Debates of Nov. 16th, 2020

[Arif Virani, Liberal, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Madam Speaker, that question really does drive at the heart of the accountability piece that informs people's confidence in the administration of justice, and whether it is in repute or disrepute.

What I can say very specifically is that it is a sensitive matter but not one we are not aware of, in terms of being able to determine who has received training.

The bill purports to indicate, in the annual report that would be provided to the minister and then tabled in Parliament, that training was provided in certain areas of the law, and the number of judges who were provided with it. For example, it would say 250 out of 300 judges in the superior court around the country received the training. Enumerating the specific names of the judges who received it is not a part of this bill. I think parliamentarians should be aware of that. Also, the bill is prospective in the main: Prospectively, people who put forward their names as applicants for a judicial appointment must undertake to take this training. It is only recommended for those who are currently on the bench. That is out of regard for the very important notion of judicial independence.

We have a lot of confidence, however, that given the step that Parliament would take in enacting this bill, given the importance of societal awareness, and given the public clamouring for this kind of accountability, that most if not all judges would participate in the training. As to whether it is ultimately efficacious in rendering judgments—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Carol Hughes]

We have to allow for other questions, and the hon. member could add to his response, hopefully.

[Alistair MacGregor, NDP, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC]

Madam Speaker, I enjoyed working with the parliamentary secretary at the justice committee. The bill that we see before us today is a testament to the great work that was done at committee. It appropriately follows the many recommendations we heard from witnesses.

I would say that this bill is an example of parliamentary leadership. Parliamentarians from all stripes have come together, and I believe we have a good bill.

The question I want to ask the parliamentary secretary is specifically regarding his comments about our provincial colleagues. How confident is he that when we establish this bill we may see provincial jurisdictions follow suit?

Does he feel confident that various provinces may in fact put in place their own statutory requirements for judicial training, given that so many cases of this nature are in fact heard by provincial judges under provincial jurisdiction?

[Arif Virani, Liberal, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Cowichan—Malahat—Langford for his contributions in this go-around and also in the last Parliament. I would also highlight the contributions of the member for Oakville North—Burlington, a Liberal member who did the same thing, participating in the last Parliament and again in this study, showing tangible commitment to the bill.

I would say to the member that I am somewhat confident, in terms of provincial leadership. I was trying to consult my notes, and we have had indications. I believe at least one province has put in place this kind of training. It may be P.E.I., if memory serves. I also have confidence that other members, in their commitment to this legislation, will be encouraging their provincial counterparts around the country to really be thinking about this and how it could be implemented on a provincial level.

I think the sensitization to this issue, social context, systemic racism, systemic discrimination and, above all else, sexual assault law and the importance of understanding it and getting the application of the law right, is something that is not lost in any area or region of the country.

I am confident that this can be advanced going forward.

[Julie Vignola, Bloc, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Madam Speaker, I have a simple question.

How can we ensure that this training does not become a convention where a bunch of pals get together once a year? How can we ensure that the training has a tangible, visible impact on both the Crown and the judge, so that we never again hear questions like, “What were you wearing that evening?” or “Did you look his way?” or “Did you approach him?” or “Did you scream?”

What will we do to ensure that this training has a real impact?

[Arif Virani, Liberal, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Madam Speaker, I understand the passion of the hon. member across the way. She is asking a very good question. I thank her.

The text of Bill C-3 mentions the importance of fighting myths and stereotypes. It also includes directions for judges, a recommendation to consult with women and organizations that work with women on sexual assault matters regarding how to establish and run these courses.

The curriculum itself would be designed, ideally, in consultation with those women's groups that spend their entire mandate ensuring they confront the very myths and stereotypes that the member for Beauport—Limoilou just mentioned.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada and to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, I wonder if my colleague could provide his thoughts in terms of the manner in which the bill originated and the co-operation it took among the different parties to get it to the point it is today.

[Arif Virani, Liberal, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Madam Speaker, the spirit of co-operation has been quite astounding. In my five years in Parliament, I have rarely seen such unanimous support for a bill. It has been useful, and it has been encouraging.

