Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I want to begin by noting that it was Conservatives on this committee who actually supported efforts to do a prestudy on the budget, so any suggestion that somehow the efforts by us or by the Bloc are to delay the passage of the budget is false and ill-advised.
I note that Mr. Ste-Marie did preface his remarks, when he proposed splitting up elements of this bill and sending those elements to different committees, by saying that what he was opposed to, fundamentally, was putting limits on the bill. I think what I have to draw from that reference is that he opposes limiting the ability of parliamentarians to do their job when it comes to analyzing the budget and its different components, which are manifested in the different parts of the budget implementation legislation.
I note that he is referring to taking section 9 in part 5 and referring it to the trade committee; sections 15 to 17 to the industry committee; sections 26, 27, 29 and 32 to HUMA; section 23 to immigration; and sections 18, 19, 21 and 22 to the justice committee.
I understand why he wants to do that. For example, there is a reference in this bill to the establishment of a Criminal Code offence for activities created on the moon. How is that a money-related issue? That is the case for many pieces of this budget implementation act, and I understand why he would want to refer elements to different committees that are better tasked to consider them.
Because the government has violated its promise not to introduce an omnibus bill, which this is, we now have a situation that is causing this committee significant scheduling problems, which the government is trying to resolve by simply ramming this stuff through without proper oversight. That is irresponsible.
I also note that the government actually promised not to put limitations on debate by not invoking closure, yet we have seen this government do it regularly. You understand why we, as the official opposition, would be incredibly frustrated by the sudden about-turn this government has taken after making these promises to become more transparent and accountable not only to parliamentarians but to Canadians.
I am pleading with the parliamentary secretary, who has already approached me on a number of occasions to see if there's a way of moving this through expeditiously, to come forward with realistic, fair solutions that can allow this legislation to pass in a manner that provides for proper oversight but is still timely in nature. I've not seen that from the parliamentary secretary. So far he's been crafty. He's been trying to propose solutions that he knows very well we as an opposition cannot accept because they interfere with our constitutional right to exercise oversight over what is, at the end of the day, $57 billion of new spending in a budget.
Canadians will understand that this kind of new money being spent by a government should have proper oversight, and for all those reasons—