Mike Lake

[Committees of the House, November 18th, 2024]

Madam Speaker, actually, the quote-unquote comment was “fake news” from the hon. member, so that point of order seems to be fake news in and of itself.

I serve in an Edmonton riding. I have served for 19 years in the House. I have had the opportunity to—

[Committees of the House, November 18th, 2024]

Madam Speaker, before I start my comments today, I have an opportunity, because I am standing up, to recognize Sabrina Larson, who has worked in my constituency office for 16 years. She is here in Ottawa today to get a long service award. I cannot say whether she is in the House but I am very thankful for the work she has done for many, many years, helping my constituents handle their casework. I serve what is no doubt the largest constituency by population in the country, with a lot of casework. We think there are between 260,000 and 280,000 people right now in Edmonton—Wetaskiwin. I am looking forward to the boundary changes in the next election. I should mention that Sabrina's husband, Laine, is here in Ottawa. I am very thankful for him as well.

The new constituency, when the boundaries take effect at the election, will be switched from Edmonton—Wetaskiwin to Leduc—Wetaskiwin. In that new constituency, the community of Maskwacis will be added to my constituency. I am very much looking forward to the riding boundaries being moved in that way. It is very important for Maskwacis to be included in the region we are in.

Of course, the hon. member for Edmonton Griesbach and I may not agree on very many things, but as he spoke today, I was listening intently. I appreciated his comments, and I appreciated, especially, his shout-out to Willie Littlechild, who was the member of Parliament for that area, I believe, from 1984 to 1993, or in that time frame anyway.

We also have a connection in that he is very involved with the Edmonton Oilers Community Foundation. I worked for the Edmonton Oilers before I was elected. I am very thankful to Willie for his contributions to the broader community and specifically to the community of Maskwacis.

This debate is really important. As I was listening to the debate today, I was struck by Liberal members, including the Liberal member for Winnipeg North, the parliamentary secretary to the government House leader, and, earlier, the member for Saint John—Rothesay, standing up and completely discounting the importance of this conversation, completely demeaning the fact that we would even have this conversation today, talking about how unimportant it is.

Of course, the member for Winnipeg North called it “fake news”. Just a few minutes ago, as we were talking, he referred to the whole debate we are having today as “fake news”. Interestingly, Conservatives have brought up this issue at various committees in the House. We are having this debate today because of a concurrence motion brought forward by Conservatives.

The member will have the opportunity to vote on this concurrence motion and the amendments in the coming days. We will look forward to seeing how the member for Winnipeg North votes.

I want to focus on the member of Parliament for Edmonton Centre and the broader issue here. Of course, he is the Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Official Languages—

[Oil and Gas Industry, November 7th, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, after nine years, the NDP-Liberal government is not worth the cost. The government's own analysis admits that its cap on production will cost Canadians thousands of jobs and billions of dollars. Meanwhile, a Canadian company that cannot get a pipeline approved in Canada is investing $700 million in a U.S. project, and in 2023, the Liberals increased oil and gas imports to Canada, with over 40 million barrels shipped across the Atlantic from Nigeria and Saudi Arabia alone.

Why is the Prime Minister so intent on funding powerful paycheques in the U.S. and everywhere else, while Canadians struggle to afford food and housing?

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, November 1st, 2024]

With regard to funding provided through the Housing Accelerator Fund: (a) how much funding has been provided to date, broken down by city or municipality and by province or territory; and (b) what are the key milestones that must be achieved before the federal government provides the next Housing Accelerator Fund payment, broken down by city or municipality?

[Questions on the Order Paper, November 1st, 2024]

With regard to the Federal Lands Initiative, since the program launched in February 2019: how many homes (i) have been built, (ii) are currently under development?

[Privilege, October 28th, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, again, the hon. member stands up and asserts that I am incorrect in what I said, but he does not actually reference what I said.

Yes, our leader would be restricted. It is very clear. We could say he would be “gagged” or whatever other word we use, but he would be restricted in his ability to say things that he learns in the briefing. People might have different opinions on everything that is going on. This foreign interference scandal is one of the most important issues facing our country today. We need the government to name the names. We have been very clear that we want the government to do so; then we can decide where we go from there to protect our country.

[Privilege, October 28th, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, I absolutely agree with that. Anything that stops the Liberal-NDP partnership from continuing to destroy the economics of our country is important. I also want to point out the reason we are having this debate, which is that the Liberals continue to do exactly what the hon. member said. They relitigate a debate they already lost a vote on, which was the opposition day motion. That vote is done. It was passed in the House. They did not win. We are here today because members such as the hon. member continue to stand up in the House and relitigate that debate. This can end immediately if the government simply complies with the conditions of the order that was passed in the House.

[Privilege, October 28th, 2024]

It is interesting, Mr. Speaker, to listen carefully to that question. The assertion the member makes at the start of the question is that I have said something that is incorrect, but nowhere in her question does she actually itemize anything I said that was incorrect. She talks about evidence, but she does not give one piece of evidence that anything I said was incorrect.

The fact of the matter is that she talks about the privilege motion, but it is important to go back to the opposition day motion for the production of papers that was passed. The Liberals voted against the motion, but the House voted in favour of it. We are here today because the government clearly has not complied.

If the member gets another chance, I would love to hear what she would deem incorrect that I had to say in my speech. I assert that there is nothing and that she knows there is nothing. This is just part of the debate we have seen week in and week out since we came back in September.

[Privilege, October 28th, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, I referenced that the election in January 2006 was precipitated by the sponsorship scandal. It was a minority Liberal government at the time that had been supported by the NDP. We saw that it eventually got to a point for the NDP that the scandal and information coming out was bad enough that no one with a conscience serving in opposition could possibly prop up a government in that circumstance.

As I mentioned earlier, the situation we are facing today is infinitely worse than the situation in 2005. I think Canadians find it absolutely abhorrent that members from the NDP, particularly, and the Bloc, from time to time, are finding ways to twist themselves into pretzels to support a government that is so clearly on the wrong path for Canadians.

[Privilege, October 28th, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, the member has asked me a lot of questions, but this might be the first relevant question he has asked in many years. The reality is that, when asked about this, the Conservative leader, the future prime minister, said in the House of Commons the other day that he is not going to be gagged by the Liberal government.

He has the support of the person who was in charge of holding us to account when we were in government, as opposition leader. Tom Mulcair said the same thing: He would not do it if he were the Conservative leader either. The Liberals would like nothing more than for the Conservative leader to take a briefing he cannot talk about so that he cannot ask the questions he is asking in the House of Commons. Those questions are super uncomfortable for the Liberals.

This whole issue is connected to that. It is all about government censorship and the government controlling information Canadians get. I hope the member will take to heart the question that he has just asked, go into caucus on Wednesday, fight for a spot at the microphone and demand that the government release the names of everybody affected by foreign interference in the House.