Obviously, what happens in the House is different from what happens in the Senate. I will note, with a bit of disappointment, what transpired in the Senate in the last Parliament, but we are confident that this will have a fair review and a good, rigorous analysis. We are hoping that this piece of legislation will see the light of day, because so many parliamentarians of all stripes, including independents, are behind the bill. That is a good sign for women and for all those who are concerned with having confidence in the justice system.

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Madam Speaker, today is my third attempt to speak to Bill C-3 in the House. The first time, there was not enough time and I was interrupted. The second time, there was a technical problem, unfortunately. This time, I finally have enough time.

On our side of the House, we have certainly made a good effort to indicate the challenges females face when they are in positions of power and the judgments they face on a daily basis in terms of what they wear, their makeup and how they express themselves.

This is something my colleagues in the House are not unfamiliar with. They are very aware of it, and my colleagues on this side of the House have done a very good job of expressing that and noting the challenges they have faced throughout their political careers as they have attempted to express who they are and represent their constituents in the most authentic way possible.

Sometimes I get comments on Facebook or Twitter. People say that my eyelashes are too big or my makeup is too dark. It does not bother me, because inside I know who I am. I know my family loves me and my friends love me.

One of those special friends is a woman by the name of Rona Ambrose. I first met her at the Conservative Party convention in 2005 in Montreal. It was really something to meet her. I thought, “Oh my goodness, I am meeting Rona Ambrose.” Fortunately, I have a friend who is a family relative of hers, so I would see her from time to time in Ottawa during my time at Global Affairs. I would run into her on a street corner downtown and it was always lovely to see her.

Throughout my nomination she was incredibly supportive, as she was during the election campaign, and I have one special memory of her. My campaign office was set up, and all the media were there because she was visiting. I recall that right before we walked into the office together, she took a moment and said, “Stop". She said she had to think about what she was going to say and needed to collect her thoughts. For me, that was such an incredible lesson: We should be clear and concise in the words being communicated in the House of Commons as official representatives of the people.

I will never forget this time she came to my campaign office. That moment really sticks with me. We were in the back of a strip mall and she just said, “Stop". It was such a pivotal moment in my political career.

My other dear memory of Rona is when I won the by-election and she walked me into the House of Commons. That is a moment I will never forget. I remember being in the antechamber waiting. My husband and son were there, and there were other federal cabinet ministers ready to walk us in. She turned to me and said, “Put on the biggest smile you possibly can because this is a moment that will go down in your history. This is the single moment that will be seen over and over again.” She was absolutely correct. When I look at all of my videos from the three and a half years since being elected to the House, that video stands out.

There are many special things about Rona, and I would like to think she and I are similar. We both speak more than two languages, we both have a master's degree and we both display a class and decorum that the House deserves. However, what I think is most special about her is that she recognized something in me and encouraged me in seeing that something special.

This is something Rona Ambrose has now dedicated her life to: She is mentoring, encouraging and promoting women all around the world. It is therefore no surprise to me that she introduced this significant piece of legislation.

I was very fortunate to attend an event in Calgary last year with SOS Children's Villages Canada, at which she was the guest speaker. She had incredible stories about her time in the House.

She talked about one time when, as minister of the environment, she was meeting her U.S. counterpart. She was in a room waiting for her U.S. counterpart to arrive and a secret security agent told her, “Listen here little lady; you have to clear this room. There are important people who are about to meet here, two ministers.” She said, “I am one of the ministers.” It is astounding that in this day and age, a conversation like that would happen, but it did.

What is so special about her and this legislation is that it would allow people to tell their stories. Is that not really what justice and truth are about? It is about the opportunity for people to share their stories.

I want give a special shout-out to all of the participants at the Results Canada conference this weekend. Yesterday morning I woke up at nine o'clock and looked at my calendar. I turned to my husband and said, “Oh, my goodness, I'm scheduled to be a keynote speaker for Results Canada in half an hour.” I wondered why I put myself through this at 9:30 on a Sunday morning, and it became very apparent to me that I do it for myself because it is so inspiring to share stories and motivate young people. That is really what Rona Ambrose is about. She allows people to tell their stories.

