an election year so that they could spend on what they wanted with zero accountability.Will the new Treasury Board president listen to the Parliamentary Budget Officer and eliminate the vote 40 Liberal slush fund?

Mr. Speaker, in last year's budget implementation bill, the Liberals amended the Criminal Code. Companies accused of corruption can pursue out-of-court settlements, thus ensuring their continued eligibility for lucrative federal contracts.Which company has been accused of corruption in other countries many times over? SNC-Lavalin. Which company talked to the Prime Minister's Office 14 times? SNC-Lavalin.The Liberals are corporate puppets. Will the people ever find out just how much sway SNC-Lavalin holds over the Liberal government?

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

Mr. Speaker, the parliamentary secretary still has not answered the question. I want to quote the former attorney general. She stated that “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.” Shockingly, now it appears the Prime Minister fired the former attorney general for speaking truth to power.In December, Gerald Butts discussed a special deal for SNC-Lavalin with the former attorney general. A month later, she was fired. What was said in that meeting?

Mr. Speaker, the former attorney general has been asked, point blank, if the Prime Minister's Office pressured her to make a deal letting SNC-Lavalin off bribery and corruption charges. Her answer was, “No comment”.The Prime Minister has the ability to waive attorney-client privilege and let her speak the truth. Will the Prime Minister let the former attorney general speak?

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Mississauga—Lakeshore for his question.Our government supports our active and reserve military personnel.We enhanced job protection legislation with new provisions for military training leave and job protection when serving on deployment.I was in New Brunswick this week to congratulate the businesses and educators in our region who support our reservists and make it possible for them to serve. I thank the Canadian Forces Liaison Council and its partners for promoting the transferable skills of reservists for civilian jobs and for helping them balance their civilian lives while gaining valuable military experience that sets them up for success.

Mr. Speaker, as you know, our government is committed to the care, health and well-being of our military personnel and their families.We recognize that we need to continually adapt the way we care for people with mental illness. That is exactly why the minister has asked the Standing Committee on National Defence to examine the issue of suicide and self-harm within the Canadian Armed Forces with a view to making recommendations to the government for dealing with these challenges.Looking after our soldiers, our veterans and their families is a priority for our government. These men and women are always at the centre of everything we do.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the parliamentary secretary, and I commend him on his French, but he did not answer my question. My question was perfectly simple, especially since the Globe and Mail published an added detail today. It seems that the Prime Minister's principal secretary, the infamous Gerald Butts, had a conversation with the former attorney general of Canada in December, and a month later, she got the boot from that important post. I will repeat the question that is on all Canadians' minds and that they want a clear answer to. Were there discussions between the Prime Minister's Office and the former attorney general regarding the SNC-Lavalin scandal? Yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, every question feels like Groundhog Day.The RCM of Vaudreuil-Soulanges asked the National Energy Board, the NEB, to provide a list of compliance issues and information on monitoring carried out in relation to Enbridge's line 9B. The NEB declined to answer.I also tried to get this information by submitting a written question. Here is what I got in response: ...producing and validating a comprehensive response to this question is not possible in the time allotted and could lead to the disclosure of incomplete and misleading information. Do the NEB and the Liberals have something to hide?

Mr. Speaker, pipeline regulation is the responsibility of the National Energy Board.Anyone with questions or concerns about pipeline safety should contact the NEB.

Mr. Speaker, at no point has the current Minister of Justice or the former minister of justice been pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or the Prime Minister's Office to make any decision on this or any other matter. I absolutely agree with my colleague across the way that the Attorney General of Canada is the chief law officer of the Crown and provides legal advice to the government, with a responsibility to act in the public interest, as the hon. member points out. The Attorney General takes those responsibilities very seriously.

Mr. Speaker, at no point has the current Minister of Justice or the former minister of justice been pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or the Prime Minister's Office to make a decision in this or on any other matter.As the Prime Minister stated clearly yesterday, the allegations contained in the original article in The Globe and Mail are false.

Mr. Speaker, our thoughts go out to the family at the centre of an abduction of Canadian children to Lebanon. Canadian consular officials are in direct contact with the family and are providing consular assistance and advice. Due to the provisions of the Privacy Act, no further information can be disclosed at this time.

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister indicated that he would have talks with Quebec concerning immigration. The talks did not last long.The ink on Quebec's bill is not even dry and the government is already saying no. Last week, he refused to discuss knowledge of French as a condition for citizenship. This week, he is refusing to discuss knowledge of French as a condition in earlier steps in the immigration process. French is not a shameful disease.Why is the government refusing to discuss this? Why is it showing such contempt?

