2019-05-08

Mr. Speaker, I encourage the member to actually read the statement of the Public Prosecution Service of Canada, which confirmed today that every decision made was completely independent. I will have to quote again: “No other factors were considered in this decision...including political influence”. Any accusations otherwise are absurd.

Mr. Speaker, the government seems concerned and confused about its jurisdiction, but the Prime Minister's actions in the Vice-Admiral Norman trial are the exact same as those in the SNC-Lavalin scandal. The Prime Minister tried to interfere in an ongoing criminal trial. The fact that he was unsuccessful twice does not change the fact that he tried to put his fingers on the scales of justice. Thankfully, our independent justice system resisted his attempt to politically interfere with it.This is corrupt, this is shameful and it has no place in our democracy. When will the Prime Minister apologize for his continual attempts to pervert the course of justice?

Mr. Speaker, this was said today in the press: “I have an important story to tell that Canadians will want and need to hear.”We have had documents withheld, we have had witnesses silenced and we have seen a personal attack on the reputation of a revered public servant. I am not talking about SNC-Lavalin. What I am talking about is the trial of Vice-Admiral Mark Norman. Will the Prime Minister do the right thing and apologize?

Mr. Speaker, Canadians wake up daily to alarming news about mass extinctions and catastrophic climate change, and yet Liberals are planning to steamroll ahead with the Trans Mountain pipeline, despite the NEB not fully considering the impacts to climate, despite toxic tanker traffic and threats to the coastline and despite indigenous concerns.Better choices will lead to better results. Will the Prime Minister stop spending billions on pipelines, and instead invest in the clean energy economy of the future?

Mr. Speaker, it was the political interference by the Liberal government that was the catalyst for the Vice-Admiral Norman show trial. The Liberal government obstructed the legal process and sat on the evidence that Vice-Admiral Norman needed to defend his case. It dragged his good name through the mud, drove him into near bankruptcy and refused to turn over evidence to the courts. It is no surprise that the case against Vice-Admiral Norman has been dropped.Canadians want to know, what is the Prime Minister so desperate to hide?

Mr. Speaker, the government's witch hunt against Vice-Admiral Norman has collapsed, but it has exposed the ruthlessness of a Prime Minister who was willing to destroy the career of a naval officer who served this nation with distinction. Why? It was because the vice-admiral raised questions about a lucrative pork-barrel deal on an important naval deal. What we have seen are the shocking lengths to which this Prime Minister will go to interfere in the legal system to help cronies in the Liberal Party, but to attempt to destroy an admiral's career is way over the line. I am asking the Prime Minister to stand in this House today to apologize to Vice-Admiral Norman and his family.

Mr. Speaker, the Auditor General issued a scathing criticism of the Liberal government yesterday morning on the issue of web giants. The government keeps saying that it is waiting for the international community to join forces to come up with a solution to address the growth of the digital economy. These are just more excuses, and the problem has yet to be solved.What is interesting is that of the 60 countries polled by the OECD, Canada is one of just two countries that have yet to do anything. Worst of all, it has no intention of doing anything.What excuse will the Prime Minister use next to justify his failure to act?

Mr. Speaker, Vice-Admiral Mark Norman had the honour and integrity to face allegations against him, himself. The Prime Minister does not have the same fortitude or backbone. Let us look at what Mark Norman's lawyer did say. She said, “There are times when you agree with what happens in a court” and at “times you don't and that's fine, but what you don't do is you don't put your finger and try to weigh in on the scales of justice. That is not what should be happening.” That is exactly what the government did in trying to block and obstruct evidence coming before that court. What is in those documents that the Prime Minister is so afraid of?

Mr. Speaker, first, I would like to congratulate Unifor and GM Canada for finding a solution to save hundreds of jobs in Oshawa. While this is a good start, I am concerned with another auto announcement. In my riding, Ford Canada will eliminate the third shift of the Essex Engine plant, come October 1. Workers are bearing the brunt of Liberal inaction. For years, the NDP has been calling for a national auto strategy. How many job losses will it take before the Liberals start a working group and get us a national auto strategy?

Mr. Speaker, what is absurd is the fact that these cabinet ministers are being sent out with such flimsy lines and actually do not address the matter. The matter, simply put, is that Vice-Admiral Mark Norman had to spend the last two and a half years scraping and fighting and defending himself while the government sat back and let it happen. It did not produce the documents it was supposed to. In fact, the Prime Minister, on two occasions, said that this matter would end up in court even before the RCMP laid the charge.What is the government afraid of?

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is creating two classes of refugees in Bill C-97 to pander to the right. Facing backlash, the government emailed Liberal MPs saying that no asylum seekers would be at risk. The Canadian Association of Refugee Lawyers and Amnesty International were clear: That is not true. The Liberals are desperate for a fix, but experts were explicit: There is no fix. Any people pretending the Liberal proposal is the same as the independent work of the IRB are fooling themselves.Will the Prime Minister do what thousands of Canadians are demanding and withdraw these dangerous provisions?

Mr. Speaker, the Privy Council Office's investigation into the matter led nowhere, but the Prime Minister needed a scapegoat so he set his sights on a respected vice-admiral from the Canadian Armed Forces.Why did the Prime Minister say that this matter would end up in court even before the RCMP laid any charges?

Mr. Speaker, it is shameful that the Prime Minister does not have the fortitude to answer these questions himself. Long before any charges were laid against Vice-Admiral Norman, the Prime Minister told the media that it would inevitably wind up before the courts. Today, Vice-Admiral Norman's lawyer described those comments as “an extraordinary event”. How did the Prime Minister know that this would end up in court before any charges were made, and why will he not stand and answer these questions for himself?

Mr. Speaker, the Royal Canadian Navy is our senior service, and today its most senior officer, Mark Norman, was completely vindicated.The Crown said there was no reasonable prospect of conviction. There was never a reasonable prospect of convicting Mark Norman. He never should have been removed from command. He never should have faced a criminal charge. He never should have been the fall guy for Liberal corruption.Can the government start making it right? Can the defence minister commit today to reinstating Mark Norman as the vice-chief of the defence staff?

Mr. Speaker, it is unbelievable that the Prime Minister cannot bring himself to apologize for what he has done to Vice-Admiral Norman, a man who has served our country with honour for decades. The Prime Minister seems to have no problem apologizing for the actions of others, but when it comes to his own bad conduct, “sorry” seems to be the hardest word.Why did the Prime Minister have no problem apologizing to a convicted terrorist, Omar Khadr, but cannot bring himself to apologize to Vice-Admiral Norman for the damage he has done to his career, his family and his reputation?

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Leader of the Conservative Party announced that he would move the Canadian embassy from Tel-Aviv to Jerusalem if he became Prime Minister. Not only would this policy be irresponsible, but it would also violate international law and United Nations Security Council resolutions. Most especially, it would make no sense for anyone who wants peace in the region. The Conservatives seem to have a simple plan to copy Donald Trump's foreign policy, which is particularly troubling for stability in the Middle East.Will the Liberals commit to condemning this plan, knowing that East Jerusalem is internationally recognized as occupied Palestinian territory?

Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman should know that all of the procedures here, conducted by the office of the public prosecutor and by the RCMP, are totally independent of the Government of Canada. The whole structure is designed to keep it independent so that the decisions that are made are made on the basis of proper legal considerations, and all of those considerations are weighed carefully in court before a judge.The matter was entirely without political influence, and that is what the prosecutor said today.

Mr. Speaker, tourism is a key economic driver in Waterloo Region. For 10 years, the Conservatives failed to understand that. Harper made cuts to Destination Canada's budget, and now Doug Ford is cutting the province's tourism budget. It is very clear that the tourism sector is not a priority for these Conservatives.Can the Minister of Tourism, Official Languages and La Francophonie reassure the hard-working people of the tourism sector what our government is doing to support them better?

Mr. Speaker, the minister should actually listen to the press release by Marie Henein today in Vice-Admiral Norman's defence. She actually said that they waited for six months after they made the request for documents that still have not shown up.Now the Prime Minister callously stomped all over the admiral, who served this country with distinction. The Prime Minister maliciously accused Mark Norman of a crime he never committed, then blocked him from getting any legal assistance. The Prime Minister dragged his feet disclosing evidence for the case and sent completely blacked-out documents.What is in those documents? What is the Prime Minister covering up?

Mr. Speaker, Vice-Admiral Mark Norman served our country with honour and distinction, but the Prime Minister and the Liberals tried to destroy him. They attacked him personally and professionally, and they even tried to bankrupt him and his family. Now the Prime Minister needs to start to make amends, and that starts by issuing an apology.Will the Prime Minister finally apologize for all that he has done to Vice-Admiral Mark Norman?

Mr. Speaker, as I already told the House, the government followed all the rules in this case. The prosecution was handled by the Public Prosecution Service of Canada. The PPSC is the one that decided to launch this investigation and to prosecute, and it was the PPSC's decision to stay the proceedings.

Mr. Speaker, Vice-Admiral Norman has always put the national interest first. The Asterix was a tremendous success for military procurement. It was delivered by Davie on time and on budget.However, the Liberal government is hurting Quebec by putting its political and partisan interests ahead of the national interest, which is to provide our armed forces with suitable equipment in a timely manner. Why did the government want to take the contract away from Davie?

Mr. Speaker, as the Public Prosecution Service of Canada confirmed today, every decision was made completely independently. Let me quote from that statement: No other factors were considered in this decision, nor was there any contact or influence from outside the PPSC, including political influence in either the initial decision to prosecute Mr. Norman or in the decision to stay the charge today. Any accusations otherwise are absurd.

Mr. Speaker, now, that is quite the coincidence. After we learned that the former parliamentary secretary to the minister of foreign affairs was going to testify against his own Liberal government in the Vice-Admiral Norman case, the charges were dropped.Once again, this Liberal government attempted to interfere politically, as it did in the SNC-Lavalin case. What was the strategy of the Prime Minister's entourage? It was to tarnish the reputation of Vice-Admiral Norman.What is the Prime Minister hiding from Canadians?

Mr. Speaker, the rule of law in Canada and the course of justice is doing quite well today.The prosecution service of Canada, acting independently of government, as the director said, and acting independently of influence, including political influence of any kind, made a decision to stay a proceeding after having led a process and after having started that process based on evidence given by another great institution, the RCMP.The rule of law is functioning as it should in Canada. Justice has been served. I am quite proud of our system.

Mr. Speaker, however, the lawyer for Mark Norman was quite clear that the government did impede this investigation by withholding important documents and facts. When it looked like the truth was going to try to come out in the SNC-Lavalin corruption scandal, the Prime Minister shut down the investigations. When it looked like the truth in this scandal was going to come out, the Prime Minister tried to prevent a fair trial by withholding evidence and using delay tactics.What is in those documents that the Prime Minister is so afraid of?

Mr. Speaker, I will repeat that the decision to stay charges was made by the director of the Public Prosecution Service of Canada alone. As I have repeated many times, we co-operated with the court to produce the documents required for the trial. The director herself said this morning, as she did in February, that there was no political influence in this case.

Mr. Speaker, Vice-Admiral Norman's trial has been a debacle from the start. People deserve to know the truth about allegations that the Prime Minister's Office interfered in the judicial process yet again. As we saw in the SNC-Lavalin case, the Liberals have no respect for the independence of the system.Will the Liberals launch an independent investigation into credible allegations of interference by the Prime Minister's Office in Vice-Admiral Norman's case?