Last March, right before the pandemic hit and before the shutdown, I was very fortunate to attend an incredible event that happens every year in Calgary, where people have an opportunity to tell their stories. This past year it was about women telling their stories. It is called the YWHISPER Gala, and it is put on by the local YWCA.

I want to give a special shout-out to the CEO, Sue Tomney, who does an incredible job. I also want to give a shout-out to Nesreen, who has always been incredibly instrumental in my relationship with that organization, and its incredible board of directors, including wonderful women such as Shannon Young. In my previous portfolio, I was shadow minister for families, children and social development, and I hope the minister sticks to his commitments to the YWCA.

Last year, the YWHISPER Gala had incredible guests Jodi Kantor and Megan Twohey, two women who won the Pulitzer Prize for breaking the sexual harassment story that helped ignite the movement. If ever anyone has an opportunity to read their book, She Said, it is filled with incredible stories that I believe are relevant to this piece of legislation today.

It notes what they went through to get the stories from women. The most telling story for me was about the first house they went to. They knocked on the door of a woman they were hoping to get insight and perspective from. She answered and said she had waited 25 years for them to knock on her door. She waited 25 years to tell her story. That is another reason this piece of legislation is so incredible. It speaks to Rona's foresight to allow people the opportunity to tell their stories.

These are not always bad, horrible, terrible stories, the kind we might hear in courtrooms or at the YWCA about horrific situations that women are escaping from. There are also good stories.

When I was preparing for this speech, the United States was looking to confirm the appointment of Amy Coney Barrett. There was so much light being shed on this potential justice, yet we do not focus on the incredible women within our own judicial system. I therefore want to take a moment to highlight the incredible women of our Supreme Court. Of course, to get into their entire resumés would take hours, so here is an overview.

There is the Honourable Rosalie Silberman Abella. She is the first Jewish woman appointed to the Supreme Court. Previous to her appointment, she did significant work on equality, discrimination and disabilities.

There is the Honourable Andromache Karakatsanis. She served as Ontario's secretary of the cabinet and as clerk of the executive council from July 2000 to November 2002. As the province's senior public servant, she provided leadership to the Ontario public service and the deputy ministers. She was also involved in a lot of issues related to education, which is what the bill is about as well, so it is incredible to recognize her.

There is also the Honourable Suzanne Côté. She was a partner at Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP, where she was head of the Montreal office's litigation group. Before that she was at Stikeman Elliott, where she was head of the litigation group as well. She is another incredible woman on our Supreme Court.

Finally, there is the Honourable Sheilah Martin, who, prior to being a Supreme Court justice, fought for equal justice for all. Of course, very dear to me is the fact that Justice Martin worked as a researcher and law professor at the University of Calgary from 1982 to 1986. She is another incredible woman that I want to shine a light on as we talk about Bill C-3, which would no doubt have significant implications for our justice system.

I will now go back to Rona Ambrose, who is another incredible individual. She had the vision and foresight for this legislation as a result of all the work she has done, and continues to do, with women and girls. I am sure members are aware that very recently she published her first book on girls, entitled The International Day of the Girl: Celebrating Girls Around the World, which is very special.

I remind members that Rona Ambrose is a Conservative woman and that Conservative women have really led the way here in the House of Commons. Since we are talking about stories of survivors and victims, who are often women, I will run through some of the incredible accomplishments of Conservative women in the House of Commons.

We had Ellen Fairclough, who was the first female cabinet minister and the first acting prime minister. That is no small feat.

Of course there is Flora MacDonald, who is very dear to my heart. She was the first female foreign affairs minister. As I was at Global Affairs for a significant period of time prior to being in the House of Commons, she really means a lot to me and touches my heart. I am not sure if I have shared this with the House, but oddly enough, on my first diplomatic trip to Washington, I was on the same flight as the Right Hon. Joe Clark, which I thought was significant.

