House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2025, with 42% of the vote.
Public Safety May 27th, 2019
Mr. Speaker, what we do know is that criminal organizations and Mexican cartels have set up shop here in Canada, especially in Montreal. We know that there are nearly 200 criminals, including contract killers.
The Prime Minister changed the immigration rules in 2016. He wanted to be nice to Mexico, and we have been having problems ever since.
When will the government change the rules to keep criminals from ending up here?
Public Safety May 27th, 2019
Mr. Speaker, it is bad enough that ISIS traitors move back to Canada and that illegal migrants crossing our borders are greeted by a welcoming committee. Now we learn that criminal members of Mexican cartels are living comfortably in Canada and doing business here. That is another consequence of the Prime Minister's rosy outlook.
What is the plan for sending these criminals home and stopping others from coming here?
Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act May 17th, 2019
Mr. Speaker, I know that we are short of time, but it would be great to have at least 10 minutes to answer my Liberal colleague.
He just said that, ultimately, opening our borders and inviting the whole world to come and settle here would be a good idea. However, this government is currently trying to amend the safe third country agreement because it clearly sees that the agreement makes no sense and cannot work. I think my hon. colleague needs to go back and do his homework.
Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act May 17th, 2019
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question.
As I reminded the minister in committee, and as I have repeatedly reminded the House, I must remind him that the Library of Parliament produced a document that clarifies the budget issue.
The Liberals say we cut $300 million, but none of that was cut from services for front-line officers. They were administrative measures, and they did not hurt our officers, so the members can stop bringing that up.
Now, it is not the opposition's problem if there are only 28 days left in this parliamentary session. It is the government's problem, because it mismanaged its legislative agenda from the start. It got bogged down in scandal after scandal. We are going to do what needs to be done. The Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security still has way too much on its plate. It is still studying Bill C-93. It has not finished studying the bill or the cybersecurity report, for starters. I do not see how the committee can get this done in the time it has left. Committee meetings still need to happen, and the Senate still has work to do, so it will be impossible to wrap this up before the end of the session.
Justice May 17th, 2019
Mr. Speaker, I will take no lessons from the parliamentary secretary.
In the SNC-Lavalin affair, they tried to lecture us on the law. It is one corruption scandal after the next with this government. We are not making any of this up. According to this morning's Globe and Mail—and I think it was on the front page, so I am sure they checked their facts—it was the Prime Minister who had a little temper tantrum, like a spoiled kid, and wanted to involve the RCMP. That is what the Prime Minister did regarding the Davie shipyard matter.
Since when can a Prime Minister direct the RCMP to investigate a matter because he is upset about something? That is not how it works.
Why did the Liberal members on the committee refuse—
Justice May 17th, 2019
Mr. Speaker, the truth is that the Prime Minister desperately wanted to find a scapegoat for the cabinet involving the Davie case.
Twice, the Prime Minister stated publicly, before the end of the investigation, that Vice-Admiral Norman would be charged. The Liberals withheld evidence from the RCMP, the Attorney General and Mr. Norman's defence team.
To make matters worse, the Prime Minister said publicly that the RCMP acted independently.
Does the Prime Minister realize that his actions toward this great military man constitute a serious abuse of power befitting a police state?
Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act May 17th, 2019
Mr. Speaker, I think my colleague from Cariboo—Prince George for that great question.
As I said in my speech, in 2015, the Liberals promised to get this done, but then they waited three and a half years before taking action, with just a couple weeks left in their term. They did not have time to speak to the union and the employees who would be affected. They want to pass a bill that would allow the public to complain about their work, yet they did not even talk to them. I cannot understand that.
That is why I cannot agree to the government's request to pass this bill quickly. The message that sends to Canadians is that our officers are incompetent, that the public wants to complain, and that we have to hurry up so people can file complaints.
The Prime Minister created a mess. His government did not help our officers, and now it wants to allow public complaints as fast as possible. I disagree with that.
Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act May 17th, 2019
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question.
The committee already has a packed schedule, so I do not see how we could deal with this directly, as he suggests. We have had meetings that demonstrate that our schedule is totally full.
Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act May 17th, 2019
Mr. Speaker, I thank my NDP colleague for her question. It is actually more of a statement, but I completely agree with her.
They must be desperate, if they are introducing a bill such as this at the end of the session and at the end of their term. The Liberals will try to say that they introduced it, checking off another item on their 2015 list of promises, but that the opposition prevented them from passing it. Everyone knows full well that it is not true. Had the bill been introduced two months ago, we would have had time to pass it.
My colleague is right. This is just another desperate attempt.
Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act May 17th, 2019
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her question.
One of the main concerns shared by all opposition parties is that the people involved were not consulted in any way through the agency's union. There were no discussions to let them know that legislation was being passed to allow the public to file complaints about their work or to ask them whether certain things should be done differently. No, the Liberals failed to see the importance of consulting the union, the people who will be directly affected by this legislation.
From the outset, that has been one of the reasons why we cannot support this bill without reservation. We need to complete the process properly and, as I said earlier, we definitely will not have enough time to call all the witnesses to appear in committee and complete the study before the end of this session.