Business of Supply  Mr. Speaker, the member did not really address the motion. The motion is about the production of documents. We have seen the government withhold information from Canadians. The member ran in 2015 on a promise to be the most open and transparent government in Canadian history, which would be open by default and would release data to Canadians that is the property of Canadians.

Business of Supply  Madam Speaker, I do not accept the premise of the member. It seems to be implied that the carbon tax is somehow making a significant impact on climate change. We heard from the member for Louis-Saint-Laurent earlier that Canada ranks very poorly in its performance on emissions, so I do not accept the premise that the carbon tax is a solution to the problems that she has outlined.

Business of Supply  Madam Speaker, the member is continuing to mislead people about what the report says and what the carbon tax does to Canadians. This whole discussion is about the economic impact of the carbon tax, and eight out of 10 Canadians are not better off when we measure the economic impact.

Business of Supply  Madam Speaker, my colleague, our shadow minister of environment, talked about that in his speech, but I want to say to my colleague from the Bloc that his colleagues seemed to think that this motion is unworthy of debate or concern in the House. Do they think that it is okay for the Government of Canada to ignore requests for information with impunity, to gag the Parliamentary Budget Officer and to promise to Canadians openness and transparency but deliver secrecy, obfuscation and cover-ups?

Business of Supply  Madam Speaker, today's motion is one for the production of documents, arising from the refusal of the government to allow the PBO to release information he had seen that supported the conclusions he had drawn, and that is that the overwhelming majority of Canadians are worse off under the carbon tax when the economic impacts of the carbon tax are taken into effect.

Business of Supply  Madam Speaker, I would ask you, as the Chair, if you could direct the member to address the motion before the House.

Business of Supply  Madam Speaker, on the motion itself, literally minutes, maybe even seconds, before the opposition leader moved the motion to compel the production of documents, the government reluctantly, at the very last second, dropped an 80-page report. The Parliamentary Budget Officer has had to resort to the broken and completely chaotic ATIP system to try to get basic information from the government to do his job.

Business of Supply  Madam Speaker, on this point of order, I listened very carefully to the member, and he did not accuse a member of Parliament of lying, which would be against the rules. He pointed out that the government has not told the truth, and the government has lied in its—

Business of Supply  Madam Speaker, does the member have any explanation for the reflexive secrecy? How on earth could it possibly come to the Parliamentary Budget Officer having to resort to ATIPing the government to get information from them? Secrecy by default is the Liberal government's M.O. Does the member agree?

Business of Supply  Madam Speaker, as this story has been unfolding, up to and including the debate today, we have seen the Liberals claim they dealt with the problem as soon as they became aware of it. We know that this is a terrible mistruth. We know that former minister Navdeep Bains was warned about the board appointment, which he went ahead and made anyway.

Business of Supply  Madam Speaker, we have seen, since this began to unfold quite some time ago, that the current minister gets up and claims that as soon as the government knew there were governance problems, its members took swift action. We have heard that talking point repeatedly today during this debate, and it is false.

Committees of the House  Mr. Speaker, it is truly pathetic to see the House leader of the NDP literally reciting, verbatim, Liberal talking points. If the member would stop supporting the government, we could have a carbon tax election and could sort out where Canadians want to go.

Committees of the House  Mr. Speaker, the Liberals reflexively blame Canadians for issues. They would literally say, as the Minister for Health said, that if a Canadian family wants to take their kids on a vacation, then it is all on them. It is their fault, and they are bad people for wanting to put the kids in the car to go on a road trip.

Committees of the House  Mr. Speaker, there is a lot to unpack there. We will see who is misleading Canadians. In my speech, I was very clear. I talked about the carbon tax. The Parliamentary Budget Officer has debunked the member's assertion about what people get back versus what they pay. Take into account the economic cost of the carbon tax, and that is what it is: a tax.

Committees of the House  Mr. Speaker, could the member finish her thoughts on this bizarre attack on the family road trip that we have observed from this side?