Mr. Speaker, even before the RCMP filed charges, the Prime Minister said that this would probably end up in court.After trying to destroy the reputation of the former attorney general in the SNC-Lavalin case, this government tried to completely tarnish the reputation of Vice-Admiral Norman, a man of integrity who stood up to this Liberal government's interference in our justice system. The Vice-Admiral even paid his own legal fees, which amount to $500,000.When will the government and the Prime Minister—

Mr. Speaker, that runs contrary to what we have heard from Mark Norman's defence team. They have raised serious concerns about Scott Brison, about the Liberals' cozy relationship with the Irving companies and about political interference directly from the Prime Minister's office. Sunshine is the best disinfectant. Canadians deserve the truth. Why is the Prime Minister refusing to hold an independent investigation into the Liberals' troubling handling of this case?

Mr. Speaker, first I want to encourage the member to actually read the statement from the Public Prosecution Service of Canada, which I will quote again: No other factors were considered in this decision, nor was there any contact or influence from outside the PPSC, including political influence in either the initial decision to prosecute Mr. Norman or in the decision to stay the charge today. When it comes to the legal fees, I have authorized for this payment to occur.

Mr. Speaker, today the Liberals are talking about independence. Let us review.Scott Brison independently manipulated a $700 million contract. The Prime Minister's office independently hired James Cudmore, who revealed the leak. The Prime Minister independently—

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister tried to interfere in a shipbuilding contract and when he was caught, he tried to destroy the reputation and career of the person who stood up to him. We have seen this before and it is a dangerous pattern with the government.Why is it that anyone who says “no” to the Prime Minister ends up with a target on his or her back?

Mr. Speaker, even though it poses a danger to our coast, to marine life and to ecosystems; even though indigenous communities said in consultations that it should not move ahead; and even though the court of appeal found that the Liberals had not done their homework, the Liberal government is going to move forward with the Trans Mountain expansion anyway. Indigenous and coastal communities have clearly stated that they do not want this pipeline.Why do the Liberals refuse to listen?

Mr. Speaker, a few days after the hon. member for Orléans announced that he was preparing to testify against his own government, the Prime Minister dropped the charges against the vice-admiral. If the Liberals had provided the documents requested by Vice-Admiral Norman's defence team, this whole matter would have been settled in no time. For more than a year, the Liberals allowed Vice-Admiral Norman's reputation to get tarnished and his career destroyed.Will the Prime Minister at least apologize?

Mr. Speaker, chicken farmers are here in Ottawa. I met with them yesterday, and I can say that they are very worried. The lack of import controls, one of the key pillars of supply management, is compromising the entire system.The Liberals sacrificed our farmers in the recent free trade negotiations. An NDP government would never have allowed these breaches in our supply management system.Will the Liberal government promise to control our imports, support the survival of our family farms and protect our supply management system?

Mr. Speaker, I obviously reject the premise of the hon. member's question. This country is all about the rule of law. This country is about great institutions, like the RCMP, like the Public Prosecution Service, which was a good thing started by the previous Conservative government in order to give independence to the prosecutorial decisions and the governance of prosecution proceedings in Canada.That system worked well today. Members do not have to just believe me. They can believe the lawyer for Vice-Admiral Norman, who said the rule of law worked.

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is unwilling to admit that politically interfering against a man whose only desire was to serve Canada honourably was wrong. There are many members on the other side, including in cabinet, who served this country in uniform. We swore an oath to serve and defend this nation and the values for which it stands. Putting service ahead of self takes courage. When will they find the courage to stand for what is right and honour their oath to serve this country ahead of the leader of the Liberal Party?

Mr. Speaker, the minister left out one important point: It was a star Liberal MP, a former decorated general, who stepped forward and was willing to testify against this Prime Minister and his own government over this harassment of Admiral Norman, so this is much bigger than defending the cronyism of the Liberal Party of Canada, which the Attorney General of Canada has been defending as of late. This is about the rule of law in Canada. Why is the Prime Minister refusing to stand up to apologize to Canadians, to explain himself and to launch an independent investigation into the behaviour of his government?

Mr. Speaker, we have seen the Prime Minister fight veterans in court before. He says that they are asking for more than he can give, but when it comes to fighting people who are standing up against him, then money is no object.How many taxpayers' dollars has the Prime Minister wasted trying to destroy Vice-Admiral Mark Norman?

Mr. Speaker, I am thankful for all the members who serve our Canadian Armed Forces and our veterans as well, including all members in this House. We should not compare one service over another, regardless of party affiliation, and we honour that. Our defence policy makes sure that it is fully funded and we are going to be focusing on looking after our people. We have increased our defence spending by 70% and we are putting a premium on looking after them and their families.

Mr. Speaker, as I have stated a number of times over the course of the last couple of weeks, this government, and my department in particular, fulfilled all of their obligations with respect to documents requested in the proceedings. All the priority documents identified in the month of February had been given over at the point of trial. This prosecution was directed by the Public Prosecution Service of Canada. It is independent of the government and of my department. It proved today that the system works.

Mr. Speaker, as I have stated a number of times in the House, the government has met all of its obligations with respect to third party records applications during the course of the trial. All documents and priority individuals identified by the defence in February had already been provided to the court.As I have said, it is the Public Prosecution Service of Canada that has undertaken the evaluation of the evidence of this case and the prosecution of this trial. It is its decision and its decision alone to stay the proceedings.

Mr. Speaker, the various remedies available to all western governments are under active consideration now through the forums provided by the Five Eyes alliance and by the G7 security ministers. Various potential approaches have been advanced by a number of those countries. There will be international discussions following later this spring. It is obviously clear that those who purvey dangerous material on the Internet need to assume responsibility for their behaviour.

Mr. Speaker, service to country is an honourable profession and to be willing to give one's life in the defence of the nation should be revered, but what this government has done to Admiral Mark Norman undermines the values of our nation that every person who serves in uniform is willing to fight to defend. The use of code words and the withholding of documents to tip the scales of justice is clear political interference. Why does this Prime Minister think that it is acceptable to behave in this manner?

Mr. Speaker, as I said in French and English, the government fulfilled all of its obligations with respect to documents requested in the proceedings.The Public Prosecution Service of Canada operates independently from the Government of Canada, my office and the Department of Justice. This proves that the rule of law system works very well in Canada.

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are a little touchy today.Scott Brison independently tried to stop a naval contract. The reporter who revealed that, James Cudmore, was independently hired by the PMO. The PMO independently had Michael Wernick look into the leaks and found that 73 people knew. The Prime Minister independently said Mark Norman would be charged.

Mr. Speaker, in February 2018, the Prime Minister announced that the Norman case would go to court even before the RCMP laid charges. On the eve of the election, the charges were withdrawn after the Liberal member for Orléans confirmed that he would testify on behalf of Vice-Admiral Norman. We were told these are coincidences.The government never wanted to hand over the necessary documents to Vice-Admiral Norman's defence team. What is it hiding?

Mr. Speaker, there are still so many unanswered questions with respect to the Vice-Admiral Mark Norman case. What was the level of political interference by Liberal MPs, the cabinet and the Prime Minister to try to change the supply ship contract? What was the Prime Minister hiding when we fought in court to deny the defence access to key documents?The Prime Minister said on two occasions that the Vice-Admiral Norman case would end up in court before charges were laid. How did he know that?The Prime Minister can start by answering this question. What was he trying to hide and whom was he protecting?

Mr. Speaker, we are very encouraged to see the positive news in Oshawa, with regard to the GM workers. More importantly, the member opposite raised the question of jobs. Since we formed government in 2015, 11,500 new jobs have been created in the automotive sector. In comparison, in the Conservatives' first two years, 20,000 jobs were lost, before we even hit the recession. That is because we have been able to attract six billion dollars' worth of investments in the automotive sector. That is our track record, and we look forward to campaigning on that.

Mr. Speaker, as I have said many times, my office had no say in the decision to stay the charges. This decision was made by the Public Prosecution Service of Canada.I did not give any instructions or directives, and neither I nor my office had any contact whatsoever with anyone regarding the decision to pursue or stay the charges. The director of public prosecutions said so in February and she repeated it today.

Mr. Speaker, I was at the G7 meeting in France, where we talked about how we need to take more action on climate, how we need to take action on nature and how we need to do it in an affordable way while creating good jobs. That is exactly what we are doing.We are putting a price on pollution, giving the money back, such that a family of four in Ontario receives $307. We are tackling our biodiversity challenge and protecting nature by doubling the amount of nature that we protect in Canada. We know that we need to tackle climate change. We need to protect more nature. We need to do it in a way that creates good jobs and grows our economy.

Mr. Speaker, it is kind of rich to have our hon. colleague mention veterans affairs after what her Conservative government did to veterans affairs. It cut 1,000 jobs, cutting agents who work on pension benefits.We, as a government, allocated $10 billion of new money and allocated a pension for life. We have taken care of veterans in this country and will continue to do so.

Mr. Speaker, the government did not play any role in the prosecution of Vice-Admiral Norman. My office did not play a role and neither did the PMO. This decision falls to the director of public prosecutions alone. Today, she said, as she indicated in February, that there was no outside influence in the proceedings.

Mr. Speaker, I reject the premise of the question.We fulfilled all our obligations. We co-operated with the court for the production of documents.The director of the Public Prosecution Service of Canada makes decisions independently of government. As she said in February and again today, there was no political interference.

Mr. Speaker, our government understands that rural communities face unique challenges, requiring unique solutions.Since my appointment as minister of rural economic development, I have visited rural communities across the country to hear directly from Canadians, including in my hon. colleague's riding. We have heard from stakeholder groups, local governments and small business owners. The feedback we have been receiving has been immensely helpful in getting the message out, which we will make sure will help form our national economic development strategy.I look forward to continuing the work to develop this strategy, bringing it back to the House soon and sharing these opportunities with all Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, I want to reassure my colleague and supply-managed farmers.Our government made them a commitment. The budget clearly states that $3.9 billion will be allocated, $2.4 billion of which will go to farmers. We are also strongly committed to helping processors.I would ask the member to wait a few weeks for more information on this matter.

Mr. Speaker, the director of the Public Prosecution Service of Canada did say today, as she did in February, that there was no outside interference in either the initial decision to prosecute Vice-Admiral Norman, or during the trial, or in the decision to stay the charge today. It is therefore clear that there was no interference and that the system worked as it should.

Mr. Speaker, I can assure members that we are laser-focused on delivering for our men and women in the military and in the Coast Guard. We have delivered a fully-costed defence policy and a defence investment plan that is going to allow research and development into the future. We have launched the future fighter jet procurement for the replacement of 88 fighter jets. We have delivery of our first interim jet. We have the first large vessels in the water built under the national shipbuilding strategy, including the first offshore fishery and science vessel and the first Arctic offshore patrol ship. We are building two more. We cut steel on the fourth last week. We purchased fixed-wing search and rescue aircraft. We have awarded—

Mr. Speaker, our government is committed to supporting the Canadian agri-food processing industry. Under the Canadian agricultural partnership program, I joined the Minister of Agriculture last week in announcing an $8.5-million investment in Vaughan-based and family-owned organic food processor Riverside Natural Foods.Can the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food tell us how these investments will increase trade, support agricultural innovation and create good jobs for the middle class?

