Madam Speaker, first, I will deal with the assertion that the Prime Minister has never tried to avoid facing the House on this issue. On March 24, 2020, hoping that we would be in a panic, the government tried to get unanimous consent to push through a provision. This would have given it the power to avoid facing a confidence vote in the House for a little over year and a half.
When the opposition showed some backbone, the government was forced to move to a normal process and to have some give-and-take. The Conservatives spent all day going back and forth, working on adjustments, and the provision was removed from the legislation. To be clear, it was done because the government and the Prime Minister could not get away with it.
With regard to the issue of Stephen Harper proroguing to avoid a confidence vote, the member is almost right. In 2008, shortly after the election, there was a move to bring down the government. The House was prorogued, and it came back; the opposition could then have brought down the government, had it so chosen. What it did instead was to propose an arrangement under which the government would spend a certain amount of money on infrastructure in order to deal with the 2008 economic crisis, and there would be periodic reviews of that.
At any of those review points, the government could have been brought down on a confidence motion. Indeed, that was built into the structure of the deal. All the parties participated, and if the member has a problem with that, he should go back and consult with the members of his party who were present.