Moving back to the incredible women from the Conservative movement, who can forget Deb Grey? I would like to think we have Deb Grey reincarnated in the member for Lakeland, another woman who shows that fire and passion for her constituents, for her party and for Canada. Deb Grey was the first woman to lead the official opposition, so another significant Conservative woman there. Of course, I would mention the first female Prime Minister of Canada, Kim Campbell.

I genuinely believe that the Liberals often feel that they own compassion, that they own the rights to people's stories. I am saying here today that they do not. This piece of legislation was brought forward by a prominent Conservative woman and former minister. I am very glad that the government took this legislation and moved forward with it from Minister Ambrose. I want to point out it really was upon former minister Ambrose to come up with this legislation and to say what we are hearing at this special time in history, which is “I see you and I believe you”. That is what Rona was thinking of when she came up with the idea for this piece of legislation.

Believing people's story is what this legislation is about. All that the bill is asking us to do is listen to people's stories and believe them, no matter what they are. I made this point to the Results Canada group yesterday, to be open-minded to the thoughts of Conservative women and to all young women and to see themselves as Conservative women. I was very happy to have that conversation. We are not told in our party what to think or what to believe. When I say “I see you, I believe you”, I see everyone and we believe everyone. These are the messages we are giving.

If any young women are thinking of putting their name forward for Conservative nominations, they will not get a phone call from the local party representative saying sorry, there will not be a nomination race, the position is being filled by another individual who is being appointed. This is because we believe in fair and democratic processes, but we also believe in women. We believe that women have it within them to run, to compete and to win. That is another thing that Rona Ambrose taught me.

As I said, the Liberals like to believe that they own compassion. They do not. They like to believe that they own the rights to people's stories. That is not true. I know this. Rona Ambrose knew this. That is the reason that she brought forth this legislation and that is all the bill is asking for, that those who have been entrusted with the greatest responsibility in our society be open to all of these stories, listen to all of these stories. That is really what this training is about: “I see you and I believe you”. I am grateful that Rona Ambrose put forward this legislation.

[Arif Virani, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Madam Speaker, the member for Calgary Midnapore spent some time outlining the achievements of Conservative women, most notably, those of Ms. Ambrose, to which she will find no objection on this side of the House. There is no doubt her leadership is strong with respect to the bill.

I wonder if the member opposite might comment on Conservative men. Ms. Ambrose was quite public in her criticism of Conservative men who form part of the Conservative caucus in the Senate not expeditiously pursuing the passage of the bill in the last Parliament. Further to that, could she comment on Conservative men who are premiers in other parts of this country, including the province that my colleague represents, Alberta, and about this notion of getting provincial training replicated at the provincial level including by the government of Premier Kenney?

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Madam Speaker, I think Ms. Ambrose would very much be in support of men contributing to the process. Men were implicated in allowing her to become a member of Parliament, minister and interim leader. The parliamentary secretary's point goes right back to my point with respect to this. The wonderful thing about being a Conservative is we are allowed to disagree with our colleagues. We are allowed to hold other views. This is not permitted in the current governing party, so I think it is something important to hold out. Conservatives have open discussions all the time within our caucus. We absolutely challenge each other's ideas and viewpoints in a way that I think is unprecedented in the Liberal caucus. Therefore, I would say she very much appreciates and is open to the ideas of all elected officials and parliamentarians. The wonderful thing about our party is that it allows for this wonderful scale of views.

[Alistair MacGregor, NDP, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC]

Madam Speaker, I too would like to echo the part of the speech by the member for Calgary Midnapore that acknowledged the leadership of Rona Ambrose.

I would also like to take this opportunity to thank Ms. Ambrose for her leadership in bringing this bill forward. The fact we are still debating it today I think speaks to that.

I want to ask the member this. There was some specific debate at the justice committee on how to broaden the term “social context”, and there was debate over the term “systemic”, so we now have in this bill reference to systemic racism and systemic discrimination. I would like to hear not only the member's comments on why it is important that this federal statute now acknowledge systemic racism and systemic discrimination in the justice system, but also her thoughts on what we need to do beyond legislation to ensure that everyone, no matter their background, who goes through the justice system feels accepted, that their experience is going to be valued and that they will get the justice they deserve.