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for Kitchener South—Hespeler for his important question and hard work.Last year, Ontario welcomed almost 10 million international visitors, contributing $7 billion to the economy. The Conservatives made it clear that 700,000 hard-working Ontarians in the tourism sector are not a priority for them.Our Liberal government understands the growth in the sector, and that is why we invested $60 million in our budget. How can the Conservatives say, on the one hand, that Ontario is open for business, and meanwhile they are cutting—

Mr. Speaker, the only thing I agree with in the hon. member's statement is that this is about the rule of law in Canada, and indeed the rule of law in Canada functioned very well, from the RCMP in beginning its investigation through to the Public Prosecution Service acting independently and making decisions based on the evidence as it came through.This Public Prosecution Service operates independently of government. It operated independently of government. It made appropriate decisions. It proves that the rule of law is alive and well in Canada and that the system works well.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind the Attorney General that, upon leaving the courthouse this morning, Vice-Admiral Norman's lawyer said there had been political interference because the government did not provide the document requested. This story is not over. Will the Prime Minister apologize to Admiral Norman?

Mr. Speaker, I actually met with the chicken farmers' association at midday today. I got to have a great discussion with this group, one of many, to give them some assurances.Our government made a commitment to all industries regarding supply management. We made a firm commitment in budget 2019, and I am working very hard so I can fulfill those commitments over the coming months.These associations can count on our government.

Mr. Speaker, in February the Public Prosecution Service of Canada said that there was no influence in this case and it reiterated that today. By claiming the opposite, the opposition is raising doubts about our justice system and our legal institutions.We are very proud that the system worked as it should.

Mr. Speaker, Canada is a steadfast friend of Israel and a friend to the Palestinian people. Canada's long-standing position is that the status of Jerusalem can be resolved only as part of a general settlement of the Palestinian-Israeli dispute.That has been a long-standing policy of consecutive governments, and we remain strongly committed to the goal of a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East, including the creation of a Palestinian state living side by side in peace and security with Israel, which we celebrate today on its day of independence.

Mr. Speaker, the prosecution in question was handled by the Public Prosecution Service of Canada, which operates independently from the Department of Justice and independently from my office. My office had no role whatsoever in the decision to seek a stay of proceedings. The decision belongs to the director of public prosecutions alone. The director of public prosecutions stated in February and repeated today that there was no contact or influence from outside the PPSC on either the initial decision to prosecute or the decision to stay the charge.

Mr. Speaker, as I have said a number of times today, the Department of Justice co-operated with the court and fulfilled its obligations for the production of third party documents. There were thousands of documents. Yes, it took time, but we fulfilled our obligation to the court.The system of justice in Canada is working. The Public Prosecution Service made an independent decision to stay proceedings based on the evidence it had in front of it. It took the initial decision to proceed with the case based on evidence raised by another institution—

Mr. Speaker, the government announced $3.9 billion in compensation for supply-managed farmers in the budget. However, there is no mention of that money in the budget's financial tables, schedules or votes. There is no line item for the compensation and no program for that purpose. None of the departmental budgets make any mention of this compensation.If there is money to compensate our farmers, can the Minister of Finance tell us exactly where to find it, how much there is and, most importantly, how we can approve that amount in the House before the election?

Mr. Speaker, rural communities across Canada play an important role in our national economy and are a special part of the Canadian identity and vibrancy. As the MP for Bonavista—Burin—Trinity, a large rural riding, I see first-hand the unique sorts of issues faced by rural communities and the need for a coordinated, specific plan to address them.Can the Minister of Rural Economic Development please give this House an update on the work being undertaken to develop a national rural economic development strategy?

Mr. Speaker, I will be very clear that our government remains committed to a fair and compassionate refugee system. As the UNHCR has stated, we are upholding our international and domestic legal obligations, as all claimants still have access to a robust oral hearing, subject to appeal, and will receive Canada's protection if they are found to be at risk. The UNHCR went on to attest that the PRRA, which we are providing, provides the same objectives as the IRB's process and confirms the same degree of refugee protection.

Mr. Speaker, as we stated before, no other factors were considered in this decision, including no political influence.As mentioned today to the media, General Vance, Vice-Admiral Norman's immediate superior, will be having discussions. Once those discussions have been had, I will have the appropriate military advice to make appropriate decisions.

Mr. Speaker, the director of public prosecutions stated today, as she stated in February, that there was no contact or influence, including political influence, from outside the PPSC, either at the step of the initial decision to prosecute or the decision to stay the charge.On this side of the House, we believe in our judicial institutions and we believe in our prosecutorial institutions, unlike the previous government, which had a record of interfering with the courts.

Mr. Speaker, as I have stated a number of times in this House today, there are a number of outstanding institutions that did their jobs properly to protect the rule of law in Canada.The RCMP conducted an investigation, which produced evidence. The prosecution service took that evidence, assessed it, decided to lay charges, decided to proceed with the prosecution and then decided to stay it, all within its independent powers as our prosecution service.Our government co-operated in producing thousands of documents under third party record application—

Mr. Speaker, based on the decision today, the charge against Vice-Admiral Norman has been stayed. Based on today's decision, my deputy ministers have reviewed the policy in place regarding Vice-Admiral Norman's request to have his legal fees paid for as it relates to this case. I agree with this advice and I have authorized it.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Vaughan—Woodbridge for accompanying me to Riverside Natural Foods.This is an expanding family business whose healthy snacks are enjoyed in more than 30 countries. It is a business that has provided markets for Canadian agriculture products.Our investment under the agriInnovate program will help Riverside install its new, first-in-Canada robotic equipment, customize and automate production, and develop many new healthy snack foods.Through budget 2019, we are investing $100 million to drive innovation in the food processing industry.

Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member well knows, the RCMP, which did the initial investigation, operates independently of government. The Public Prosecution Service, which looks at the evidence gathered by the RCMP and decides whether to lay charges, which proceeds with the prosecution if it decides to lay charges and then, in this case, decides to stay the proceedings, also operates independently of government, independently of my office and independently of the Prime Minister's office. The director of public prosecutions stated today, as she stated in February, that there was no outside—

Mr. Speaker, we are following the guidance of the Federal Court of Appeal to move this process forward in the right way, through meaningful consultations, and we are making progress every day.The NEB's report, completed on time, marked an important milestone in this process. On indigenous consultations, our teams are on the ground and they are engaged in a meaningful two-way dialogue. On this side of the House, we are working each day to get this right.

Mr. Speaker, I disagree with every single premise in that question. A great institution, the RCMP, led the investigation and produced evidence, which it gave over to the prosecution service. The prosecution service, which operates independently from government, evaluated that evidence and decided to move ahead with laying charges in this case, and then went through the proceedings.During the proceedings, the Department of Justice co-operated with the court for the production of third party document requests. That is—

Mr. Speaker, if you seek it, I think you will find the unanimous consent of the House for the following motion: that the House of Commons (a) acknowledge the concerns of the Government of Quebec about the budget situation at Telefilm Canada; (b) recognize, as La Presse noted yesterday, that without Telefilm and its operating budget, Quebec cinema and artists such as Xavier Dolan would not have had as much international success; (c) note the outrage of the film industry over the dismissal of some of the leadership at Telefilm; (d) call on the government to resolve the crisis, act swiftly to secure funding for francophone cinema for 2019-20, and ensure that films in production in the coming months are not jeopardized.

Mr. Speaker, I apologize.

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister tried to interfere in a shipbuilding contract and when he was caught, he tried to destroy the reputation and career of the person who stood up to him. We have seen this before and it is a dangerous pattern with the government.Why is it that anyone who says “no” to the Prime Minister ends up with a target on his or her back?

Mr. Speaker, it is unbelievable that the Prime Minister cannot bring himself to apologize for what he has done to Vice-Admiral Norman, a man who has served our country with honour for decades. The Prime Minister seems to have no problem apologizing for the actions of others, but when it comes to his own bad conduct, “sorry” seems to be the hardest word.Why did the Prime Minister have no problem apologizing to a convicted terrorist, Omar Khadr, but cannot bring himself to apologize to Vice-Admiral Norman for the damage he has done to his career, his family and his reputation?

Mr. Speaker, what is absurd is the fact that these cabinet ministers are being sent out with such flimsy lines and actually do not address the matter. The matter, simply put, is that Vice-Admiral Mark Norman had to spend the last two and a half years scraping and fighting and defending himself while the government sat back and let it happen. It did not produce the documents it was supposed to. In fact, the Prime Minister, on two occasions, said that this matter would end up in court even before the RCMP laid the charge.What is the government afraid of?

Mr. Speaker, the government seems concerned and confused about its jurisdiction, but the Prime Minister's actions in the Vice-Admiral Norman trial are the exact same as those in the SNC-Lavalin scandal. The Prime Minister tried to interfere in an ongoing criminal trial. The fact that he was unsuccessful twice does not change the fact that he tried to put his fingers on the scales of justice. Thankfully, our independent justice system resisted his attempt to politically interfere with it.This is corrupt, this is shameful and it has no place in our democracy. When will the Prime Minister apologize for his continual attempts to pervert the course of justice?

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is creating two classes of refugees in Bill C-97 to pander to the right. Facing backlash, the government emailed Liberal MPs saying that no asylum seekers would be at risk. The Canadian Association of Refugee Lawyers and Amnesty International were clear: That is not true. The Liberals are desperate for a fix, but experts were explicit: There is no fix. Any people pretending the Liberal proposal is the same as the independent work of the IRB are fooling themselves.Will the Prime Minister do what thousands of Canadians are demanding and withdraw these dangerous provisions?

Mr. Speaker, the government's witch hunt against Vice-Admiral Norman has collapsed, but it has exposed the ruthlessness of a Prime Minister who was willing to destroy the career of a naval officer who served this nation with distinction. Why? It was because the vice-admiral raised questions about a lucrative pork-barrel deal on an important naval deal. What we have seen are the shocking lengths to which this Prime Minister will go to interfere in the legal system to help cronies in the Liberal Party, but to attempt to destroy an admiral's career is way over the line. I am asking the Prime Minister to stand in this House today to apologize to Vice-Admiral Norman and his family.

Mr. Speaker, the Auditor General issued a scathing criticism of the Liberal government yesterday morning on the issue of web giants. The government keeps saying that it is waiting for the international community to join forces to come up with a solution to address the growth of the digital economy. These are just more excuses, and the problem has yet to be solved.What is interesting is that of the 60 countries polled by the OECD, Canada is one of just two countries that have yet to do anything. Worst of all, it has no intention of doing anything.What excuse will the Prime Minister use next to justify his failure to act?

Mr. Speaker, tourism is a key economic driver in Waterloo Region. For 10 years, the Conservatives failed to understand that. Harper made cuts to Destination Canada's budget, and now Doug Ford is cutting the province's tourism budget. It is very clear that the tourism sector is not a priority for these Conservatives.Can the Minister of Tourism, Official Languages and La Francophonie reassure the hard-working people of the tourism sector what our government is doing to support them better?

