Mr. Speaker, the architects of prorogation do not have any lessons to give us about the protection of parliamentary procedure and protection of parliamentary debate.
The notion as the minister has put it that these bills were all public through their introduction in the previous Parliament is no less problematic than it is demagogy. Not all of these bills made it through full deliberation and debate in the House let alone in clause-by-clause consideration in committee.
More important, there are new MPs on his side of the House as well as on this side of the House who deserve to have the right to participate in a debate on these bills, which they will not have a chance to do, to discuss it with their constituents and not have the mantra thrown at them: we have a mandate.
We all have a mandate for safe streets and safe communities. The question is how to achieve that mandate. It will not be achieved through this procedure.