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Madam Speaker, I go back to what I believe is the fundamental beauty of this bill, which is to provide all Canadians and all individuals within the justice system the opportunity to share their stories no matter what those stories are.

The hon. member is correct. I did focus mostly on women and Rona's commitment and contributions to women and girls. This is an incredible time in history of recognizing ourselves as individuals, as free thinkers, as being authentically who we are. That is fundamentally a conservative principle to me, recognizing the individual, believing in oneself and expressing who one is, so I would say that applies to all Canadians.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada and to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, the degree to which political parties have been put to the side as we deal with this very important issue is encouraging. The role the provinces play was raised by one of my colleagues. It is important. My daughter, an MLA, is dealing with this very issue. I am anticipating that sometime before Christmas there will be an act to try to move forward with it. Would my colleague be prepared to share her thoughts with the premier of Manitoba on giving support to any potential legislation of this nature?

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Madam Speaker, I will always have love and respect for Manitoba. My husband is from Winnipeg.

Certainly, as a federal member of Parliament, I am not in the business of providing direction to my provincial colleagues, no matter what their station or position. I just speak to the appreciation I have for this bill and, more importantly, its creator today.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Madam Speaker, I want to salute the member for Calgary Midnapore, because I know that she played a role in Equal Voice in Calgary and has done a lot for women in politics. In light of that and, again, celebrating the many wonderful women judges of the Supreme Court of Canada, including the former chief justice Beverley McLachlin, our first woman justice Bertha Wilson and current members of the court, I do feel that non-partisanship is important. It is important to recognize that Rona Ambrose did a lot of non-partisan things in the House, including supporting my bill for lyme disease action.

Please forgive me, but with deep respect for someone who as well as being my personal hero became a dear friend, the late Flora MacDonald would never have wanted to be associated with the current version of the Conservative Party. She was unable to join it once it ceased to be the Progressive Conservative Party. My wish for members on that side of the House is that they strive to be the kind of party that the Right Hon. Joe Clark would join again.

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Madam Speaker, my thanks to the member for Saanich—Gulf Islands for the compliment, although it was, as always, a little double-sided and a little backhanded. Apparently, she has an ability to speak to the dead. If she could teach me how to do that, I would be interested.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Madam Speaker, we see many substantial contributions by Conservative women in various countries throughout the world. It is striking to me that in some corners of the commentary, those contributions are often not recognized. There is legitimate celebration around the achievements of women on the left side of the spectrum, and yet, some of the great heroes of the Conservative movement who are women are ignored.

Does the member have thoughts on that and the steps we can take to better celebrate and recognize the immense contributions of Conservative women?

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Madam Speaker, my colleague from Sherwood Park has incredible knowledge and is very much implicated in world affairs. I would not know where to begin in terms of the incredible world leaders who are women beyond our borders, but I am very grateful to have worked with former minister Ambrose and to still call her a friend. I will save my recognition for another speech.

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with my colleague, the member for Salaberry—Suroît.

As far as we are concerned—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Carol Hughes]

Order.

We must ask for unanimous consent of the House to split your time given that this is the first part of the debate.

Does the member have the unanimous consent of the House to share his time with the member for Salaberry—Suroît?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Carol Hughes]

There is no opposition.

The hon. member for Rivière-du-Nord.

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

Madam Speaker, the Bloc Québécois will support this bill with enthusiasm, just as we supported all its previous iterations.

We believe that victims of sexual assault must be well supported. The judicial process must be followed and, in our opinion, the only way to ensure that victims come forward and that there is due process, as our justice system requires, is to support the victims. We must ensure that judges who hear these cases do so with an open mind in order to be able to recognize the credibility of the victims and to examine the facts objectively and carefully.