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are a little touchy today.Scott Brison independently tried to stop a naval contract. The reporter who revealed that, James Cudmore, was independently hired by the PMO. The PMO independently had Michael Wernick look into the leaks and found that 73 people knew. The Prime Minister independently said Mark Norman would be charged.

Mr. Speaker, the director of public prosecutions stated today, as she stated in February, that there was no contact or influence, including political influence, from outside the PPSC, either at the step of the initial decision to prosecute or the decision to stay the charge.On this side of the House, we believe in our judicial institutions and we believe in our prosecutorial institutions, unlike the previous government, which had a record of interfering with the courts.

Mr. Speaker, Vice-Admiral Mark Norman served our country with honour and distinction, but the Prime Minister and the Liberals tried to destroy him. They attacked him personally and professionally, and they even tried to bankrupt him and his family. Now the Prime Minister needs to start to make amends, and that starts by issuing an apology.Will the Prime Minister finally apologize for all that he has done to Vice-Admiral Mark Norman?

Mr. Speaker, I encourage the member to actually read the statement of the Public Prosecution Service of Canada, which confirmed today that every decision made was completely independent. I will have to quote again: “No other factors were considered in this decision...including political influence”. Any accusations otherwise are absurd.

Mr. Speaker, as the Public Prosecution Service of Canada confirmed today, every decision was made completely independently. Let me quote from that statement: No other factors were considered in this decision, nor was there any contact or influence from outside the PPSC, including political influence in either the initial decision to prosecute Mr. Norman or in the decision to stay the charge today. Any accusations otherwise are absurd.

Mr. Speaker, the prosecution in question was handled by the Public Prosecution Service of Canada, which operates independently from the Department of Justice and independently from my office. My office had no role whatsoever in the decision to seek a stay of proceedings. The decision belongs to the director of public prosecutions alone. The director of public prosecutions stated in February and repeated today that there was no contact or influence from outside the PPSC on either the initial decision to prosecute or the decision to stay the charge.

Mr. Speaker, as I have stated a number of times in the House, the government has met all of its obligations with respect to third party records applications during the course of the trial. All documents and priority individuals identified by the defence in February had already been provided to the court.As I have said, it is the Public Prosecution Service of Canada that has undertaken the evaluation of the evidence of this case and the prosecution of this trial. It is its decision and its decision alone to stay the proceedings.

Mr. Speaker, the Privy Council Office's investigation into the matter led nowhere, but the Prime Minister needed a scapegoat so he set his sights on a respected vice-admiral from the Canadian Armed Forces.Why did the Prime Minister say that this matter would end up in court even before the RCMP laid any charges?

Mr. Speaker, as I already told the House, the government followed all the rules in this case. The prosecution was handled by the Public Prosecution Service of Canada. The PPSC is the one that decided to launch this investigation and to prosecute, and it was the PPSC's decision to stay the proceedings.

Mr. Speaker, the government did not play any role in the prosecution of Vice-Admiral Norman. My office did not play a role and neither did the PMO. This decision falls to the director of public prosecutions alone. Today, she said, as she indicated in February, that there was no outside influence in the proceedings.

Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member well knows, the RCMP, which did the initial investigation, operates independently of government. The Public Prosecution Service, which looks at the evidence gathered by the RCMP and decides whether to lay charges, which proceeds with the prosecution if it decides to lay charges and then, in this case, decides to stay the proceedings, also operates independently of government, independently of my office and independently of the Prime Minister's office. The director of public prosecutions stated today, as she stated in February, that there was no outside—

Mr. Speaker, I reject the premise of the question.We fulfilled all our obligations. We co-operated with the court for the production of documents.The director of the Public Prosecution Service of Canada makes decisions independently of government. As she said in February and again today, there was no political interference.

Mr. Speaker, today the Liberals are talking about independence. Let us review.Scott Brison independently manipulated a $700 million contract. The Prime Minister's office independently hired James Cudmore, who revealed the leak. The Prime Minister independently—

Mr. Speaker, I apologize.

Mr. Speaker, as I have said a number of times today, the Department of Justice co-operated with the court and fulfilled its obligations for the production of third party documents. There were thousands of documents. Yes, it took time, but we fulfilled our obligation to the court.The system of justice in Canada is working. The Public Prosecution Service made an independent decision to stay proceedings based on the evidence it had in front of it. It took the initial decision to proceed with the case based on evidence raised by another institution—

Mr. Speaker, chicken farmers are here in Ottawa. I met with them yesterday, and I can say that they are very worried. The lack of import controls, one of the key pillars of supply management, is compromising the entire system.The Liberals sacrificed our farmers in the recent free trade negotiations. An NDP government would never have allowed these breaches in our supply management system.Will the Liberal government promise to control our imports, support the survival of our family farms and protect our supply management system?

Mr. Speaker, the various remedies available to all western governments are under active consideration now through the forums provided by the Five Eyes alliance and by the G7 security ministers. Various potential approaches have been advanced by a number of those countries. There will be international discussions following later this spring. It is obviously clear that those who purvey dangerous material on the Internet need to assume responsibility for their behaviour.

Mr. Speaker, Vice-Admiral Mark Norman had the honour and integrity to face allegations against him, himself. The Prime Minister does not have the same fortitude or backbone. Let us look at what Mark Norman's lawyer did say. She said, “There are times when you agree with what happens in a court” and at “times you don't and that's fine, but what you don't do is you don't put your finger and try to weigh in on the scales of justice. That is not what should be happening.” That is exactly what the government did in trying to block and obstruct evidence coming before that court. What is in those documents that the Prime Minister is so afraid of?

Mr. Speaker, I actually met with the chicken farmers' association at midday today. I got to have a great discussion with this group, one of many, to give them some assurances.Our government made a commitment to all industries regarding supply management. We made a firm commitment in budget 2019, and I am working very hard so I can fulfill those commitments over the coming months.These associations can count on our government.

Mr. Speaker, the director of the Public Prosecution Service of Canada did say today, as she did in February, that there was no outside interference in either the initial decision to prosecute Vice-Admiral Norman, or during the trial, or in the decision to stay the charge today. It is therefore clear that there was no interference and that the system worked as it should.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind the Attorney General that, upon leaving the courthouse this morning, Vice-Admiral Norman's lawyer said there had been political interference because the government did not provide the document requested. This story is not over. Will the Prime Minister apologize to Admiral Norman?

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is unwilling to admit that politically interfering against a man whose only desire was to serve Canada honourably was wrong. There are many members on the other side, including in cabinet, who served this country in uniform. We swore an oath to serve and defend this nation and the values for which it stands. Putting service ahead of self takes courage. When will they find the courage to stand for what is right and honour their oath to serve this country ahead of the leader of the Liberal Party?

Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman should know that all of the procedures here, conducted by the office of the public prosecutor and by the RCMP, are totally independent of the Government of Canada. The whole structure is designed to keep it independent so that the decisions that are made are made on the basis of proper legal considerations, and all of those considerations are weighed carefully in court before a judge.The matter was entirely without political influence, and that is what the prosecutor said today.

Mr. Speaker, as I have stated a number of times over the course of the last couple of weeks, this government, and my department in particular, fulfilled all of their obligations with respect to documents requested in the proceedings. All the priority documents identified in the month of February had been given over at the point of trial. This prosecution was directed by the Public Prosecution Service of Canada. It is independent of the government and of my department. It proved today that the system works.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for Kitchener South—Hespeler for his important question and hard work.Last year, Ontario welcomed almost 10 million international visitors, contributing $7 billion to the economy. The Conservatives made it clear that 700,000 hard-working Ontarians in the tourism sector are not a priority for them.Our Liberal government understands the growth in the sector, and that is why we invested $60 million in our budget. How can the Conservatives say, on the one hand, that Ontario is open for business, and meanwhile they are cutting—

Mr. Speaker, the Royal Canadian Navy is our senior service, and today its most senior officer, Mark Norman, was completely vindicated.The Crown said there was no reasonable prospect of conviction. There was never a reasonable prospect of convicting Mark Norman. He never should have been removed from command. He never should have faced a criminal charge. He never should have been the fall guy for Liberal corruption.Can the government start making it right? Can the defence minister commit today to reinstating Mark Norman as the vice-chief of the defence staff?

Mr. Speaker, first I want to encourage the member to actually read the statement from the Public Prosecution Service of Canada, which I will quote again: No other factors were considered in this decision, nor was there any contact or influence from outside the PPSC, including political influence in either the initial decision to prosecute Mr. Norman or in the decision to stay the charge today. When it comes to the legal fees, I have authorized for this payment to occur.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Leader of the Conservative Party announced that he would move the Canadian embassy from Tel-Aviv to Jerusalem if he became Prime Minister. Not only would this policy be irresponsible, but it would also violate international law and United Nations Security Council resolutions. Most especially, it would make no sense for anyone who wants peace in the region. The Conservatives seem to have a simple plan to copy Donald Trump's foreign policy, which is particularly troubling for stability in the Middle East.Will the Liberals commit to condemning this plan, knowing that East Jerusalem is internationally recognized as occupied Palestinian territory?

Mr. Speaker, the minister should actually listen to the press release by Marie Henein today in Vice-Admiral Norman's defence. She actually said that they waited for six months after they made the request for documents that still have not shown up.Now the Prime Minister callously stomped all over the admiral, who served this country with distinction. The Prime Minister maliciously accused Mark Norman of a crime he never committed, then blocked him from getting any legal assistance. The Prime Minister dragged his feet disclosing evidence for the case and sent completely blacked-out documents.What is in those documents? What is the Prime Minister covering up?

Mr. Speaker, it was the political interference by the Liberal government that was the catalyst for the Vice-Admiral Norman show trial. The Liberal government obstructed the legal process and sat on the evidence that Vice-Admiral Norman needed to defend his case. It dragged his good name through the mud, drove him into near bankruptcy and refused to turn over evidence to the courts. It is no surprise that the case against Vice-Admiral Norman has been dropped.Canadians want to know, what is the Prime Minister so desperate to hide?

Mr. Speaker, as I said in French and English, the government fulfilled all of its obligations with respect to documents requested in the proceedings.The Public Prosecution Service of Canada operates independently from the Government of Canada, my office and the Department of Justice. This proves that the rule of law system works very well in Canada.

Mr. Speaker, however, the lawyer for Mark Norman was quite clear that the government did impede this investigation by withholding important documents and facts. When it looked like the truth was going to try to come out in the SNC-Lavalin corruption scandal, the Prime Minister shut down the investigations. When it looked like the truth in this scandal was going to come out, the Prime Minister tried to prevent a fair trial by withholding evidence and using delay tactics.What is in those documents that the Prime Minister is so afraid of?

Mr. Speaker, it is shameful that the Prime Minister does not have the fortitude to answer these questions himself. Long before any charges were laid against Vice-Admiral Norman, the Prime Minister told the media that it would inevitably wind up before the courts. Today, Vice-Admiral Norman's lawyer described those comments as “an extraordinary event”. How did the Prime Minister know that this would end up in court before any charges were made, and why will he not stand and answer these questions for himself?

Mr. Speaker, that runs contrary to what we have heard from Mark Norman's defence team. They have raised serious concerns about Scott Brison, about the Liberals' cozy relationship with the Irving companies and about political interference directly from the Prime Minister's office. Sunshine is the best disinfectant. Canadians deserve the truth. Why is the Prime Minister refusing to hold an independent investigation into the Liberals' troubling handling of this case?

