Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise to speak on this very important issue. There is no doubt that the standing committee did a fabulous job of gathering information. I would especially like to give a shout-out to those individuals who shared their personal stories. I am sure that if we were to canvass members who listened to those personal stories, we would find that members in all political parties would express a great deal of gratitude to the witnesses for having the courage to share their stories. By going to the standing committee, they shared their stories with all Canadians. In my book, that would have taken a great deal of courage. For this reason, I would like to acknowledge those presenters who went before the committee.
I want to emphasize that this has been a very important priority for this government. When we think of sports and the abuse that has taken place, this is not new, unfortunately. It has been there for many years. I can assure people that the government's priority has been the safety of kids. We take this very seriously. It is one of the reasons why we were very pleased to see the standing committee deal with this important issue. Even the presentations we have had thus far have been really encouraging, at least in some ways, not as encouraging in others.
I will be sharing my time, Madam Speaker, with one of my colleagues from the Bloc.
Let us look at a number of the comments that were put on the record today.
I thought the parliamentary secretary, the member for Milton, did a fabulous job explaining, to anyone following the debate, the types of actions the government has taken. He also shared with us his personal experience. He is someone who can relate, at least in good part, with individuals who are most affected. He has a depth of knowledge that very few people in the chamber would have, and I would encourage others look at what he had to say.
I was disappointed in the member for Saskatoon—Grasswood's thoughts in regard to the issue. We are trying to come up with some ideas with respect to how we can improve the system, and he summarized the Conservative Party's position by saying that we should get rid of Sport Canada. That is the far-right attitude we often see from the Conservative Party. Cutting something does not make things better. I had the opportunity to ask another Conservative member if he supported that and he did not deny it. I am led to believe that is what a Conservative government would do.
We have a contrast between the Liberals and the Conservatives in the way we would approach public policy. It is one that is based on marginalized government, where it cuts where it can, versus a government that cares about people and the role that government can play to support Canadians. We see that when we get speeches like the ones we heard earlier and in the questions on those speeches. Here is what the member for Saskatoon—Grasswood said in his response to a question from the Bloc member, “disband it altogether.”
In the background, I can hear some members from the Conservative lobby saying, “Hear, hear.” Canadians can hear them. When the election comes, we will ensure that Canadians know how sharp the knife is in the Conservative Party, that the leader of the Conservative Party yields two machetes, like a samurai, cutting everything he can see so he can fix the budget.
We just heard another statement about something they are going to fix, but at what cost? As a government, our primary concern is the safety of kids. What is the alternative? What is the Conservative Party going to do to deal with this issue? First and foremost, I would like to think the Conservatives recognize the seriousness of the issue.
Instead of just talking about cuts, what are they going to do to deal with the issue? I understand that Stephen Harper did nothing, and the leader of the Conservative Party was one of his minions back then. However, at the end of the day, the issue does not disappear.
Through organizations, we are able to build upon it, whether it is through regulations or codes of ethics. The government has done that to ensure our athletes, both today and into the future, are in fact being protected.
The report deals with the issue of how we can best provide support to our children. We can answer that by reading what the the minister has provided to the House, responding to the issues listed in the report that we are debating. The minister gave about an 12-13 page response. I would highly recommend that members read the response.
I want to pick up on another point. As the House deals with concurrence reports, it does give us a break from the Conservative game and why the leader of the Conservative Party does not want to get the security clearance, unlike every other leader in the House of Commons, because he does not have an interest in foreign interference and its impact within the Conservative Party. I believe there is a reason, and it might have something to do with Conservative leader's past. We are getting a break from talking about that issue, whether it is concurrence reports or the hours and hours of debate by the Conservatives on a bogus issue, which is their motion that ultimately asks for the issue to go to procedures and House affairs committee. The Conservatives do not want to allow it to go to committee. The Conservatives are actually talking out their own motion.
With the sort of behaviour we have witnessed over the last few weeks, they are denying the government the opportunity to bring forward its legislative agenda that deals with things such as the inappropriate use of the Internet, and I am talking about the harms to children, to reforms of our military court system being transferred to the civil side to changes to our Citizenship Act.
My plea to the Conservative Party is to start thinking about Canadians first as opposed to the Conservative Party. Hopefully this report will pass.