Debates of Dec. 3rd, 2024

Reference to Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs

[Marc Dalton, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

Madam Speaker, in the last Parliament, we found ourselves in a similar situation. Documents were to be presented to Parliament, but the Liberals said, “No, we cannot have transparency”. The Speaker made a judgment, and he ordered documents to be produced unredacted. It sounds like it is a repeat. The Prime Minister and all those who were surrounding him decided to take that Speaker to court to sue him or to throw away the keys and forget about him. I am not sure.

I would like to read excepts from an article from The Globe and Mail from June 23, 2021, by Robert Fife and Steven Chase:

The Liberal government is taking the House of Commons Speaker to court, in an unprecedented move to prevent the release of uncensored documents to members of Parliament that offer insight into the firing of two scientists from Canada’s top infectious-disease laboratory.

The government said in a court filing that the disclosure of this information could not only jeopardize national security but also, possibly, Canada’s international relations. ...

The legal challenge against a ruling of the House stunned opposition MPs.... An order of the House backed by a majority of MPs....called on the Public Health Agency to produce records it has been withholding from a Commons committee for months.

[The Speaker] called the court action an “urgent matter” and vowed to vigorously fight the government, saying House of Commons law clerk Philippe Dufresne will prepare a legal defence.

“The Speaker’s Office will defend the rights of the House. That is something I take very seriously,”.... “The legal system does not have any jurisdiction over the operations of the House. We are our own jurisdiction. That is something we will fight tooth and nail to protect and we will continue to do that.” ....

Mr. Dufresne told MPs before a Commons committee...that “to his knowledge” the Canadian government has never before gone to court to try to elude an order of the House to produce documents.

That sounds like today, when it could have jeopardized the Liberals' political fortunes.

Now, Canada is 157 years old. This was about three years ago, so it was 154 years old. It had never been ordered to produce documents. The article continues:

He said the House “has exclusive authority” when it comes to matters that fall under parliamentary privilege. ...

For months, opposition MPs have been seeking unredacted records from the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC), that explain why Xiangguo Qiu and her husband, Keding Cheng, were fired from the National Microbiology Laboratory in Winnipeg. The two scientists lost their security clearances, and the RCMP was called into investigate, in July, 2019. They were dismissed in January [the following year].

More than 250 pages of records have been withheld in their entirety and hundreds of others have been partly censored before being provided to MPs.

We had the same thing here. In 2024, the Liberals said that they produced the documents. However, they used up all the ink in the printer, because they blacked out most of it. They have actually mocked Parliament.

The documents also relate to the March 2019 transfer of deadly virus samples to the Wuhan Institute of Virology that was overseen by Dr. Qiu. It is interesting. Does Wuhan remind members of any place? It should, as it is where the COVID virus began, and it was closed down. MPs put in safeguards that required the House of Commons law clerk to review the documents or redact information that would cause national security questions or criminal investigation before making them public. The former House of Commons law clerk, Rob Walsh, said that the Federal Court should deny the Liberal government's request.

Here is what happened. The Liberals did not want scrutiny into this lab scandal. These were Chinese spies. It showed the connection of Canada, China, the Wuhan lab and the world-wide pandemic. Now, that would really not be good for the Liberals' political fortune, because they had spent hundreds of billions of dollars on COVID. We are going to see how much of that was lining their own pockets and the pockets of those who were close to them. It was just a total disaster. Canada's debt doubled during that time. Just as much debt had been added during a short period of time, in the past few years, under the Liberals, than has been added throughout Canadian history. It is a shame.

The thing is, giving out all this money, with very little accountability, would all go to naught. There were some things we Conservatives supported, but in many respects it was poorly managed, and it was politically driven, which is my interpretation. The Liberals said it was for COVID supports, but now the Auditor General has just announced that the Prime Minister's CEBA program was just another billion-dollar disaster during the COVID period. There was $3.5 billion in taxpayers' money paid to almost 80,000 recipients who did not meet eligibility requirements. I know the Liberals wanted to hurry and get it out, but it was just a disaster.

The Auditor General found that the Liberal Minister of Finance did not provide effective oversight for the CEBA program. Billions of dollars was given out to people who had lost their unemployment, to people who were incarcerated, to high school students and to addicts on social assistance, and this actually exacerbated the addiction crisis.

What did the Liberals do in 2021? They did not want this information coming out, because it showed too much of a connection with the COVID virus coming from Wuhan to Canada. It did not look very good, but their polling numbers were looking good. They had said that they would not take advantage of a national emergency like COVID to call an election. However, what did they do? Well, they called an election in 2021, and that kind of closed the books on the procurement of documents.

