Andrew Scheer

[Justice, April 10th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister seems to be missing an important fact here. It is that I am not withdrawing my remarks. In fact, I am standing by them and I repeated them outside of the House of Commons. Once again, if the Prime Minister is so sure of his case, will he commence court proceedings so that Canadians can finally hear the truth about this scandal?

[Justice, April 10th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister asked his lawyers to send me a letter threatening me with a lawsuit if I did not retract the statement I made on March 29. Not only will I not retract it, but I stand by every single word of that statement. I repeated it outside the chamber.

When will I see him in court to discuss his corruption scandal?

[Justice, April 10th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is still threatening to sue me over a statement that I made on March 29. I stand by every single word of that statement. In fact, I just repeated it moments ago outside the chamber. He claims I will face consequences for exposing his potentially illegal interference in a criminal trial. However, the only consequence seems to be that the Prime Minister will be forced to finally tell the truth.

When will I see him in court?

[Justice, April 8th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, this is nothing but a disgusting attempt to deflect from their own despicable handling of this affair. We will always denounce those who promote hateful ideologies while we stand up for energy workers who are fighting for their jobs.

Again, if the government is so sure of its case, why can the government House leader not inform the House on what day the Prime Minister will show up in court under oath?

[Justice, April 8th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, the government House leader knows that is just not true. I stand by everything I said in that statement.

However, here is what we do know. The Prime Minister has done everything he can to try to shut down criticism. He has shut down two parliamentary investigations. He used his majority in the House to block calls for a public inquiry, and he kicked two members out of his caucus for the sole crime of telling the truth, all to cover up his corruption.

Once again, if the government House leader is so sure that the Liberals have such a firm case, when will they start court proceedings?

[Justice, April 8th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, the government House leader wants to talk about falsehoods. Let us run down a few of them. The Prime Minister said that the former attorney general never came to him with her concerns. That turned out to be false. The Prime Minister said that he never put pressure on the former attorney general to change her decision. That turned out to be false. The Prime Minister said that he had no idea about the phone call between the Clerk of the Privy Council and the former attorney general. That turned out to be a falsehood as well.

Is the Prime Minister aware of what the consequences are for saying falsehoods under oath in court?

[Justice, April 8th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, they asked a yes-or-no question, and I can answer a yes-or-no question. No, I have not deleted tweets, because I stand by everything that I said in those statements.

The reality is that the Prime Minister led a campaign of interference and is now trying to silence his adversaries. Canadians deserve answers without the Prime Minister trying to obstruct the questions.

When will the Prime Minister proceed with his lawsuit?

[Justice, April 8th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, for months now, the Prime Minister has done everything he can to avoid accountability in his handling of the SNC-Lavalin corruption scandal. Now he has indicated that he intends to sue me to stop my criticisms of his government's actions. Canadians are looking forward to this. Canadians are looking forward to the Prime Minister finally appearing under oath and testifying in a setting that he cannot control himself.

Can the government inform the House on what date these court proceedings will commence?

[Justice, April 3rd, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, I note that he just cannot seem to bring himself to answer a very simple question. Is it yes or no? There is a reason this is important. It is because from the beginning he has always claimed that he never put pressure on the former attorney general. In that phone call, the clerk said four times that the Prime Minister was “firm”. He also claims that he had no idea the phone call took place and that she never brought her concerns to his office.

Once again, is the answer yes or no? Did he know anything about the call before or after? It is one of the two options: yes or no.

[Justice, April 3rd, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, nobody would have to dig through anything if the Prime Minister did not abuse his power to interfere in a court proceeding. Nobody would have to dig through anything if the Prime Minister could just answer a simple question.

Did he know about that phone call on December 19, yes or no?