Mr. Speaker, even though it poses a danger to our coast, to marine life and to ecosystems; even though indigenous communities said in consultations that it should not move ahead; and even though the court of appeal found that the Liberals had not done their homework, the Liberal government is going to move forward with the Trans Mountain expansion anyway. Indigenous and coastal communities have clearly stated that they do not want this pipeline.Why do the Liberals refuse to listen?

Mr. Speaker, the only thing I agree with in the hon. member's statement is that this is about the rule of law in Canada, and indeed the rule of law in Canada functioned very well, from the RCMP in beginning its investigation through to the Public Prosecution Service acting independently and making decisions based on the evidence as it came through.This Public Prosecution Service operates independently of government. It operated independently of government. It made appropriate decisions. It proves that the rule of law is alive and well in Canada and that the system works well.

Mr. Speaker, there are still so many unanswered questions with respect to the Vice-Admiral Mark Norman case. What was the level of political interference by Liberal MPs, the cabinet and the Prime Minister to try to change the supply ship contract? What was the Prime Minister hiding when we fought in court to deny the defence access to key documents?The Prime Minister said on two occasions that the Vice-Admiral Norman case would end up in court before charges were laid. How did he know that?The Prime Minister can start by answering this question. What was he trying to hide and whom was he protecting?

Mr. Speaker, the minister left out one important point: It was a star Liberal MP, a former decorated general, who stepped forward and was willing to testify against this Prime Minister and his own government over this harassment of Admiral Norman, so this is much bigger than defending the cronyism of the Liberal Party of Canada, which the Attorney General of Canada has been defending as of late. This is about the rule of law in Canada. Why is the Prime Minister refusing to stand up to apologize to Canadians, to explain himself and to launch an independent investigation into the behaviour of his government?

Mr. Speaker, I will be very clear that our government remains committed to a fair and compassionate refugee system. As the UNHCR has stated, we are upholding our international and domestic legal obligations, as all claimants still have access to a robust oral hearing, subject to appeal, and will receive Canada's protection if they are found to be at risk. The UNHCR went on to attest that the PRRA, which we are providing, provides the same objectives as the IRB's process and confirms the same degree of refugee protection.

Mr. Speaker, our government understands that rural communities face unique challenges, requiring unique solutions.Since my appointment as minister of rural economic development, I have visited rural communities across the country to hear directly from Canadians, including in my hon. colleague's riding. We have heard from stakeholder groups, local governments and small business owners. The feedback we have been receiving has been immensely helpful in getting the message out, which we will make sure will help form our national economic development strategy.I look forward to continuing the work to develop this strategy, bringing it back to the House soon and sharing these opportunities with all Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, now, that is quite the coincidence. After we learned that the former parliamentary secretary to the minister of foreign affairs was going to testify against his own Liberal government in the Vice-Admiral Norman case, the charges were dropped.Once again, this Liberal government attempted to interfere politically, as it did in the SNC-Lavalin case. What was the strategy of the Prime Minister's entourage? It was to tarnish the reputation of Vice-Admiral Norman.What is the Prime Minister hiding from Canadians?

Mr. Speaker, even before the RCMP filed charges, the Prime Minister said that this would probably end up in court.After trying to destroy the reputation of the former attorney general in the SNC-Lavalin case, this government tried to completely tarnish the reputation of Vice-Admiral Norman, a man of integrity who stood up to this Liberal government's interference in our justice system. The Vice-Admiral even paid his own legal fees, which amount to $500,000.When will the government and the Prime Minister—

Mr. Speaker, as I have stated a number of times in this House today, there are a number of outstanding institutions that did their jobs properly to protect the rule of law in Canada.The RCMP conducted an investigation, which produced evidence. The prosecution service took that evidence, assessed it, decided to lay charges, decided to proceed with the prosecution and then decided to stay it, all within its independent powers as our prosecution service.Our government co-operated in producing thousands of documents under third party record application—

Mr. Speaker, it is kind of rich to have our hon. colleague mention veterans affairs after what her Conservative government did to veterans affairs. It cut 1,000 jobs, cutting agents who work on pension benefits.We, as a government, allocated $10 billion of new money and allocated a pension for life. We have taken care of veterans in this country and will continue to do so.

Mr. Speaker, if you seek it, I think you will find the unanimous consent of the House for the following motion: that the House of Commons (a) acknowledge the concerns of the Government of Quebec about the budget situation at Telefilm Canada; (b) recognize, as La Presse noted yesterday, that without Telefilm and its operating budget, Quebec cinema and artists such as Xavier Dolan would not have had as much international success; (c) note the outrage of the film industry over the dismissal of some of the leadership at Telefilm; (d) call on the government to resolve the crisis, act swiftly to secure funding for francophone cinema for 2019-20, and ensure that films in production in the coming months are not jeopardized.

Mr. Speaker, rural communities across Canada play an important role in our national economy and are a special part of the Canadian identity and vibrancy. As the MP for Bonavista—Burin—Trinity, a large rural riding, I see first-hand the unique sorts of issues faced by rural communities and the need for a coordinated, specific plan to address them.Can the Minister of Rural Economic Development please give this House an update on the work being undertaken to develop a national rural economic development strategy?

Mr. Speaker, I can assure members that we are laser-focused on delivering for our men and women in the military and in the Coast Guard. We have delivered a fully-costed defence policy and a defence investment plan that is going to allow research and development into the future. We have launched the future fighter jet procurement for the replacement of 88 fighter jets. We have delivery of our first interim jet. We have the first large vessels in the water built under the national shipbuilding strategy, including the first offshore fishery and science vessel and the first Arctic offshore patrol ship. We are building two more. We cut steel on the fourth last week. We purchased fixed-wing search and rescue aircraft. We have awarded—

Mr. Speaker, Canada is a steadfast friend of Israel and a friend to the Palestinian people. Canada's long-standing position is that the status of Jerusalem can be resolved only as part of a general settlement of the Palestinian-Israeli dispute.That has been a long-standing policy of consecutive governments, and we remain strongly committed to the goal of a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East, including the creation of a Palestinian state living side by side in peace and security with Israel, which we celebrate today on its day of independence.

Mr. Speaker, service to country is an honourable profession and to be willing to give one's life in the defence of the nation should be revered, but what this government has done to Admiral Mark Norman undermines the values of our nation that every person who serves in uniform is willing to fight to defend. The use of code words and the withholding of documents to tip the scales of justice is clear political interference. Why does this Prime Minister think that it is acceptable to behave in this manner?

Mr. Speaker, we have seen the Prime Minister fight veterans in court before. He says that they are asking for more than he can give, but when it comes to fighting people who are standing up against him, then money is no object.How many taxpayers' dollars has the Prime Minister wasted trying to destroy Vice-Admiral Mark Norman?

Mr. Speaker, Canadians wake up daily to alarming news about mass extinctions and catastrophic climate change, and yet Liberals are planning to steamroll ahead with the Trans Mountain pipeline, despite the NEB not fully considering the impacts to climate, despite toxic tanker traffic and threats to the coastline and despite indigenous concerns.Better choices will lead to better results. Will the Prime Minister stop spending billions on pipelines, and instead invest in the clean energy economy of the future?

Mr. Speaker, a few days after the hon. member for Orléans announced that he was preparing to testify against his own government, the Prime Minister dropped the charges against the vice-admiral. If the Liberals had provided the documents requested by Vice-Admiral Norman's defence team, this whole matter would have been settled in no time. For more than a year, the Liberals allowed Vice-Admiral Norman's reputation to get tarnished and his career destroyed.Will the Prime Minister at least apologize?

Mr. Speaker, as I have said many times, my office had no say in the decision to stay the charges. This decision was made by the Public Prosecution Service of Canada.I did not give any instructions or directives, and neither I nor my office had any contact whatsoever with anyone regarding the decision to pursue or stay the charges. The director of public prosecutions said so in February and she repeated it today.

Mr. Speaker, I will repeat that the decision to stay charges was made by the director of the Public Prosecution Service of Canada alone. As I have repeated many times, we co-operated with the court to produce the documents required for the trial. The director herself said this morning, as she did in February, that there was no political influence in this case.

Mr. Speaker, this was said today in the press: “I have an important story to tell that Canadians will want and need to hear.”We have had documents withheld, we have had witnesses silenced and we have seen a personal attack on the reputation of a revered public servant. I am not talking about SNC-Lavalin. What I am talking about is the trial of Vice-Admiral Mark Norman. Will the Prime Minister do the right thing and apologize?

Mr. Speaker, I disagree with every single premise in that question. A great institution, the RCMP, led the investigation and produced evidence, which it gave over to the prosecution service. The prosecution service, which operates independently from government, evaluated that evidence and decided to move ahead with laying charges in this case, and then went through the proceedings.During the proceedings, the Department of Justice co-operated with the court for the production of third party document requests. That is—

Mr. Speaker, Vice-Admiral Norman's trial has been a debacle from the start. People deserve to know the truth about allegations that the Prime Minister's Office interfered in the judicial process yet again. As we saw in the SNC-Lavalin case, the Liberals have no respect for the independence of the system.Will the Liberals launch an independent investigation into credible allegations of interference by the Prime Minister's Office in Vice-Admiral Norman's case?

Mr. Speaker, based on the decision today, the charge against Vice-Admiral Norman has been stayed. Based on today's decision, my deputy ministers have reviewed the policy in place regarding Vice-Admiral Norman's request to have his legal fees paid for as it relates to this case. I agree with this advice and I have authorized it.

Mr. Speaker, in February 2018, the Prime Minister announced that the Norman case would go to court even before the RCMP laid charges. On the eve of the election, the charges were withdrawn after the Liberal member for Orléans confirmed that he would testify on behalf of Vice-Admiral Norman. We were told these are coincidences.The government never wanted to hand over the necessary documents to Vice-Admiral Norman's defence team. What is it hiding?

Mr. Speaker, I want to reassure my colleague and supply-managed farmers.Our government made them a commitment. The budget clearly states that $3.9 billion will be allocated, $2.4 billion of which will go to farmers. We are also strongly committed to helping processors.I would ask the member to wait a few weeks for more information on this matter.

Mr. Speaker, our government is committed to supporting the Canadian agri-food processing industry. Under the Canadian agricultural partnership program, I joined the Minister of Agriculture last week in announcing an $8.5-million investment in Vaughan-based and family-owned organic food processor Riverside Natural Foods.Can the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food tell us how these investments will increase trade, support agricultural innovation and create good jobs for the middle class?

Mr. Speaker, Vice-Admiral Norman has always put the national interest first. The Asterix was a tremendous success for military procurement. It was delivered by Davie on time and on budget.However, the Liberal government is hurting Quebec by putting its political and partisan interests ahead of the national interest, which is to provide our armed forces with suitable equipment in a timely manner. Why did the government want to take the contract away from Davie?

Mr. Speaker, as we stated before, no other factors were considered in this decision, including no political influence.As mentioned today to the media, General Vance, Vice-Admiral Norman's immediate superior, will be having discussions. Once those discussions have been had, I will have the appropriate military advice to make appropriate decisions.

