Opposition Motion—Summer Tax Break  Madam Speaker, could my colleague tell me on what scientific, financial or taxation basis his party made that choice?

Opposition Motion—Summer Tax Break  Madam Speaker, we know that the Conservatives' proposal involves not an expense, but a $1.5-billion shortfall over three months. I would like to know what financial or taxation basis the Conservatives relied on to estimate that there would be savings of $400, $500 or $600 per family.

Opposition Motion—Summer Tax Break  Madam Speaker, as the member said, we had a taste over the past year of the frightening new reality brought about by climate change, with 15 billion hectares having burned down, as she mentioned. Does she not think that her government should change course when it comes to the oil industry, so that we can turn things around as quickly as possible?

Business of Supply  Madam Speaker, I would like to challenge my colleague on something. Throughout her speech, she spoke about the Liberal government's out-of-control spending. I would like to point out to her that the Conservatives are adding a new expenditure of $1.4 billion over three months, which is rather ridiculous.

Business of Supply  Madam Speaker, I have a very simple question for my colleague. First of all, we are talking about $1.4 billion in government revenue, which is a truly astronomical sum. Can my colleague help me understand why the Conservatives claim that axing this tax will be better for poor people than for rich people, who obviously use more oil and gas than other people?

Business of Supply  Madam Speaker, I always love hearing my colleague from Victoria speak in the House. She speaks with sincerity, conviction, love and sensitivity. She should be held up as an example for some of our colleagues. I will throw something out to her. In my opinion, if we adopted this Conservative motion, it would mean that, from now on, it would be legal and free to pollute in English Canada.

Business of Supply  Mr. Speaker, I find this to be the most extraordinary opposition day we have ever had. It is a bunch of hot air. This is a horrible show of populism. These taxes represent $1.3 billion for the three months during which the Leader of the Opposition wants them waived. How would he make up for this $1.3-billion shortfall?

Committees of the House  Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the 14th report of the Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs entitled “Main Estimates 2024-25: Votes 1 and 5 under Department of Veterans Affairs, Vote 1 under Veterans Review and Appeal Board”.

Privilege  Madam Speaker, we are currently facing a crisis. I get that my colleague has no solution to the crisis except to vote against the motion under consideration, which is fine. I just find it funny how many gaffes a Speaker is allowed to commit. There is also the gravity of those gaffes to consider.

Privilege  Mr. Speaker, I have a comment, rather than a question, for my colleague. The current Speaker was elected on September 27, 2023, just eight months ago. The government is well aware that the Bloc Québécois called for the Speaker to step down after a second incident. Now, there have been three incidents.

Business of Supply  Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his comments. He is a man I very much like and respect. He gave a nuanced and thoughtful speech with a few constructive aspects, which helps counterbalance a bit the speeches of many of his Conservative colleagues, who are firmly on the other end of the spectrum.

Business of Supply  Madam Speaker, I would like to know my colleague's opinion on the impact of the Conservatives' rhetoric, demagoguery and lies and the lack of scientific content in the opioid file. I would like my colleague to tell me what impact this could have on drug users.

Business of Supply  Madam Speaker, this morning, something rather unusual happened, and we in the Bloc Québécois are taking it very seriously. When we asked the Leader of the Conservative Party about the difference between decriminalization and diversion, he said that they meant the same thing, that it was just semantics.

Privilege  Mr. Speaker, up until the beginning of 2023, the Liberal government was completely denying that there was interference. We could ask all the questions we wanted, but they just denied its existence, full stop. The opposition parties fought for a rapporteur to be appointed, and we succeeded in, I believe, March 2023, but his appointment was far from unanimous.

Privilege  Mr. Speaker, I am rather surprised at what my colleague is saying. I just want to give a little reminder. Two years ago, his Prime Minister and the entire cabinet were saying that there was no problem with interference. In the end, because of pressure from all sides, the government appointed a special rapporteur, David Johnston, who tabled a report that nobody was happy with.