Madam Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to speak to this. It was interesting that two-thirds of the member's speech was a bunch of bluster in regard to history rather than the facts of the case that is before us.
He mentioned their proposed standard of withstanding the highest of public scrutiny, so I have some very simple questions for the member.
Does a pay-to-play event by a minister of justice for $500 meet Canadians' highest public scrutiny? Does a $500 donation and a face-to-face meeting with a minister of justice who makes judicial appointments withstand the highest public scrutiny in Canadians' eyes? Does a minister accepting an invitation by a law firm which has significant dealings with the federal government to attend a lavish reception catered by the law firm in its offices withstand the highest public scrutiny? Finally, would any appointment in the future of any person who attended that event withstand the highest public scrutiny?