Mr. Speaker, I obviously reject the premise of the hon. member's question. This country is all about the rule of law. This country is about great institutions, like the RCMP, like the Public Prosecution Service, which was a good thing started by the previous Conservative government in order to give independence to the prosecutorial decisions and the governance of prosecution proceedings in Canada.That system worked well today. Members do not have to just believe me. They can believe the lawyer for Vice-Admiral Norman, who said the rule of law worked.

Mr. Speaker, the government announced $3.9 billion in compensation for supply-managed farmers in the budget. However, there is no mention of that money in the budget's financial tables, schedules or votes. There is no line item for the compensation and no program for that purpose. None of the departmental budgets make any mention of this compensation.If there is money to compensate our farmers, can the Minister of Finance tell us exactly where to find it, how much there is and, most importantly, how we can approve that amount in the House before the election?

Mr. Speaker, the rule of law in Canada and the course of justice is doing quite well today.The prosecution service of Canada, acting independently of government, as the director said, and acting independently of influence, including political influence of any kind, made a decision to stay a proceeding after having led a process and after having started that process based on evidence given by another great institution, the RCMP.The rule of law is functioning as it should in Canada. Justice has been served. I am quite proud of our system.

Mr. Speaker, we are very encouraged to see the positive news in Oshawa, with regard to the GM workers. More importantly, the member opposite raised the question of jobs. Since we formed government in 2015, 11,500 new jobs have been created in the automotive sector. In comparison, in the Conservatives' first two years, 20,000 jobs were lost, before we even hit the recession. That is because we have been able to attract six billion dollars' worth of investments in the automotive sector. That is our track record, and we look forward to campaigning on that.

Mr. Speaker, we are following the guidance of the Federal Court of Appeal to move this process forward in the right way, through meaningful consultations, and we are making progress every day.The NEB's report, completed on time, marked an important milestone in this process. On indigenous consultations, our teams are on the ground and they are engaged in a meaningful two-way dialogue. On this side of the House, we are working each day to get this right.

Mr. Speaker, in February the Public Prosecution Service of Canada said that there was no influence in this case and it reiterated that today. By claiming the opposite, the opposition is raising doubts about our justice system and our legal institutions.We are very proud that the system worked as it should.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Vaughan—Woodbridge for accompanying me to Riverside Natural Foods.This is an expanding family business whose healthy snacks are enjoyed in more than 30 countries. It is a business that has provided markets for Canadian agriculture products.Our investment under the agriInnovate program will help Riverside install its new, first-in-Canada robotic equipment, customize and automate production, and develop many new healthy snack foods.Through budget 2019, we are investing $100 million to drive innovation in the food processing industry.

Mr. Speaker, I was at the G7 meeting in France, where we talked about how we need to take more action on climate, how we need to take action on nature and how we need to do it in an affordable way while creating good jobs. That is exactly what we are doing.We are putting a price on pollution, giving the money back, such that a family of four in Ontario receives $307. We are tackling our biodiversity challenge and protecting nature by doubling the amount of nature that we protect in Canada. We know that we need to tackle climate change. We need to protect more nature. We need to do it in a way that creates good jobs and grows our economy.

Mr. Speaker, first, I would like to congratulate Unifor and GM Canada for finding a solution to save hundreds of jobs in Oshawa. While this is a good start, I am concerned with another auto announcement. In my riding, Ford Canada will eliminate the third shift of the Essex Engine plant, come October 1. Workers are bearing the brunt of Liberal inaction. For years, the NDP has been calling for a national auto strategy. How many job losses will it take before the Liberals start a working group and get us a national auto strategy?

Mr. Speaker, I am thankful for all the members who serve our Canadian Armed Forces and our veterans as well, including all members in this House. We should not compare one service over another, regardless of party affiliation, and we honour that. Our defence policy makes sure that it is fully funded and we are going to be focusing on looking after our people. We have increased our defence spending by 70% and we are putting a premium on looking after them and their families.

Mr. Speaker, I am thankful for all the members who serve our Canadian Armed Forces and our veterans as well, including all members in this House. We should not compare one service over another, regardless of party affiliation, and we honour that. Our defence policy makes sure that it is fully funded and we are going to be focusing on looking after our people. We have increased our defence spending by 70% and we are putting a premium on looking after them and their families.

Mr. Speaker, first, I would like to congratulate Unifor and GM Canada for finding a solution to save hundreds of jobs in Oshawa. While this is a good start, I am concerned with another auto announcement. In my riding, Ford Canada will eliminate the third shift of the Essex Engine plant, come October 1. Workers are bearing the brunt of Liberal inaction. For years, the NDP has been calling for a national auto strategy. How many job losses will it take before the Liberals start a working group and get us a national auto strategy?

Mr. Speaker, I was at the G7 meeting in France, where we talked about how we need to take more action on climate, how we need to take action on nature and how we need to do it in an affordable way while creating good jobs. That is exactly what we are doing.We are putting a price on pollution, giving the money back, such that a family of four in Ontario receives $307. We are tackling our biodiversity challenge and protecting nature by doubling the amount of nature that we protect in Canada. We know that we need to tackle climate change. We need to protect more nature. We need to do it in a way that creates good jobs and grows our economy.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Vaughan—Woodbridge for accompanying me to Riverside Natural Foods.This is an expanding family business whose healthy snacks are enjoyed in more than 30 countries. It is a business that has provided markets for Canadian agriculture products.Our investment under the agriInnovate program will help Riverside install its new, first-in-Canada robotic equipment, customize and automate production, and develop many new healthy snack foods.Through budget 2019, we are investing $100 million to drive innovation in the food processing industry.

Mr. Speaker, in February the Public Prosecution Service of Canada said that there was no influence in this case and it reiterated that today. By claiming the opposite, the opposition is raising doubts about our justice system and our legal institutions.We are very proud that the system worked as it should.

Mr. Speaker, we are following the guidance of the Federal Court of Appeal to move this process forward in the right way, through meaningful consultations, and we are making progress every day.The NEB's report, completed on time, marked an important milestone in this process. On indigenous consultations, our teams are on the ground and they are engaged in a meaningful two-way dialogue. On this side of the House, we are working each day to get this right.

Mr. Speaker, we are very encouraged to see the positive news in Oshawa, with regard to the GM workers. More importantly, the member opposite raised the question of jobs. Since we formed government in 2015, 11,500 new jobs have been created in the automotive sector. In comparison, in the Conservatives' first two years, 20,000 jobs were lost, before we even hit the recession. That is because we have been able to attract six billion dollars' worth of investments in the automotive sector. That is our track record, and we look forward to campaigning on that.

Mr. Speaker, the rule of law in Canada and the course of justice is doing quite well today.The prosecution service of Canada, acting independently of government, as the director said, and acting independently of influence, including political influence of any kind, made a decision to stay a proceeding after having led a process and after having started that process based on evidence given by another great institution, the RCMP.The rule of law is functioning as it should in Canada. Justice has been served. I am quite proud of our system.

Mr. Speaker, the government announced $3.9 billion in compensation for supply-managed farmers in the budget. However, there is no mention of that money in the budget's financial tables, schedules or votes. There is no line item for the compensation and no program for that purpose. None of the departmental budgets make any mention of this compensation.If there is money to compensate our farmers, can the Minister of Finance tell us exactly where to find it, how much there is and, most importantly, how we can approve that amount in the House before the election?

Mr. Speaker, I obviously reject the premise of the hon. member's question. This country is all about the rule of law. This country is about great institutions, like the RCMP, like the Public Prosecution Service, which was a good thing started by the previous Conservative government in order to give independence to the prosecutorial decisions and the governance of prosecution proceedings in Canada.That system worked well today. Members do not have to just believe me. They can believe the lawyer for Vice-Admiral Norman, who said the rule of law worked.

Mr. Speaker, as we stated before, no other factors were considered in this decision, including no political influence.As mentioned today to the media, General Vance, Vice-Admiral Norman's immediate superior, will be having discussions. Once those discussions have been had, I will have the appropriate military advice to make appropriate decisions.

Mr. Speaker, Vice-Admiral Norman has always put the national interest first. The Asterix was a tremendous success for military procurement. It was delivered by Davie on time and on budget.However, the Liberal government is hurting Quebec by putting its political and partisan interests ahead of the national interest, which is to provide our armed forces with suitable equipment in a timely manner. Why did the government want to take the contract away from Davie?

Mr. Speaker, our government is committed to supporting the Canadian agri-food processing industry. Under the Canadian agricultural partnership program, I joined the Minister of Agriculture last week in announcing an $8.5-million investment in Vaughan-based and family-owned organic food processor Riverside Natural Foods.Can the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food tell us how these investments will increase trade, support agricultural innovation and create good jobs for the middle class?

Mr. Speaker, I want to reassure my colleague and supply-managed farmers.Our government made them a commitment. The budget clearly states that $3.9 billion will be allocated, $2.4 billion of which will go to farmers. We are also strongly committed to helping processors.I would ask the member to wait a few weeks for more information on this matter.

Mr. Speaker, Vice-Admiral Norman's trial has been a debacle from the start. People deserve to know the truth about allegations that the Prime Minister's Office interfered in the judicial process yet again. As we saw in the SNC-Lavalin case, the Liberals have no respect for the independence of the system.Will the Liberals launch an independent investigation into credible allegations of interference by the Prime Minister's Office in Vice-Admiral Norman's case?

Mr. Speaker, based on the decision today, the charge against Vice-Admiral Norman has been stayed. Based on today's decision, my deputy ministers have reviewed the policy in place regarding Vice-Admiral Norman's request to have his legal fees paid for as it relates to this case. I agree with this advice and I have authorized it.

Mr. Speaker, in February 2018, the Prime Minister announced that the Norman case would go to court even before the RCMP laid charges. On the eve of the election, the charges were withdrawn after the Liberal member for Orléans confirmed that he would testify on behalf of Vice-Admiral Norman. We were told these are coincidences.The government never wanted to hand over the necessary documents to Vice-Admiral Norman's defence team. What is it hiding?

Mr. Speaker, I disagree with every single premise in that question. A great institution, the RCMP, led the investigation and produced evidence, which it gave over to the prosecution service. The prosecution service, which operates independently from government, evaluated that evidence and decided to move ahead with laying charges in this case, and then went through the proceedings.During the proceedings, the Department of Justice co-operated with the court for the production of third party document requests. That is—

Mr. Speaker, this was said today in the press: “I have an important story to tell that Canadians will want and need to hear.”We have had documents withheld, we have had witnesses silenced and we have seen a personal attack on the reputation of a revered public servant. I am not talking about SNC-Lavalin. What I am talking about is the trial of Vice-Admiral Mark Norman. Will the Prime Minister do the right thing and apologize?

Mr. Speaker, as I have said many times, my office had no say in the decision to stay the charges. This decision was made by the Public Prosecution Service of Canada.I did not give any instructions or directives, and neither I nor my office had any contact whatsoever with anyone regarding the decision to pursue or stay the charges. The director of public prosecutions said so in February and she repeated it today.

Mr. Speaker, I will repeat that the decision to stay charges was made by the director of the Public Prosecution Service of Canada alone. As I have repeated many times, we co-operated with the court to produce the documents required for the trial. The director herself said this morning, as she did in February, that there was no political influence in this case.

