Mr. Speaker, I am always pleased to get up and speak in this place on behalf of the people in Elmwood—Transcona.
I watched a considerable amount of the testimony yesterday. I went down to the justice committee room because I was interested, and in part because I wanted to get a feel for the credibility of the witness. I have to say I was impressed, not just with her delivery but this is a person who is citing text messages and other documentation, who took copious notes, who is not flying by the seat of her pants on this, at all, but acting as we would expect of a professional of her calibre. It was an interesting contrast to see the Prime Minister at a press conference this morning, just kind of saying that he totally disagreed with her characterization of the events.
What I would like to know is what the Prime Minister can tell us that is different about those conversations. What are the other facts that she missed? He did not say, in such and such a meeting, he actually also said this, or he did not say that, or he said it with this tone. There was no effort at all to try to give Canadians any idea as to what was different about those events, such that we would prefer his account. In fact, we really do not have an account of those events from him, which is part of the problem, and why we want to see him appear at the justice committee and give his account of events so that they can be compared.
In the absence of the Prime Minister providing that, we have a really credible witness who was well prepared and gave a very believable story. I do not see any reason to believe the Prime Minister over her until he offers us a lot more.