There are “philosophical razors”, a term I was not familiar with until I looked it up this morning. In philosophy, a “razor”, is not something one shaves with but a principle that allows one to eliminate or shave off unlikely expectations for an occurrence. I believe someone quoted here today during question period Hanlon's razor. Robert J. Hanlon said, “Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence.”

Let us just say that the Liberal's fiscal management is not a strong suit for them. I would like to quote a couple of economic razors from our Prime Minister and the Liberals. Here is one, which we could take to the bank, or not: “the budget will balance itself.”

That is the way that the Liberals have run this country. This is a quote from the Prime Minister saying that budgets just balance themselves. They do not just balance themselves. It takes a lot of work, sacrifice and attention. That is something that we see from the Liberals, supported by the NDP, inattention and fiscal imprudence, which are dragging our nation down.

Here is one that the Prime Minister said a week or two ago: “We're focused on Canadians. Let the bankers worry about the economy.” When we make stupid economic decisions, when there is no fiscal restraint, things spiral out of control. Who pays the price? Canadians pay the price, with higher interest rates, increased mortgage payments and the higher cost of living. That is what we are seeing and what is being felt on the streets and in homes across Canada.

We have also seen that the per capita income in Canada has been stagnant since they have been in power, beginning 2015. The New York Times, at the time it was quoted, said, Canada has the “world's richest” middle class. This was in 2015. I wonder who was in power at that time. It was the Conservatives under Harper.

That is not the case now. We are declining, year after year, in our standard of living in comparison to much of the world. We were one of the top six for many years, for decades. We are now, I do not know, maybe approaching number 30.

That is after the Prime Minister has lost control of spending. A few weeks ago, the Parliamentary Budget Officer reported that the deficit will be $7 billion higher than the Liberal government's own $40-billion spending cap for this year alone. Liberals cannot control one year. It is just not in them. They just do not know how, it seems. That is serious, but it is an unserious government.

The Liberals inherited a surplus budget under the Conservatives. I will say, also, that the Conservatives inherited a surplus budget under the previous prime minister, Paul Martin, of the Liberals. That was a different party.

I was going door to door on the weekend in Fort Langley and Cloverdale for a by-election. I was talking to people, people who had voted for Liberals. They are just shaking their heads now. They said that under Martin, under others, they supported them, but with these guys, it is a clown show. It is not just a clown show. It is a disaster.

It is a disaster and they are being supported. They would not be here if it were not for the NDP. It rests on the NDP.

The Liberals promised in 2015 that there would be a $10-billion deficit and we would be okay after that. That has not been the case at all, for any of those years. We then have a quote from the finance minister. They are two peas in a pod. She called Canada's current state a “vibecession”. That sounds like the disco days. No, this is economics. She said, “Canadians just aren't feeling that good”, which has caused them to slow down their spending, thereby causing vibecession. That is basically what she is saying. It is an insult. She is insulting Canadians, saying that it is all in our heads, that it is not real, that Canadians do not know or understand reality.

It is the finance minister. It is the Prime Minister. It is the Liberal government, backed by the NDP. It just shows how clearly ignorant they are on where Canadians are at and where their policies have dragged our nation to.

I had much more I wanted to talk about on this topic. I will say we would not even have this opportunity to debate if the NDP had voted along with the Liberals. The thing is, the New Democrats, which is a bit surprising, have to show a bit of a separation from the Liberals. If anybody looks at polling from the past year and a half, or even sneaks a peek, it is not going great for the Liberals. I know it is only a snapshot, but there have been lots of snapshots. It has been more like a movie for the past year and a half.

The NDP members say they are not supporting the Liberals, but they vote with them every time, but not here. They have to show a bit of separation: “We are different from the Liberals. Look, we are allowing this debate to continue.” I will say they have missed 35 speaking spots. They have put six speakers up. This is an opportunity to share what is in their hearts and there is a lot of flexibility.

As far as Conservatives go, we do not agree with the agenda of the Liberals. We are quite happy to discuss this. We would much rather have a carbon tax election today.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Madam Speaker, I appreciate my colleague's intervention, especially since he ran for Speaker in this place as well. I think it is really important to talk a bit about the Canada-China foreign investment protection and promotion agreement that his former leader Stephen Harper signed with the Communist Chinese regime.

The cozy Conservative-Communist coalition has actually led to a 31-year agreement. Stephen Harper went over to China, into Beijing, watched all the goose-stepping and celebrated the agreement. There are current Conservative members in this chamber today who are on the press releases and the contribution agreements, who were participating as Communist China was allowed to buy up Canadian companies, like Nexen and others. We were selling Canadian natural resources because the Liberals did not want Petro-Canada to exist; we sold it off under Paul Martin. We were then putting Canadian natural resources up for sale to Communist China.