Mr. Speaker, a few days after the hon. member for Orléans announced that he was preparing to testify against his own government, the Prime Minister dropped the charges against the vice-admiral. If the Liberals had provided the documents requested by Vice-Admiral Norman's defence team, this whole matter would have been settled in no time. For more than a year, the Liberals allowed Vice-Admiral Norman's reputation to get tarnished and his career destroyed.Will the Prime Minister at least apologize?

Mr. Speaker, Canadians wake up daily to alarming news about mass extinctions and catastrophic climate change, and yet Liberals are planning to steamroll ahead with the Trans Mountain pipeline, despite the NEB not fully considering the impacts to climate, despite toxic tanker traffic and threats to the coastline and despite indigenous concerns.Better choices will lead to better results. Will the Prime Minister stop spending billions on pipelines, and instead invest in the clean energy economy of the future?

Mr. Speaker, service to country is an honourable profession and to be willing to give one's life in the defence of the nation should be revered, but what this government has done to Admiral Mark Norman undermines the values of our nation that every person who serves in uniform is willing to fight to defend. The use of code words and the withholding of documents to tip the scales of justice is clear political interference. Why does this Prime Minister think that it is acceptable to behave in this manner?

Mr. Speaker, we have seen the Prime Minister fight veterans in court before. He says that they are asking for more than he can give, but when it comes to fighting people who are standing up against him, then money is no object.How many taxpayers' dollars has the Prime Minister wasted trying to destroy Vice-Admiral Mark Norman?

Mr. Speaker, Canada is a steadfast friend of Israel and a friend to the Palestinian people. Canada's long-standing position is that the status of Jerusalem can be resolved only as part of a general settlement of the Palestinian-Israeli dispute.That has been a long-standing policy of consecutive governments, and we remain strongly committed to the goal of a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East, including the creation of a Palestinian state living side by side in peace and security with Israel, which we celebrate today on its day of independence.

Mr. Speaker, I can assure members that we are laser-focused on delivering for our men and women in the military and in the Coast Guard. We have delivered a fully-costed defence policy and a defence investment plan that is going to allow research and development into the future. We have launched the future fighter jet procurement for the replacement of 88 fighter jets. We have delivery of our first interim jet. We have the first large vessels in the water built under the national shipbuilding strategy, including the first offshore fishery and science vessel and the first Arctic offshore patrol ship. We are building two more. We cut steel on the fourth last week. We purchased fixed-wing search and rescue aircraft. We have awarded—

Mr. Speaker, rural communities across Canada play an important role in our national economy and are a special part of the Canadian identity and vibrancy. As the MP for Bonavista—Burin—Trinity, a large rural riding, I see first-hand the unique sorts of issues faced by rural communities and the need for a coordinated, specific plan to address them.Can the Minister of Rural Economic Development please give this House an update on the work being undertaken to develop a national rural economic development strategy?

Mr. Speaker, if you seek it, I think you will find the unanimous consent of the House for the following motion: that the House of Commons (a) acknowledge the concerns of the Government of Quebec about the budget situation at Telefilm Canada; (b) recognize, as La Presse noted yesterday, that without Telefilm and its operating budget, Quebec cinema and artists such as Xavier Dolan would not have had as much international success; (c) note the outrage of the film industry over the dismissal of some of the leadership at Telefilm; (d) call on the government to resolve the crisis, act swiftly to secure funding for francophone cinema for 2019-20, and ensure that films in production in the coming months are not jeopardized.

Mr. Speaker, it is kind of rich to have our hon. colleague mention veterans affairs after what her Conservative government did to veterans affairs. It cut 1,000 jobs, cutting agents who work on pension benefits.We, as a government, allocated $10 billion of new money and allocated a pension for life. We have taken care of veterans in this country and will continue to do so.

Mr. Speaker, even before the RCMP filed charges, the Prime Minister said that this would probably end up in court.After trying to destroy the reputation of the former attorney general in the SNC-Lavalin case, this government tried to completely tarnish the reputation of Vice-Admiral Norman, a man of integrity who stood up to this Liberal government's interference in our justice system. The Vice-Admiral even paid his own legal fees, which amount to $500,000.When will the government and the Prime Minister—

Mr. Speaker, as I have stated a number of times in this House today, there are a number of outstanding institutions that did their jobs properly to protect the rule of law in Canada.The RCMP conducted an investigation, which produced evidence. The prosecution service took that evidence, assessed it, decided to lay charges, decided to proceed with the prosecution and then decided to stay it, all within its independent powers as our prosecution service.Our government co-operated in producing thousands of documents under third party record application—

Mr. Speaker, now, that is quite the coincidence. After we learned that the former parliamentary secretary to the minister of foreign affairs was going to testify against his own Liberal government in the Vice-Admiral Norman case, the charges were dropped.Once again, this Liberal government attempted to interfere politically, as it did in the SNC-Lavalin case. What was the strategy of the Prime Minister's entourage? It was to tarnish the reputation of Vice-Admiral Norman.What is the Prime Minister hiding from Canadians?

Mr. Speaker, our government understands that rural communities face unique challenges, requiring unique solutions.Since my appointment as minister of rural economic development, I have visited rural communities across the country to hear directly from Canadians, including in my hon. colleague's riding. We have heard from stakeholder groups, local governments and small business owners. The feedback we have been receiving has been immensely helpful in getting the message out, which we will make sure will help form our national economic development strategy.I look forward to continuing the work to develop this strategy, bringing it back to the House soon and sharing these opportunities with all Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, I will be very clear that our government remains committed to a fair and compassionate refugee system. As the UNHCR has stated, we are upholding our international and domestic legal obligations, as all claimants still have access to a robust oral hearing, subject to appeal, and will receive Canada's protection if they are found to be at risk. The UNHCR went on to attest that the PRRA, which we are providing, provides the same objectives as the IRB's process and confirms the same degree of refugee protection.

Mr. Speaker, the minister left out one important point: It was a star Liberal MP, a former decorated general, who stepped forward and was willing to testify against this Prime Minister and his own government over this harassment of Admiral Norman, so this is much bigger than defending the cronyism of the Liberal Party of Canada, which the Attorney General of Canada has been defending as of late. This is about the rule of law in Canada. Why is the Prime Minister refusing to stand up to apologize to Canadians, to explain himself and to launch an independent investigation into the behaviour of his government?

Mr. Speaker, even though it poses a danger to our coast, to marine life and to ecosystems; even though indigenous communities said in consultations that it should not move ahead; and even though the court of appeal found that the Liberals had not done their homework, the Liberal government is going to move forward with the Trans Mountain expansion anyway. Indigenous and coastal communities have clearly stated that they do not want this pipeline.Why do the Liberals refuse to listen?

Mr. Speaker, the only thing I agree with in the hon. member's statement is that this is about the rule of law in Canada, and indeed the rule of law in Canada functioned very well, from the RCMP in beginning its investigation through to the Public Prosecution Service acting independently and making decisions based on the evidence as it came through.This Public Prosecution Service operates independently of government. It operated independently of government. It made appropriate decisions. It proves that the rule of law is alive and well in Canada and that the system works well.

Mr. Speaker, there are still so many unanswered questions with respect to the Vice-Admiral Mark Norman case. What was the level of political interference by Liberal MPs, the cabinet and the Prime Minister to try to change the supply ship contract? What was the Prime Minister hiding when we fought in court to deny the defence access to key documents?The Prime Minister said on two occasions that the Vice-Admiral Norman case would end up in court before charges were laid. How did he know that?The Prime Minister can start by answering this question. What was he trying to hide and whom was he protecting?

Mr. Speaker, it is shameful that the Prime Minister does not have the fortitude to answer these questions himself. Long before any charges were laid against Vice-Admiral Norman, the Prime Minister told the media that it would inevitably wind up before the courts. Today, Vice-Admiral Norman's lawyer described those comments as “an extraordinary event”. How did the Prime Minister know that this would end up in court before any charges were made, and why will he not stand and answer these questions for himself?

Mr. Speaker, that runs contrary to what we have heard from Mark Norman's defence team. They have raised serious concerns about Scott Brison, about the Liberals' cozy relationship with the Irving companies and about political interference directly from the Prime Minister's office. Sunshine is the best disinfectant. Canadians deserve the truth. Why is the Prime Minister refusing to hold an independent investigation into the Liberals' troubling handling of this case?

Mr. Speaker, however, the lawyer for Mark Norman was quite clear that the government did impede this investigation by withholding important documents and facts. When it looked like the truth was going to try to come out in the SNC-Lavalin corruption scandal, the Prime Minister shut down the investigations. When it looked like the truth in this scandal was going to come out, the Prime Minister tried to prevent a fair trial by withholding evidence and using delay tactics.What is in those documents that the Prime Minister is so afraid of?

Mr. Speaker, as I said in French and English, the government fulfilled all of its obligations with respect to documents requested in the proceedings.The Public Prosecution Service of Canada operates independently from the Government of Canada, my office and the Department of Justice. This proves that the rule of law system works very well in Canada.

Mr. Speaker, it was the political interference by the Liberal government that was the catalyst for the Vice-Admiral Norman show trial. The Liberal government obstructed the legal process and sat on the evidence that Vice-Admiral Norman needed to defend his case. It dragged his good name through the mud, drove him into near bankruptcy and refused to turn over evidence to the courts. It is no surprise that the case against Vice-Admiral Norman has been dropped.Canadians want to know, what is the Prime Minister so desperate to hide?

Mr. Speaker, the minister should actually listen to the press release by Marie Henein today in Vice-Admiral Norman's defence. She actually said that they waited for six months after they made the request for documents that still have not shown up.Now the Prime Minister callously stomped all over the admiral, who served this country with distinction. The Prime Minister maliciously accused Mark Norman of a crime he never committed, then blocked him from getting any legal assistance. The Prime Minister dragged his feet disclosing evidence for the case and sent completely blacked-out documents.What is in those documents? What is the Prime Minister covering up?

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Leader of the Conservative Party announced that he would move the Canadian embassy from Tel-Aviv to Jerusalem if he became Prime Minister. Not only would this policy be irresponsible, but it would also violate international law and United Nations Security Council resolutions. Most especially, it would make no sense for anyone who wants peace in the region. The Conservatives seem to have a simple plan to copy Donald Trump's foreign policy, which is particularly troubling for stability in the Middle East.Will the Liberals commit to condemning this plan, knowing that East Jerusalem is internationally recognized as occupied Palestinian territory?

Mr. Speaker, first I want to encourage the member to actually read the statement from the Public Prosecution Service of Canada, which I will quote again: No other factors were considered in this decision, nor was there any contact or influence from outside the PPSC, including political influence in either the initial decision to prosecute Mr. Norman or in the decision to stay the charge today. When it comes to the legal fees, I have authorized for this payment to occur.

Mr. Speaker, the Royal Canadian Navy is our senior service, and today its most senior officer, Mark Norman, was completely vindicated.The Crown said there was no reasonable prospect of conviction. There was never a reasonable prospect of convicting Mark Norman. He never should have been removed from command. He never should have faced a criminal charge. He never should have been the fall guy for Liberal corruption.Can the government start making it right? Can the defence minister commit today to reinstating Mark Norman as the vice-chief of the defence staff?

