It really begs this question: What good is your ethics screen if you can vote on matters that specifically and exclusively relate to advancing the Alto project?
By the way, your spokesperson, John Fragos, is quoted in an April 6, 2026, National Post article.
He stated:
The minister fully respects the screen...meaning he is neither implicated in nor party to any discussions, decisions, or votes related to Alto.
That is simply not true. You voted at least 13 times on matters related to Alto. You qualified that by saying that it was a matter of general application, but you can't explain how you voted against motion number 44, which was not a matter of general application.