Will the member apologize for Stephen Harper going over to Beijing and selling Canada out to the Communists because of the cozy relationship between the Conservatives and Communist China?

[Marc Dalton, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

Madam Speaker, I find the NDP member's comments quite interesting. He talks about natural resources and his is a party that, along with the Liberals, stymies all development of natural resources. Whether it be oil and gas, agriculture or fishing, everywhere we look, we see the tentacles of the leftist and socialist parties trying to choke the working Canadian.

I hear it all over the place. People who used to support the NDP say it does not support their jobs, that it supports woke interests. The blue-collar people are leaving the NDP. We would think that with the polls showing the Liberals going down, the NDP would boost up, but it is not the case because Canadians see them as one and the same.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Madam Speaker, I noticed my colleague did not answer the question with regard to Stephen Harper going to Beijing and selling Canada out. That agreement is in place to this day. The member sits with colleagues, who are very close to him, who celebrated the agreement that binds us for 31 years.

New Democrats actually supported keeping Petro-Canada, which was sold off at a loss by Paul Martin at that time. I was here in the chamber when we tried to stop him from doing that and he would not stop. Stephen Harper doubled down on selling Canadian natural resources, even trying to build pipelines out there to ship our oil and natural resources to Communist China for its benefit. The Conservatives have not reconciled that piece of history, which is germane today.

Again, I ask, why does the member not do anything or at least apologize for when Stephen Harper went over to Beijing, celebrated the Communist regime goose-stepping all over Canadians and made sure we were going to put our future at risk with the agreement that was signed and is in print today?

Does the member not have a sense of dignity for Canada? Members come in this chamber, they complain about Communist China and they complain about the Prime Minister's comments about Communist China, while at the same time the former prime minister opened the door.

[Marc Dalton, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

Madam Speaker, I find the member's comments to be quite ignorant when using expressions like “goose-stepping”.

I was not a member in this House at the time, but was in the provincial government in British Columbia. Developing relationships and trade with China are important. We have a lot of trade. Even in the provincial legislature, I remember warning my colleagues that we should not get too joined at the hip with the Communist regime, recognizing who it is.

We need to think of “Canada first” interests, unlike the Liberals and NDP. Trump is bringing in a 25% tariff against Canada. We need to have strong Canada first policies. We are suffering the consequences of poor governance, whether it be in drugs, immigration, resource development and many other respects. The mocking of the president-to-be and his party has been very harmful for our relationship and for Canadians, because most of our exports go to the States.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Madam Speaker, as we are not talking about the motion now, since the last few exchanges and the member's speech had nothing to do with this issue, perhaps I will go off topic, too.

I am wondering if the member can provide his thoughts on the fact that the member for Calgary Nose Hill is implicated in foreign interference. It is certainly alleged that she was influenced to abandon Patrick Brown's campaign for leadership back in 2022, a leadership campaign that ultimately led to the election of the current leader of the Conservative Party. Is he concerned at all, like many Canadians are, that foreign diplomats would approach a member of Parliament and try to influence their support for a candidate? I would ask for a simple yes-or-no answer.

[Marc Dalton, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

Madam Speaker, we have been very clear that we want all the names to be released. We are not trying to hide anything. We are not afraid of anything being released. We are asking the Liberals to release all the names. Conservatives believe in transparency. We want to see who the members of Parliament and senators are. That is important.

Going back to the motion, Conservatives want the truth. The truth is important. We need to shine some light on the truth. That is the only way things will improve and changes will be made.

[Greg McLean, Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Madam Speaker, going back to the debate and what the member said in his speech, what does he think the government is trying to hide in this $400-million scandal we are talking about today where the Liberals refuse to produce the documents? Is he speculating at all about what companies are involved and how much additional money, beyond the $400 million, the government has siphoned off to its friends?

[Marc Dalton, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

Madam Speaker, I had about 20 pages of notes and got to page six. I certainly wanted to discuss money being siphoned off and corruption. That is not a word I use lightly. Time after time with the green slush fund, we have seen the vast majority of the $800-million fund, 82%, going to insiders and companies the money should never have gone to. We have seen the ArriveCAN scam that should have cost a quarter of a million dollars, the WE Charity and so many different things. I would love to be asked more questions.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Madam Speaker, in response to my question, the member said he wants to know who the 11 implicated members of Parliament are. I would suggest to him that one very well might be the member for Calgary Nose Hill. If the RCMP or CSIS was not aware, the member could even be the 12th member, I do not know.