Mr. Speaker, as I have stated a number of times over the course of the last couple of weeks, this government, and my department in particular, fulfilled all of their obligations with respect to documents requested in the proceedings. All the priority documents identified in the month of February had been given over at the point of trial. This prosecution was directed by the Public Prosecution Service of Canada. It is independent of the government and of my department. It proved today that the system works.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for Kitchener South—Hespeler for his important question and hard work.Last year, Ontario welcomed almost 10 million international visitors, contributing $7 billion to the economy. The Conservatives made it clear that 700,000 hard-working Ontarians in the tourism sector are not a priority for them.Our Liberal government understands the growth in the sector, and that is why we invested $60 million in our budget. How can the Conservatives say, on the one hand, that Ontario is open for business, and meanwhile they are cutting—

Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman should know that all of the procedures here, conducted by the office of the public prosecutor and by the RCMP, are totally independent of the Government of Canada. The whole structure is designed to keep it independent so that the decisions that are made are made on the basis of proper legal considerations, and all of those considerations are weighed carefully in court before a judge.The matter was entirely without political influence, and that is what the prosecutor said today.

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is unwilling to admit that politically interfering against a man whose only desire was to serve Canada honourably was wrong. There are many members on the other side, including in cabinet, who served this country in uniform. We swore an oath to serve and defend this nation and the values for which it stands. Putting service ahead of self takes courage. When will they find the courage to stand for what is right and honour their oath to serve this country ahead of the leader of the Liberal Party?

Mr. Speaker, the director of the Public Prosecution Service of Canada did say today, as she did in February, that there was no outside interference in either the initial decision to prosecute Vice-Admiral Norman, or during the trial, or in the decision to stay the charge today. It is therefore clear that there was no interference and that the system worked as it should.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind the Attorney General that, upon leaving the courthouse this morning, Vice-Admiral Norman's lawyer said there had been political interference because the government did not provide the document requested. This story is not over. Will the Prime Minister apologize to Admiral Norman?

Mr. Speaker, I actually met with the chicken farmers' association at midday today. I got to have a great discussion with this group, one of many, to give them some assurances.Our government made a commitment to all industries regarding supply management. We made a firm commitment in budget 2019, and I am working very hard so I can fulfill those commitments over the coming months.These associations can count on our government.

Mr. Speaker, Vice-Admiral Mark Norman had the honour and integrity to face allegations against him, himself. The Prime Minister does not have the same fortitude or backbone. Let us look at what Mark Norman's lawyer did say. She said, “There are times when you agree with what happens in a court” and at “times you don't and that's fine, but what you don't do is you don't put your finger and try to weigh in on the scales of justice. That is not what should be happening.” That is exactly what the government did in trying to block and obstruct evidence coming before that court. What is in those documents that the Prime Minister is so afraid of?

Mr. Speaker, the various remedies available to all western governments are under active consideration now through the forums provided by the Five Eyes alliance and by the G7 security ministers. Various potential approaches have been advanced by a number of those countries. There will be international discussions following later this spring. It is obviously clear that those who purvey dangerous material on the Internet need to assume responsibility for their behaviour.

Mr. Speaker, chicken farmers are here in Ottawa. I met with them yesterday, and I can say that they are very worried. The lack of import controls, one of the key pillars of supply management, is compromising the entire system.The Liberals sacrificed our farmers in the recent free trade negotiations. An NDP government would never have allowed these breaches in our supply management system.Will the Liberal government promise to control our imports, support the survival of our family farms and protect our supply management system?

Mr. Speaker, the prosecution in question was handled by the Public Prosecution Service of Canada, which operates independently from the Department of Justice and independently from my office. My office had no role whatsoever in the decision to seek a stay of proceedings. The decision belongs to the director of public prosecutions alone. The director of public prosecutions stated in February and repeated today that there was no contact or influence from outside the PPSC on either the initial decision to prosecute or the decision to stay the charge.

Mr. Speaker, as I have stated a number of times in the House, the government has met all of its obligations with respect to third party records applications during the course of the trial. All documents and priority individuals identified by the defence in February had already been provided to the court.As I have said, it is the Public Prosecution Service of Canada that has undertaken the evaluation of the evidence of this case and the prosecution of this trial. It is its decision and its decision alone to stay the proceedings.

Mr. Speaker, the Privy Council Office's investigation into the matter led nowhere, but the Prime Minister needed a scapegoat so he set his sights on a respected vice-admiral from the Canadian Armed Forces.Why did the Prime Minister say that this matter would end up in court even before the RCMP laid any charges?

Mr. Speaker, as I already told the House, the government followed all the rules in this case. The prosecution was handled by the Public Prosecution Service of Canada. The PPSC is the one that decided to launch this investigation and to prosecute, and it was the PPSC's decision to stay the proceedings.

Mr. Speaker, the government did not play any role in the prosecution of Vice-Admiral Norman. My office did not play a role and neither did the PMO. This decision falls to the director of public prosecutions alone. Today, she said, as she indicated in February, that there was no outside influence in the proceedings.

Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member well knows, the RCMP, which did the initial investigation, operates independently of government. The Public Prosecution Service, which looks at the evidence gathered by the RCMP and decides whether to lay charges, which proceeds with the prosecution if it decides to lay charges and then, in this case, decides to stay the proceedings, also operates independently of government, independently of my office and independently of the Prime Minister's office. The director of public prosecutions stated today, as she stated in February, that there was no outside—

Mr. Speaker, I reject the premise of the question.We fulfilled all our obligations. We co-operated with the court for the production of documents.The director of the Public Prosecution Service of Canada makes decisions independently of government. As she said in February and again today, there was no political interference.

Mr. Speaker, today the Liberals are talking about independence. Let us review.Scott Brison independently manipulated a $700 million contract. The Prime Minister's office independently hired James Cudmore, who revealed the leak. The Prime Minister independently—

Mr. Speaker, I apologize.

Mr. Speaker, as I have said a number of times today, the Department of Justice co-operated with the court and fulfilled its obligations for the production of third party documents. There were thousands of documents. Yes, it took time, but we fulfilled our obligation to the court.The system of justice in Canada is working. The Public Prosecution Service made an independent decision to stay proceedings based on the evidence it had in front of it. It took the initial decision to proceed with the case based on evidence raised by another institution—

Mr. Speaker, as the Public Prosecution Service of Canada confirmed today, every decision was made completely independently. Let me quote from that statement: No other factors were considered in this decision, nor was there any contact or influence from outside the PPSC, including political influence in either the initial decision to prosecute Mr. Norman or in the decision to stay the charge today. Any accusations otherwise are absurd.

Mr. Speaker, I encourage the member to actually read the statement of the Public Prosecution Service of Canada, which confirmed today that every decision made was completely independent. I will have to quote again: “No other factors were considered in this decision...including political influence”. Any accusations otherwise are absurd.

Mr. Speaker, Vice-Admiral Mark Norman served our country with honour and distinction, but the Prime Minister and the Liberals tried to destroy him. They attacked him personally and professionally, and they even tried to bankrupt him and his family. Now the Prime Minister needs to start to make amends, and that starts by issuing an apology.Will the Prime Minister finally apologize for all that he has done to Vice-Admiral Mark Norman?

Mr. Speaker, the director of public prosecutions stated today, as she stated in February, that there was no contact or influence, including political influence, from outside the PPSC, either at the step of the initial decision to prosecute or the decision to stay the charge.On this side of the House, we believe in our judicial institutions and we believe in our prosecutorial institutions, unlike the previous government, which had a record of interfering with the courts.

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are a little touchy today.Scott Brison independently tried to stop a naval contract. The reporter who revealed that, James Cudmore, was independently hired by the PMO. The PMO independently had Michael Wernick look into the leaks and found that 73 people knew. The Prime Minister independently said Mark Norman would be charged.

Mr. Speaker, tourism is a key economic driver in Waterloo Region. For 10 years, the Conservatives failed to understand that. Harper made cuts to Destination Canada's budget, and now Doug Ford is cutting the province's tourism budget. It is very clear that the tourism sector is not a priority for these Conservatives.Can the Minister of Tourism, Official Languages and La Francophonie reassure the hard-working people of the tourism sector what our government is doing to support them better?

Mr. Speaker, the government's witch hunt against Vice-Admiral Norman has collapsed, but it has exposed the ruthlessness of a Prime Minister who was willing to destroy the career of a naval officer who served this nation with distinction. Why? It was because the vice-admiral raised questions about a lucrative pork-barrel deal on an important naval deal. What we have seen are the shocking lengths to which this Prime Minister will go to interfere in the legal system to help cronies in the Liberal Party, but to attempt to destroy an admiral's career is way over the line. I am asking the Prime Minister to stand in this House today to apologize to Vice-Admiral Norman and his family.

Mr. Speaker, the Auditor General issued a scathing criticism of the Liberal government yesterday morning on the issue of web giants. The government keeps saying that it is waiting for the international community to join forces to come up with a solution to address the growth of the digital economy. These are just more excuses, and the problem has yet to be solved.What is interesting is that of the 60 countries polled by the OECD, Canada is one of just two countries that have yet to do anything. Worst of all, it has no intention of doing anything.What excuse will the Prime Minister use next to justify his failure to act?

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is creating two classes of refugees in Bill C-97 to pander to the right. Facing backlash, the government emailed Liberal MPs saying that no asylum seekers would be at risk. The Canadian Association of Refugee Lawyers and Amnesty International were clear: That is not true. The Liberals are desperate for a fix, but experts were explicit: There is no fix. Any people pretending the Liberal proposal is the same as the independent work of the IRB are fooling themselves.Will the Prime Minister do what thousands of Canadians are demanding and withdraw these dangerous provisions?

Mr. Speaker, the government seems concerned and confused about its jurisdiction, but the Prime Minister's actions in the Vice-Admiral Norman trial are the exact same as those in the SNC-Lavalin scandal. The Prime Minister tried to interfere in an ongoing criminal trial. The fact that he was unsuccessful twice does not change the fact that he tried to put his fingers on the scales of justice. Thankfully, our independent justice system resisted his attempt to politically interfere with it.This is corrupt, this is shameful and it has no place in our democracy. When will the Prime Minister apologize for his continual attempts to pervert the course of justice?

Mr. Speaker, what is absurd is the fact that these cabinet ministers are being sent out with such flimsy lines and actually do not address the matter. The matter, simply put, is that Vice-Admiral Mark Norman had to spend the last two and a half years scraping and fighting and defending himself while the government sat back and let it happen. It did not produce the documents it was supposed to. In fact, the Prime Minister, on two occasions, said that this matter would end up in court even before the RCMP laid the charge.What is the government afraid of?

Mr. Speaker, it is unbelievable that the Prime Minister cannot bring himself to apologize for what he has done to Vice-Admiral Norman, a man who has served our country with honour for decades. The Prime Minister seems to have no problem apologizing for the actions of others, but when it comes to his own bad conduct, “sorry” seems to be the hardest word.Why did the Prime Minister have no problem apologizing to a convicted terrorist, Omar Khadr, but cannot bring himself to apologize to Vice-Admiral Norman for the damage he has done to his career, his family and his reputation?

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister tried to interfere in a shipbuilding contract and when he was caught, he tried to destroy the reputation and career of the person who stood up to him. We have seen this before and it is a dangerous pattern with the government.Why is it that anyone who says “no” to the Prime Minister ends up with a target on his or her back?