Business of Supply  Madam Speaker, the member, speaking for the government as the parliamentary secretary, is regurgitating the jargon, the Liberal nonsense. The real question he should be asking is this: will his Liberal colleagues listen to their constituents? I will repeat what his Liberal colleague said about themes that have emerged during the consultation: The first thing that residents...indicated to me is that they believe this consultation period is too short for such broad tax reforms.

Business of Supply  Madam Speaker, the government says it is tax fairness, but as the member points out, it is not tax fairness. The government has not kept its promises. The Liberals have not lowered small business taxes, as they said they would during the 2015 election campaign. It is important that a government keep its promises, represent all Canadians, and create an economy where jobs are being created and taxes are being lowered so that we have a prosperous future.

Business of Supply  Madam Speaker, my colleague is absolutely right. To do it right takes time, true consultation, and true expertise, and the experts—the accountants and legal experts in our country—are saying that the government is wrong in doing what it is doing. To ram it through and say it has heard enough, that October 2 has come and gone, that it is done and is going to move ahead really is disingenuous and disrespectful to Canadians, and to call them tax cheats is shameful.

Business of Supply  Madam Speaker, it is always nice to have enough Liberal members in the House so that we have true consultation and consideration. To go back to the letter written to the local newspaper by a neighbouring Liberal MP, the letter said: So far, I have heard from constituents including small business owners and incorporated professionals, hearing their concerns and proposals for moving forward.

Business of Supply  Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the hard-working member for Foothills. Today we are debating the motion by the official opposition calling on the government to continue the consultations, which is quite reasonable. The consultation process to this point was launched by the government July 18 and went to October 2.

Oceans Act  Madam Speaker, again, I have the utmost respect for that member and I appreciate his question. I can only speak from my own personal experience. The previous Conservative government had great respect for first nations people. I have in my riding the Katzie and Kwantlen first nations, and I have a wonderful relationship with them.

Oceans Act  Madam Speaker, I do not believe that the member for Oshawa made any disparaging comments to the member for Nunavut. All members of our Conservative caucus greatly respect that member. I think he was pointing out that the previous member representing Nunavut was a minister in our government who set a high standard and did an incredible job.

Oceans Act  Madam Speaker, it is a real honour to speak to Bill C-55. I will be splitting my time with the member for Calgary Shepard. Legislation and the policy of government must be based on logic, on science, and on sound consultation. I want to focus my comments on the process of consultation, which, I am hearing from Canadians in my riding of Langley—Aldergrove, is disingenuous and may be fake consultation giving the impression of consultation.

Petitions  Madam Speaker, the second petition relates to a national seniors strategy. The petitioners highlight the fact that right now one in six Canadians is a senior, and within twelve and a half years it will be one in four Canadians. This major demographic change in Canada needs to be prepared for.

Petitions  Madam Speaker, the last petition I wish to present today deals with palliative care. The petitioners highlight the fact that 70% of Canadians who need palliative care in the last days of their lives do not have it available to them. They are calling on the government to ensure that palliative care is available to every Canadian who needs it.

Petitions  Madam Speaker, I am honoured to present three petitions today. The first petition relates to conscience protection. The petitioners highlight that coercion, intimidation, and other forms of pressure are being applied to force physicians, health care professionals, and institutions to be parties to assisted suicide and euthanasia, which is in violation of freedoms of conscience in Canada.

Petitions  Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to present a petition that highlights that, when the government passed legislation a year ago on assisted suicide and euthanasia, the government promised that no health care professionals would be forced to participate against their conscience in assisted suicide and euthanasia.

Main Estimates, 2017-18  Mr. Speaker, I listened intently, and it was a very interesting speech, although not quite on topic. We are here to talk about the estimates. I did find the member's perspective interesting with respect to acknowledging the high quality of the appointments of senators. What baffles me—and a lot of Canadians have asked me this—is if these are truly independent senators.

Main Estimates, 2017-18  Mr. Speaker, I listened intently and would like to ask my hon. colleague if he can think of any examples where the Prime Minister and the Liberal government have actually kept a promise. The norm in the House, and in Canada, is the Liberals say one thing and do something else. I could spend hours giving examples.

Justice for Victims of Corrupt Foreign Officials Act  Madam Speaker, it is an honour to speak on Bill S-226, a very important piece of legislation. I listened intently to all of the comments made today, within the last hour. It is unfortunate that the government did not make this a priority to introduce on day one, because during the election everybody acknowledged the importance of Magnitsky legislation.