Does the member have any insight into whether she, indeed, was one of the 11 members he speaks of?

[Marc Dalton, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

Madam Speaker, I will repeat myself: All the information should be released. This is important.

Going back to the topic right here, in terms of corruption, we have another former Liberal minister who received $120 million in contracts under a so-called indigenous company. He was claiming to be indigenous, which he is not. It is just a scam. The more we kick the tires, the more rot there is. Canada needs a new government, and soon.

[Dan Muys, Conservative, Flamborough—Glanbrook, ON]

Madam Speaker, it is always an honour to rise on behalf of the hard-working people of Flamborough—Glanbrook, who are struggling with the cost of living challenges, as are millions of Canadians across the country. Families are grappling with the skyrocketing cost of groceries, with rising interest rates on their mortgages, rents that have more than doubled since a decade ago and, of course, a jump in the gas price every time the carbon tax goes up. These are the real, tangible struggles Canadians and people in Flamborough—Glanbrook are facing every day.

Amid these struggles, Canadians are learning more and more about yet another Liberal scandal through this debate. They are upset because they work hard for the tax dollars they send to this place and to the Government of Canada, and that money is clearly being wasted on mismanagement, insider deals and flagrant conflicts of interest.

They know that the $400 million in the SDTC scandal did not go to green technologies or innovations that will create jobs as the program was intended to do; rather, it went to those with Liberal connections. I would note that this is almost half a billion dollars. Canadians know it is part of a pattern with the Liberals.

We can contrast this with the case of a senior I spoke with about a month or so ago. He told me that, despite the good pension he receives from his years of work with a utility, he just had to take a part-time job to help make ends meet, to buy groceries. Grocery prices continue to rise because of the carbon tax. Of course, seniors on a fixed income are hit hardest by this. This is what makes the $400 million in the Sustainable Development Technology Canada fund scandal so egregious.

This is not just a story of bad accounting; it is a story of betrayal. The SDTC fund was created with a noble purpose: to drive innovation, to support small businesses, to invest in sustainable technologies that could help Canada actually meet its emissions targets. This is unlike the carbon tax, which is only a tax grab and a tax plan. Instead, this program has become a glaring example of government mismanagement and misplaced priorities.

The Auditor General's investigation uncovered 186 conflicts of interest connected to SDTC, involving millions of dollars being funnelled to businesses tied to senior Liberal officials. This is not just negligence; it is systemic. The 186 conflicts of interest identified by the Auditor General are what we know about thus far. Surely, more conflicts will be identified in what has yet to be reviewed once these documents are released unredacted. The government needs to turn over the unredacted documents to the RCMP as asked by Parliament, the majority of members in this place.

Corruption does not just happen in a vacuum. It thrives where accountability is weak, where oversight is lacking and where governments forget their fundamental responsibility to the people they serve. The government's repeated ethical failures are not just individual lapses; they are symptoms of a deeper problem, a culture that prioritizes insiders and political optics over transparency and fairness.

It is taxpayer money being used to fund ineligible projects. These projects failed to meet basic criteria, overstated their environmental benefits or, worse, delivered no measurable outcomes at all. Can we believe that?

Four hundred million dollars is not just a number. It represents real opportunities lost. It could have been used to equip hospitals with life-saving MRI machines. It could have been used to strengthen our border, to stop the flow of illegal guns that are threatening communities such as mine. I hear about this every day.

That $400 million could have gone toward supporting small businesses, helping them to adapt in what is clearly an increasingly challenging economy. Imagine if the wasted $400 million had been invested in infrastructure, repairing the aging bridges and roads that Canadians depend on every day. These are not just luxuries. These are lifelines for families to commute to work, for businesses to transport goods and for communities to stay connected. Instead, these funds were squandered, leaving Canadians to contend with potholes and gridlock while Liberal insiders reap the rewards

However, the SDTC scandal is not just a story of waste; it is also one of trust. Canadians are supposed to trust their government to act responsibly, to manage their tax dollars with care and to prioritize the public good, but with every scandal, that trust is eroded. When Parliament demanded transparency and demanded unredacted documents related to this scandal, the Liberal government's response was silence and then refusal, a blatant disregard for the will of Parliament and the trust of Canadians. That is why we are here again today continuing to debate this motion. The government could simply turn over the documents unredacted, which is what this Parliament, the majority of us members here, the representatives of the people who sent us to this place, asked for in June.

