Online Harms Act  The provisions in Bill C-63 that I have just described are anathema to these principles. To be clear, Canadians should not be expected to have their right to protected speech chilled or limited in order to be safe online, which is what Bill C-63 would ask of them. Bill C-63 would also create a new three-headed, yet-to-exist bureaucracy.

Online Harms Act  As well, the bill would force much-needed reforms into a long, onerous regulatory process with no clear end in sight. There are people watching this today who will fear deepfaked intimate images being used to harass and bully them in their high schools. The government could have made a small amendment to the Criminal Code to update existing laws to protect Canadians in the digital age, but it has chosen this onerous, widely panned approach instead of protecting Canadians' rights.

Business of Supply  In 2024, there were 13 Canadian companies named to the Global Cleantech 100 list. This is a clear testament to Canada's innovative ecosystem and the clean-technology sector's ability to compete against leading innovative countries, such as the United States and Germany. The Government of Canada also recognizes the importance of retaining subject matter experts.

Business of Supply  We cannot continue to allow the government to get away with this level of corruption. More than $100 million was handed out to Liberal insiders with clear conflicts of interest. Therefore, the Conservative Party today is calling upon Parliament to get the requisite documents and to get to the bottom of what happened at SDTC, to get to the bottom of how taxpayer dollars were misappropriated in such a clear and deliberate way.

Business of Supply  It is not the Prime Minister's Office, and it is not the cabinet. It is Parliament itself, and the Liberals have a very clear choice on this matter. That is why common-sense Conservatives have made it so clear that we have to get to the bottom of this. We have to get the answers that Canadians ultimately deserve.

National Strategy on Brain Injuries Act  We have talked about national strategies for diabetes, firefighting cancers and eye health; now we are talking about a brain injury strategy. The Bloc Québécois wants to make it clear that it is uncomfortable with these national strategies. For one thing, they tend to disregard the jurisdictions of Quebec and the provinces. One thing the bill would do is identify the training, education and guidance needs of health care and other professionals related to brain injury prevention and treatment and the rehabilitation and recovery of persons living with a brain injury.

Public Accounts committee  Yes, if I may be very clear, first of all, I am not the deputy lead of CBSA. That was, in fact, Mr. Ossowski, and that was his job. However, let me be very clear as well that as a rather senior minister of government, my expectation is that I am always responsible for what takes place within the organizations or agencies under my ministerial authority, but I don't have authority with respect to the personnel matters you've referred to and, unfortunately, at that time, that information was not brought to my attention.

Business of Supply  The Prime Minister turned Sustainable Development Technology Canada into a slush fund for Liberal insiders. This was made clear through a secret recording of a senior civil servant who slammed the outright incompetence of the Liberal government, calling the SDTC's actions “a sponsorship-scandal level kind of giveaway.”

Canada–Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act  The article said that “a rather significant hitch disrupted his career when, in 2007, he voted against the budget tabled by the Stephen Harper government,” progressive conservative government, “saying it broke the Atlantic Accord.” It was “the most unforgettable moment of his time in Parliament.” He said, “I managed to get my vote in and a second later I was thrown out” of the party.

Mental Health and Addictions  Mr. Speaker, let me be unequivocally clear. We always put a lens of public health and public safety on everything we do in addressing this deadly overdose crisis, but in that frame, also to be clear, the safe consumption site in Montreal is managed and run by the Province of Quebec.

Health committee  Minister Williams, the numbers are clear: 1,732 people died of the toxic, poisoned drug supply in 2022, and 2,050 people died in 2023 in Alberta. We had the deputy commissioner of the RCMP testify at committee, and he was unequivocally clear that police aren't seeing diversion of safer supply across B.C.'

Health committee  However, if you call harm reduction mass distributing high-powered pharmaceutical-grade opioids unwitnessed into our communities, when those are diverted and end up on Alberta's high school and college campuses, furthering addiction, starting new addiction and massively introducing thousands of new people into addiction, then I no longer think it's fair to let Canadians believe that's harm reduction. It's clear that's harm production. It's clear that, if you're distributing the drugs, if you're the one purveying them into the community en masse, then that will produce more harm. That is my issue with it.

Business of Supply  It might not even be able to finish it because one of the pieces was lost in the sofa cushions. That is how the current government is running things, and here we have a clear example of that. Essentially, the problem is that we need to support the development of sustainable technologies. At a time when climate change is likely to cause not only health problems, but economic problems as well, we need to deal with it and develop technologies that can help mitigate it.

Business of Supply  I would remind the House that this funding is essential. What will happen? Will the criteria at last be clear? Will projects continue to be funded? Will all the projects funded to date really be audited? Are we going to resume funding those that truly need it and whose survival depends on it?

Parliament of Canada Act  It is interesting that when the opposition talks about, for example, the Winnipeg labs issue, this government offered the very same formula that Stephen Harper offered when he was prime minister. We offered the very same formula in trying to deal with the issue, and the opposition said no to that initially. Why did the opposition say no to that?