Mr. Speaker, shoreline erosion is not a new phenomenon, but the situation is getting worse. Some of my constituents are now concerned that their houses might literally fall into the St. Lawrence.Municipalities like Saint-Ignace have long been calling on the federal government to invest in maintaining retaining walls along the St. Lawrence and enforcing speed limits on the waterway. This problem is real, and people want the federal government to take action now.Will the Liberals do what needs to be done and take concrete steps to address this urgent problem?

Mr. Speaker, we have been abundantly clear. At no point has the Minister of Justice or the former minister of justice been pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or the Prime Minister's Office to make any decision on this or any other matter.The Attorney General is the chief law officer of the Crown and provides legal advice to the Government of Canada, with a responsibility to act always in the public interest. He takes those responsibilities seriously.

Mr. Speaker, at no point has the current Minister of Justice or the former minister of justice been pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or anyone in the Prime Minister's Office, including the individual just mentioned by the member for Carleton, to make any decision on this or any other matter. The Attorney General is the chief law officer of the Crown and provides legal advice to the government, with a responsibility to act in the public interest. The Attorney General takes this issue very seriously.

Mr. Speaker, to be crystal clear, at no point has the current Minister of Justice or the former minister of justice been pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or the Prime Minister's Office, including all employees therein, to make any decision on this or any other matter.The Attorney General is the chief law officer of the Crown, providing legal advice to the government. He takes that responsibility very seriously.

Mr. Speaker, the current Minister of Justice and his predecessor have neither been pressured nor directed by the Prime Minister or anyone in the Prime Minister's Office to make a decision on this or any other matter. Clearly, the Attorney General is the chief law officer of the Crown and provides legal advice to government, with a responsibility to act in the public interest. The minister takes this responsibility very seriously.

Mr. Speaker, the remediation agreements the member opposite is referencing are something that were widely consulted upon by the Government of Canada. That process was led by PSPC. That consultation concluded during the year 2017. There was an announcement made in the budget. There was a press release. There was a study done at committee. The government has been entirely transparent with respect to amendments we have made to the laws of Canada with respect to remediation.

Mr. Speaker, it was over 20 years ago that the Liberals committed to introducing a universal drug plan, but they failed to act. In the meantime, Mr. Lorenzen, in my riding, has paid over $25,000 for prescription medication following a surgery.The Liberals lack the political will to get the job done. Enough with the studies. Enough with the expert panels. Enough with the rhetoric. Will the Liberals please tell Mr. Lorenzen, indeed all Canadians, if they are ready to end the empty promises and implement a fully public, national and universal pharmacare plan?

Mr. Speaker, at no point has the current Minister of Justice or the former minister of justice been pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or anyone else in the Prime Minister's Office, and let me reiterate that, or anyone else in the Prime Minister's Office, to make any decision on this or any other matter. The Attorney General of Canada is the chief law officer of the Crown and provides legal advice to the entire Government of Canada. He has the responsibility to act in the public interest and that responsibility is one he takes very seriously.

Mr. Speaker, at no point has the current Minister of Justice or the former minister of justice been directed or pressured by the Prime Minister or the Prime Minister's Office to make any decision on this or any other matter. The Attorney General of Canada is the chief law officer of the Crown and provides legal advice to the government, with a responsibility to act in the public interest. He takes those responsibilities very seriously.

Mr. Speaker, at absolutely no point has the previous minister or the current minister been pressured or directed by the Prime Minister himself or any members of his office to make any decision on this or any other matter. As the Prime Minister said clearly yesterday to the gathered journalists, the allegations contained in the original media article are false.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the question. At no point has the current Minister of Justice or his predecessor been directed or pressured by the Prime Minister or the Prime Minister's Office to make a decision on this or any other matter. The Attorney General of Canada is the chief law officer of the Crown and provides legal advice to the government, with a responsibility to act in the public interest. He takes his responsibilities very seriously.

Mr. Speaker, at no point has the current Minister of Justice or his predecessor been pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or anyone in his office to make a decision on this or any other matter.

Mr. Speaker, as I have already said, at no point was the current Minister of Justice or his predecessor pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or his office to make a decision on this or any other matter.

Mr. Speaker, eight-year-old Liam and nine-year-old Mia Tarabichi were kidnapped. They were taken to a foreign country. The Prime Minister has done nothing to bring them home. The only hope of ever having these children brought home to their mom Shelley is if the Prime Minister calls the President and the Prime Minister of Lebanon and asks for them to intervene. These two Canadian children need to be home here in Canada with their mom.Why has the Prime Minister not called President Aoun and Prime Minister Hariri?