I remember when the Prime Minister said, “sunshine is the [world's] best disinfectant”. What a stark difference after nine years. The consequences of this scandal strike to the very core of what it means to govern with integrity and accountability. Unfortunately, the mismanagement seen in the SDTC scandal is not an exception. Rather, it is emblematic of a troubling trend within the government.

Time and time again, we have witnessed decisions that prioritize political optics over meaningful outcomes, leaving Canadians to bear the cost. Nowhere is this pattern more evident than in the carbon tax, a policy that claims to address climate change but in reality disproportionately burdens Canadians while doing little to deliver tangible results. The senior I spoke to pays the price of that carbon tax, but we know, because just recently there was a report that Canada continues to be 62nd out of 67 countries in meeting our emissions targets, that the carbon tax is not an environment plan. It is a tax plan.

It is a tax, and since the carbon tax drives up prices across the board and fuels the cost of living crisis, it is even worse than that. Canadians are justifiably angry when they see this SDTC scandal and they see the Liberal government continue to tax them more and more, while Liberal insiders get away with lining their pockets through a government program. Canadians are footing the bill, and they are tired of footing the bill. The government continues to show its true priorities: protecting insiders, evading accountability and perpetuating a cycle of waste, mismanagement and corruption.

Let us talk about what the government's refusal to release documents related to the SDTC scandal really means. When Parliament demands transparency, it is exercising its duty to uphold accountability on behalf of the people who elected us, yet the government has chosen to ignore those demands. The Speaker of the House has ruled that parliamentary privilege was violated. This is not a minor infraction. This is a blatant disregard for the democratic process.

What does the government have to hide? That certainly is the question that it begs. What are the Liberals so afraid of revealing in these documents? Canadians deserve to know the truth because they are paying the bills. They deserve to see how their hard-earned money is being spent.

The refusal to release the documents is not just a violation of privilege; it is also an insult to every Canadian who pays taxes and to every Canadian who expects integrity and accountability from their leaders. When a government wastes public funds, the impact is not just financial; it is also personal for Canadians. It undermines their confidence that their tax dollars are being used to create opportunities, to solve problems and to build a better future, and it deepens the frustration of the people who are already struggling to make ends meet.

Since we are on the topic of tax dollars being wasted, and the findings of the Auditor General, there was another example yesterday in the Auditor General's report on the CEBA loans during the pandemic. The report says that another $3.5 billion was mismanaged by the Liberals. The Auditor General found that over 77,000 recipients of the Canada emergency business account program went to businesses that did not meet the eligibility requirements. That was another $3.5 billion in wasteful spending by the government.

It is no wonder that I hear from constituents in Waterdown, Binbrook, Mount Hope and in all of the communities throughout Flamborough—Glanbrook who are renewing their mortgage. Maybe they were on a fixed-term mortgage that has come up for renewal, or maybe they are on a variable mortgage. They are seeing higher interest rates. That, of course, has a huge impact when their monthly or biweekly payment is going to be more. It has a massive impact on their household budget.

I remind constituents that this is the impact of government overspending, because we know from major banks that 2% of the interest rate increases, and therefore obviously 2% of the mortgage rate increases, is attributable to government overspending. Whether it is increased taxes or increased interest rates, it is Canadians who are paying the price when the Liberals try to sweep scandals like SDTC under the rug and continue the cover-up. People who are renewing mortgages in the communities in my riding pay the price.

What is worse is that when governments waste tax dollars and evade transparency, they weaken the public's faith in our institutions. Accountability is not just a political talking point; it is the foundation of our healthy democracy. We must recommit ourselves to the values that Canadians hold dear: honesty, fairness and respect for the public trust, respect for tax dollars and the work that goes into providing them. The scandal represents more than just an ethical lapse; it is also a betrayal of the trust of Canadians in their government. It sends a dangerous message that accountability is optional, that rules are for others and that people in power can operate with impunity.

Sadly, this is not the first time we have seen this kind of behaviour from the Liberal government. It is part of a disturbing pattern. We can think back to the WE Charity scandal, where hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars were funnelled into an organization with deep connections to the Prime Minister's family, or to the SNC-Lavalin affair, where senior officials attempted to interfere in a criminal prosecution to protect a politically connected corporation.

More recently, we can think back to the ArriveCAN app, which we know could have been produced by a couple of smart people in a basement, maybe over a case of beer. It started with an initial price tag of $80,000 but ballooned to an over $60-million fiasco. That is the amount we know about thus far; it could be more. The fiasco exposed yet another example of the government's inability or unwillingness to manage taxpayer dollars responsibly.

