Mr. Speaker, I have known that member for a long time and, frankly, she is normally a lot better than that. Maybe this illustrates the pitfalls of reading a speech written by political staff, because that speech contained a litany of false personal attacks and no engagement with the substance of the bill.
Here is the reality. Faith communities across this country have raised significant concerns about this bill, in particular the religious defence. That religious defence issue was a late amendment that was not studied at all at committee. There were no witnesses called to testify on the issue of religious defence. It was a backroom deal cooked up by the Liberals and the Bloc.
There is not a single faith community that had these concerns before that has been placated by the fake compromise of the Liberals. Why did she choose not to address these serious, substantive problems with the bill and to instead resort to personal attacks?