Mr. Speaker, as I have said several times in this chamber today, at no point whatsoever were the current Minister of Justice or the former minister of justice pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or anyone in the Prime Minister's Office to make a decision on this or any other matter. I have been patient, but at least half a dozen times members opposite have said that the former minister was fired in the context of accepting the honour of taking on serving Canada's veterans. In terms of the men and women who have fought for this country and served so valiantly, that is actually an inappropriate statement to be making in the House and it should be addressed.

Mr. Speaker, one day after the Globe and Mail broke the scandal involving the Prime Minister's Office potential interference in a criminal case, Canadians have not been reassured by what the government is telling them. The government is playing with words. Canadians want the facts.The question we are asking and will continue to ask until Canadians get an answer is very simple: Did the Prime Minister's Office have discussions with the former attorney general about SNC-Lavalin, yes or no?

Mr. Speaker, our government is working hard to help SMEs and especially to make it easier for them to do business.On January 1, 2019, we lowered the small business tax rate to 9%, allowing small businesses to keep $7,500 more. We also asked credit card companies to lower their rates, which translates into an extra $7,500 over five years. We promised small businesses that we would work for them, and that is what we will keep doing.

Mr. Speaker, I will reiterate for the House that at no point has the current Minister of Justice or the former minister of justice been pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or anyone else in his office to make a decision on this or any other matter. As the Prime Minister said very clearly yesterday to the journalists gathered, the allegations contained in The Globe and Mail article are false.

Mr. Speaker, neither the current Minister of Justice nor the former minister of justice has been pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or anyone in the Prime Minister's Office to take a decision on this or any other matter. As the Prime Minister was very clear yesterday with the journalists gathered in Vaughan, Ontario, the allegations contained in The Globe and Mail article are false.

Mr. Speaker, something stinks. The Prime Minister's answers are vague and evasive. The former attorney general spoke truth to power, and she paid the price. In December, Gerald Butts discussed a special deal for SNC-Lavalin with the former attorney general, and a month later, she was fired. What was said at that meeting?

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Justice and the former minister of justice have not been pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or anyone in the Prime Minister's cabinet on this or any other matter.As the Prime Minister said very clearly yesterday in front of a media scrum, the allegations contained in The Globe and Mail article are false.

Mr. Speaker, as regards the previous minister of justice and the current Minister of Justice, there has been absolutely no pressure or direction exercised upon either of those two individuals by the Prime Minister himself or by anyone in his cabinet, on this or any other matter. The allegations contained in the media articles that surfaced yesterday are false, as the Prime Minister stated clearly to journalists in Vaughan.

Mr. Speaker, on Monday, our leader travelled to Willowdale to hear from families and small business owners who are struggling to get by under the current Liberal government's policies. There, he met pharmacist Mr. Tamer Farag, who voiced his concerns about how the Prime Minister's tax changes are costing him and his community.We know the Prime Minister cannot relate to these stories because he has never had to balance a budget or meet a payroll, but in the rest of Canada, people are paying for his mistakes with their hard-earned money. When will the Prime Minister give hard-working Canadians, like Mr. Farag, a break?

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the comments of my colleague opposite. I work very hard to stand up for both official languages in the House. At no point has the Minister of Justice or the former minister of justice been pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or the Prime Minister's Office to make any decision on this or any other matter.

Mr. Speaker, that was not quite the answer that we needed, but the reports about the PMO's interference in a criminal prosecution are shocking. In December, Gerald Butts discussed a special deal for SNC-Lavalin with the former attorney general. A month later, she was demoted. What was said in that meeting? Canadians need to know.

Mr. Speaker, members will recall that the government refused to seriously discuss the immigration levels in Quebec on the pretext of addressing a labour shortage.Today, Quebec is legislating to deal with the labour shortage in the regions as quickly as possible, but Ottawa said no without any meetings or discussions.If the government believes that the labour shortage in the regions is a problem, why does it want to prevent Quebec from legislating in that regard?

Mr. Speaker, at no time was the current Minister of Justice or his predecessor pressured or directed by the Prime Minister or his office to make any decision on this or any other matter. As the Prime Minister said yesterday, these allegations are false.

Mr. Speaker, The Globe and Mail alleges that the Prime Minister's Office interfered in order to try to get charges dropped in a massive fraud and bribery case. The corporation in question discussed law enforcement and justice with the Prime Minister's Office 14 times, including with PMO boss Gerald Butts. Did Mr. Butts ever discuss with SNC-Lavalin lobbyists the idea of giving the company a deal to avoid criminal prosecution?