Of course, as my other colleagues have brought up, let us not forget about the Winnipeg lab cover-up. The government chose to prorogue Parliament rather than allow Canadians to know what really transpired in that lab. Time and time again, we see the government prioritize secrecy over accountability, insiders over taxpayers and political survival over the public good.

Let us also not forget that it was the ad scam scandal in the early 2000s that resulted in the Gomery inquiry that would eventually bring down the Liberal government of that day. It is worth noting that scandal involved $40 million. Today we are talking about the SDTC scandal that involves $400 million. It is ten times the size, yet the refusal to provide the documents is treated so casually. A $40-million scandal brought down a government. Today there is a $400-million scandal and a refusal to release the documents to the RCMP, as Parliament has ordered.

What was true then, in the early 2000s with ad scam, is true today. It is the same question: What do the Liberals have to hide? In each of these scandals I have mentioned, we see the same playbook: waste, secrecy and a refusal to be held accountable. Canadians who pay taxes are tired of it. They are tired of a government that prioritizes insiders over taxpayers, seeing the money they worked so hard for squandered on projects and programs that deliver little benefit. They are tired of bearing the cost of the government's failures through policies like the carbon tax and other taxes that are levied to pay for these wasteful spending. These unnecessary taxes, coupled with scandals like SDTC, create a perfect storm of financial strain and shattered trust. Canadians are left wondering, if the government can waste $400 million with no consequences, why should they believe any tax revenue is being used responsibly? It is not just about dollars and cents; it is about trust in government, leadership and the very institutions that are supposed to serve the people. When Canadians see a government that refuses to release the documents, hides behind excuses and repeatedly puts its friends and allies ahead of public good, that trust is eroded.

The impact of this serious erosion goes beyond politics and affects the very fabric of our democracy. It undermines the belief that government exists to serve the people, not the other way around. The government had the opportunity to do the right thing. It could have chosen transparency, acknowledged its mistakes and taken steps to rebuild trust. It could have released those documents, unredacted. It still can, but instead it continues to choose secrecy and defiance, further deepening the divide between itself and the Canadians it is supposed to represent. The cost of this distrust is more than just political; it leads to disengagement, skepticism and a growing belief that government itself is incapable of serving the public interest, which is why accountability and integrity matter. It is also why the Conservative Party will not stop fighting to restore these values to government. We will continue to demand answers, to hold the government accountable and to ensure the voices of Canadians are heard in the House.

The time for excuses is over. The time for accountability is now. It is not just about addressing one scandal, but addressing the culture of entitlement and mismanagement that has plagued the government for far too long. Canadians deserve better. They deserve a government that respects their hard-earned dollars, prioritizes their needs and upholds the principles of democracy and accountability. Conservatives stand ready to deliver that kind of leadership.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

On March 25, 2022, the MP was endorsed by Patrick Brown. On June 7, a month and a half later, he officially switched and started supporting the Leader of the Opposition. Nine days later, on June 16, the member for Calgary Nose Hill left and we know that she was contacted by foreign diplomats.

Can the member comment as to whether he was contacted by foreign diplomats?

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Liberal, Alexandra Mendes]

The hon. member knows that does not really relate to the hon. member's speech.

The hon. member has about 20 seconds to provide an answer, if he so wishes.

[Dan Muys, Conservative, Flamborough—Glanbrook, ON]

Madam Speaker, I was absolutely not contacted by foreign diplomats.

What I can tell the member is that I made that decision of my own volition because I watched the hon. member for Carleton and I saw that he had the qualities of leadership we needed in our party. He had the qualities of leadership we needed for the prime minister of Canada. Every single day since then, as I have watched him here in the chamber, through this Parliament and on the road in southern Ontario, I see why he is the prime minister that Canadians and Canada need—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Liberal, Alexandra Mendes]

We are done. The debate is done.

[An hon. member]

Oh, oh!

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Liberal, Alexandra Mendes]

The hon. member did stop himself. He started pronouncing the name, but he corrected himself.

A motion to adjourn the House under Standing Order 38 deemed to have been moved.

Foreign Affairs

[Mike Morrice, Green, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, I am back tonight to continue to call for action from the federal government in the face of an ongoing genocide in Gaza, one that has been documented and affirmed by experts, including the University Network for Human Rights, the special rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967, and the UN special committee.

A few weeks ago, in question period, I spoke of an IDF missile strike that had burned Palestinians alive at a hospital tent camp. In the time since, Gaza now has the highest number of child amputees per capita in the world. More aid workers have been killed, and as a result, aid organizations like World Central Kitchen have had to pause their operations in Gaza altogether, while 1.1 million in Gaza face catastrophic hunger. UN officials say there are no safe areas in Gaza. Nearly 70% of the over 44,000 killed are women and children.