In the past, there have been too many examples of situations where victims refused to come forward out of fear or a lack of trust in the judicial process. I believe that it is one of our main duties as legislators to ensure that victims of crime, no matter the crimes or the victims, trust the justice system enough to come forward and present their case.

That said, I would be remiss if I did not mention that the Bloc Québécois finds it very unfortunate that the government is using victims of sexual assault to introduce notions into this bill that were not in the previous versions and that have nothing to do with the purpose of the legislation. I am talking about the notions of systemic racism and discrimination.

Let me be clear: I am not saying that racism and discrimination do not exist in Quebec and Canada. They exist, and we agree on that. We do not agree, however, on whether racism and discrimination are systemic or institutional.

These issues are not clear-cut and they are currently a topic of debate in Quebec. They are not clear-cut and no one can agree on the meaning of these words. When we held hearings in committee on the previous version of Bill C-3, we heard from a number of witnesses. However, we did not ask any of those witnesses questions about systemic racism, systemic discrimination or all of the other notions the government has put into in Bill C-3.

Parliament is voting today on a bill that started out as a pious hope on the part of Rona Ambrose. Members will recall that the Bloc Québécois enthusiastically supported that bill. At the time, I even moved a motion in the House to send the bill directly to the Senate and for the Senate to quickly pass it before the end of the Parliament. However, we know that the bill died on the Order Paper when an election was called. Since the bill was not passed, we are starting over again today.

Until now, this was not about systemic racism or discrimination. However, we are making a decision here as legislators and saying that our judges must take training on systemic racism and discrimination even though we have not heard from experts on that subject and we have not put any thought into it. We are doing that through the simple but detrimental process of making last-minute amendments during the clause-by-clause examination of the bill.

We are changing the situation by introducing abstract notions, notions on which there is no consensus and on which we have not heard from any experts, into a laudable bill that everyone agreed on and that sought to give judges training around sexual assault. I think that is unfortunate and I would ask my colleagues to refrain from taking this approach.

If we want to bake an apple pie, then we need apples, not grapes. What we are doing here is adding grapes to our apple pie. In the end, we will have an apple-grape pie, which is rather unfortunate. I do not know what the Senate will do with this iteration of Bill C-3. We will see.

Once again, the Bloc Québécois has always been there to support all victims of crime, no matter who they are, particularly victims of sexual assault. We have been there from the start and we will always be there. We will support this bill, but we are not happy that it now includes concepts that do not belong in it.

Lastly, I want to say that we must not stop here. Yes, making sure our judges get sexual assault training is good, but we need to keep working on this. Victims of sexual assault need support throughout the legal process. It is traumatizing for victims to testify about a crime, and it is all the more traumatizing when that crime is as intimate as sexual assault. Often, that testimony is given years after the crime was committed, and victims who must testify are forced to relive the crime.

Yes, they need a judge who is open, who listens to them objectively, who understands their state of mind during their testimony and who is capable of evaluating the evidence objectively and effectively. However, the system also needs to support these victims in myriad other ways, and Bill C-3 does not enable that. Things will have to be done differently.

I remind members that the provinces are responsible for administering justice. We will always be committed to ensuring that Quebec can manage the entire judicial process. However, in order to truly support victims of sexual assault all through the process, the federal government should make significant investments. Bill C-3 does not include any such investments, but they are worth mentioning.

Let's not delude ourselves into thinking that training for judges will be a cure-all and that it will eliminate every problem. This is a very important issue that we still all agree on, but it goes beyond that. We will have to continue to work with victims and be cautious when dealing with a topic as important as victims of sexual assault. There is no consensus in Quebec or Canada on the notions of systemic racism and discrimination, and we have not heard from experts to advise us on how to legislate these major issues. The government must not introduce unclear notions into a bill, as it has done and as it will be tempted to do with other bills.

I reiterate our concern, but the Bloc Québécois will support this bill.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Carol Hughes]

Before moving on to questions and comments, I would like to encourage members to use their headsets. Otherwise, it is difficult for the interpreters to translate their questions, comments and speeches. If members have a headset, I suggest that they wear it for questions and comments.

The hon. parliamentary secretary.