Erin O'Toole

[Canadian NATO Parliamentary Association, October 31st, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, I rise to bring three dates to the attention of the House.

The first, September 17, was when the hon. member for Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill told the House that she had lost confidence in the Prime Minister and the Liberal government, and crossed the floor. She relied on her oath as a former officer to do that. The Prime Minister at that time said that was fine and wished her well.

The next date was last night, October 30, devil's night, when the true plot of our feminist Prime Minister came to pass. He marched in his zombies on devil's night to vote against a female member of Parliament who has served in the Canadian Armed Forces. Even the cabinet was there for that shameful episode.

The member for Etobicoke Centre, who has spent millions of dollars fighting for integrity in elections, stormed the stage to run a sham meeting that has no application.

The final date will be October 21, 2019, when more Canadians will be able to follow her lead and support the Conservatives.

[Justice, October 30th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, the minister says these questions are inappropriate. In the first part of question period, there was a lot of talk about data protection. Mark Norman wants data for his legal defence. The only protection going on is the Liberals protecting their butts, both literally and figuratively, with Mr. Butts.

Will the government permit the Clerk of the Privy Council to appear before the ethics committee to confirm that none of the materials related to the shipbuilding cabinet discussions have been destroyed, deleted or amended?

[Justice, October 30th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, the Privy Council investigation into leaks from the Liberal cabinet meetings on shipbuilding revealed that 73 people were aware of the substance of the discussions. Of the 73, most were ignored; some were offered deals; one journalist was offered a job, and only one person is facing trial.

The Prime Minister speculated that Admiral Norman might face charges, and eventually those charges came. Of the 73 people, only one is facing charges. How did the Prime Minister know that only Admiral Mark Norman would be charged?

[Ethics, October 29th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, I am very sorry to be meandering around these discussions around shipbuilding when a gentleman's life is on the line in terms of his liberty.

Vice-Admiral Mark Norman is facing trial. The Privy Council Office's investigation confirmed that 73 people were aware of leaks from the Liberal shipbuilding discussions, yet only one is facing trial.

If the minister does not like these questions, he should stand in the House today and confirm that they will waive cabinet confidence and release all documents to Vice-Admiral Norman.

[Ethics, October 29th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, the minister does not seem to confirm or deny my question in the line of questioning on whether the Minister of Intergovernmental and Northern Affairs and Internal Trade was involved in shipyard decisions.

What is interesting is that a few months later, in January 2016, the minister signed a conflict of interest screen related to the Irving shipbuilding affair. That leads me to this question. Was the Minister of Intergovernmental and Northern Affairs and Internal Trade involved in discussions related to Irving shipbuilding just ahead of the imposition of his conflict of interest screen?

[Ethics, October 29th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, on November 19, 2015, just days after the Liberal cabinet was sworn in, they tried to stop the contract for the Davie shipyard. Media reports have told us that the President of the Treasury Board and the Minister of Environment were involved in that decision. My question today: Was the Minister of Intergovernmental and Northern Affairs and Internal Trade involved in cabinet discussions related to shipbuilding?

[Ethics, October 24th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister suggests he has provided that information and we are suggesting he has not. I would ask him to table the documents they have shared on what date he was offered a job.

What is really concerning about this is that James Cudmore's stories led to a Privy Council investigation in January. That investigation revealed six separate leaks and 73 people who knew the details of the Liberal cabinet meeting. I want the Prime Minister to tell this House how many of those 73 were Atlantic Liberal MPs.

[Ethics, October 24th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, on November 4, the Liberal cabinet was sworn in and within days it was trying to change the Davie contract. CBC journalist James Cudmore wrote three stories on this controversy. The last one was on December 21, and on January 8, he left his job with the CBC.

The Prime Minister is trying to be cute here. On what day was James Cudmore offered a job, and who in his office offered that job? Was it on Christmas Day? Give us the day, through you, Mr. Speaker, when James Cudmore was offered a job.

[Ethics, October 23rd, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, I would invite you to comment on whether these questions can be asked in here, because what we have today is a farce, a tri-service farce.

We have a retired air force colonel covering for a retired army colonel about ruining the career of a navy admiral. CBC reporter James Cudmore wrote stories that led to a PCO and RCMP investigation, but then he was immediately hired by that minister.

On what date, minister, did you or the Prime Minister offer James Cudmore a job?

[Ethics, October 23rd, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, in late November 2015, the Privy Council Office launched an investigation into supposed leaks from the Liberal cabinet meeting that suspended the Davie Shipbuilding contract.

The PCO engaged the RCMP, largely based on the James Cudmore story. The Minister of Environment and Climate Change and the President of the Treasury Board were interviewed as part of the investigation.

If a federal investigation was under way based almost entirely on a CBC news story by James Cudmore, what would possibly have possessed the Liberals to make the decision to hire James Cudmore and place him in the centre of the investigation?