In the face of all of this, the world must not sit idly by. Canada must not sit idly by. Yet today, we remain complicit, and the calls to act continue to echo across the country. Just this morning, a hundred Jewish Canadians occupied the Confederation Building on Parliament Hill, demanding the Government of Canada end its complicity in this genocide.

Here are the words of one of the organizers, Niall Ricardo: “Our politicians cannot be complacent in these marble hallways while Israel continues to burn Palestinians alive in their tents”. Niall is right.

Meanwhile, Dr. Mohammed Awad, coordinator of the Coalition of Canadian Palestinian Organizations, recently said at committee, “The Palestinian people have been failed several times, more and more by the international community and, unfortunately, by Canada as well.”

There is much the Government of Canada could do today if it were serious about ending its complicity in this genocide. At the bare minimum, it could start by enacting a true two-way arms embargo on Israel and cancelling all active military export permits to the country. Second, Canada could, today, recognize the state of Palestine, which should be self-evident if Canada believes in, and it says it does by its foreign policy, a two-state solution. How can we possibly believe in a two-state solution if Canada does not affirm that one of the two states even exists? This, at a time when experts have shared at committee in recent months that it is an obviously critical step for peace and preservation in the region.

Canada can and should call for an end to the occupation of Palestinian territories.

The government could fix the temporary resident visa program for Palestinian Canadian family members looking to get out of Gaza, following the recent Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East report showing this program was intended to fail. We could follow through on our Geneva Convention obligations, including preventing genocide. We could sanction extremist cabinet ministers who have said, for example, that starving civilians in Gaza might be justified, or that perpetrators of settler violence are heroes.

Years from now, no doubt, politicians will come together to memorialize the genocide in Gaza, but more important than those words of memoriam in future years is action right now.

Tonight I ask the parliamentary secretary, again, when will the government's actions align with its words when it says, “Never again”?

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs (Consular Affairs)]

Madam Speaker, I will begin by thanking the member for Kitchener Centre for his question and his ongoing attention to this subject.

We too share the member's immense sense of grief, and our hearts break for the tragic loss of civilian life in Israel and Gaza. In particular, we grieve for the children, who have been disproportionately affected by this ongoing conflict. However, let us also acknowledge that this debate is taking place after a ceasefire was secured between Israel and Hezbollah. Though we remain horrified by the loss of civilian life in Lebanon and northern Israel, this ceasefire is the product of tireless and creative diplomacy. As our world becomes increasingly unstable, direct diplomatic engagement remains the most productive tool in building peace.

Of course, the horrific attacks by Hamas against Israeli citizens on October 7 still shock us all. We continue to condemn Hamas, a listed terrorist organization, unequivocally. We will never forget the pain and suffering caused by its heinous acts of violence. Canada also condemns Hamas's unacceptable treatment of hostages. We continue to call for not only the immediate and unconditional release of all remaining hostages but also the return of the bodies of hostages killed in Gaza.

What has been happening in Gaza is catastrophic. The humanitarian situation was already dire. Civilians in Gaza have nowhere else to go and, as the minister has said, asking them to move again is unacceptable. The violence must stop. Canada has been calling for an immediate, sustainable ceasefire for months, but this cannot be one-sided; Hamas must lay down its arms.

Humanitarian aid must also be urgently increased and sustained. The need for humanitarian assistance in Gaza has never been greater. Rapid, safe and unimpeded humanitarian relief must be provided to civilians. Canada was the first G7 country to act, and we will continue to work with partners towards ensuring sustained access to humanitarian assistance for civilians, including food, water, medical care, fuel, shelter and access for humanitarian workers. Today, Canada has announced $215 million in humanitarian assistance to address the urgent needs of vulnerable civilians in this crisis.

When it comes to UNRWA, we understand the vital role it plays in delivering aid to Palestinian civilians. Legislation passed by the Israeli government aimed at revoking the privileges and immunities of UNRWA is cause for grave concern. It is also critical that UNRWA continue its reform program, demonstrate its commitment to the principle of neutrality and ensure that its activities remain entirely in line with its mandate. We continue to urge the Israeli government to abide by its international obligations and allow for the full, rapid, safe and unhindered delivery of humanitarian assistance. Civilians continue to bear the brunt of the unfolding tragedy. Canada's commitment to life-saving humanitarian aid remains unwavering.

We condemn the killing of civilians in Lebanon, Gaza, the West Bank and Israel. We continue to insist that civilians be protected. Attacks on hospitals, aid delivery sites and refugee camps have caused the deaths of dozens of civilians seeking refuge.

When it comes to South Africa's case at the International Court of Justice, the court has been clear on the provisional measures. Israel must ensure the delivery of basic services and essential humanitarian assistance, and it must protect civilians. The court's decisions on provisional measures are binding.

We have also seen the expansion of settlements accelerating in the West Bank as settler violence continues. We continue to respond to the urgent needs—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Liberal, Alexandra Mendes]

The hon. member for Kitchener Centre.

[Mike Morrice, Green, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, I appreciate that the parliamentary secretary spoke of the importance of humanitarian aid getting into Gaza. She also spoke of condemning the murder of civilians in Gaza. In light of that, what I have been calling for is what we have heard from activists across the country: Canada should resume its work as a peacemaker in the world.

If we are going to stand up in the face of this genocide in Gaza, we should start by calling for a true, two-way arms embargo and following through on that. The parliamentary secretary and I have spoken about that in this place before, along with recognizing the state of Palestine, as I shared earlier. In light of her comments tonight, will she advocate within the government to ensure that we have a true, two-way arms embargo in place?

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

Madam Speaker, Canada is committed to lasting peace in the Middle East, including the creation of a Palestinian state living side by side in peace and security with Israel. Canada is prepared to recognize a Palestinian state at the right time, conducive to a lasting peace and not necessarily as the last step along the path.

Let me assure the hon. member that we remain fixated on this conflict. Just yesterday, my colleague, the member for Don Valley West and Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs, delivered Canada's national address to the Cairo Ministerial Conference to Enhance the Humanitarian Response in Gaza. The needs of civilians in Gaza are dire. That is why, on Friday, the government announced an additional $50 million in humanitarian assistance, raising the total to $215 million. Canada will continue to be there. We will work with our partners and allies. The violence must stop.

Carbon Pricing

[Martin Shields, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

Madam Speaker, a CBC story last week listed the 10 top U.S. imports from Canada in 2023. It totalled $340 billion. Oil, gas and petroleum products made up $160 billion of that, which is 48%. Agricultural products made up $30 billion, which is 10%. Agricultural products depend a lot on oil, gas and petroleum products when we are talking about fertilizer and machinery. Transportation equipment made up $74 billion, which is 25%. Transportation equipment is steel, metal and all sorts of things made from the resource sector.

This is a tremendous amount of export to a country that is looking for self-sufficiency in North America, and it comes from Canada. A lot of it comes from Canadian exports. We are over 50%. Does the U.S. have a cap on emissions and a cap on oil and gas production now? No, it does not. Has the President-elect indicated he would put an emissions cap on oil and gas production? No. He is looking to expand their oil and gas production, and he is looking for more from his biggest trading partner in oil and gas: Canada. That is why we need North American energy security.

However, the cap would cause a reduction in oil of one million barrels per day by 2030, with an additional cut of one million barrels per day by 2035. This cap on oil emissions is a cap on responsible Canadian oil production, jobs and paycheques. In Alberta, we are talking about a reduction of 92,000 jobs. We are talking about $12 billion in government revenues lost.

The Conference Board of Canada think tank estimates the cap would reduce Canada's GDP by $1 trillion by 2030. That is a loss of 151,000 jobs across Canada by 2030, slowing the GDP by 2030 from 15.3% to 14.3%. Deloitte estimates Alberta will see 3.6% less investment, which is a 4.5% decrease in the province's economic output. Also, Ontario would lose 15,000 jobs and $2.3 billion from its economy. Quebec would even lose thousands of jobs.

I know my colleagues across the way have often talked about other forms of energy production. There are solar and wind. I have the largest ones in Canada in my riding for solar and wind energy production. The Liberals were complaining about the premier putting in a moratorium. They did a six-month review and in one of the reviews, it said not to build them on irrigated land, which there is a lot of in my riding because that is for crops, yet I still have the largest ones in Canada in my riding. The other day at seven o'clock in the morning, there were no sunlight rays hitting solar panels, no wind moving and not one iota of power was coming out of solar or wind that morning. At seven o'clock in the morning, there was nothing. What supplied it? Natural gas was supplying the energy we needed in Alberta.

With respect to the products it takes to make solar and wind energy, we are talking about steel, we are talking about aluminum and we are talking about plastics. All those things to make solar and wind energy come from the resource industry, other than glass. Now here is an interesting thing about glass: It takes sand. It takes a specific kind of sand. National Geographic reports that China is destroying estuaries all over the world as mining companies get that best small, round sand to make glass. It is not the stuff in the deserts, which is rough. From the National Geographic research—