Public Safety  Madam Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to speak to the debate brought forth by the member for Kelowna—Lake Country. As my hon. colleague knows, she spoke about the decisions around bail reform and how transfers occur, as well as decisions about individuals who are in custody and how the Correctional Services of Canada handles each prisoner in the program they are under.

Public Services and Procurement  Mr. Speaker, it seems that the Conservatives are trying to pivot once again from the fact that those champagne Conservatives are trying to obstruct committee from looking into lobbyists paying for a lavish trip to London, England for five Conservative members, while they dined on a $1,200 oyster bar and $1,000 for a three-course lunch.

Royal Canadian Mounted Police  Mr. Speaker, I find it ironic that the Conservatives would actually use an issue that was settled years ago. I reconfirm that the RCMP commissioner stated he was “very comfortable” with the decision being made. While speaking about committee, I find it ironic that the Conservatives are trying to use a closed case to block the investigation of five Conservative members on a lavish trip to London paid for by individuals who want to ensure that pollution is free again.

Royal Canadian Mounted Police  Mr. Speaker, the fact remains that Conservatives had 26 opportunities to bring in the RCMP and bring forward a motion. What I find interesting is, why are the Conservatives hiding the investigation or the study that members would like to have in regard to their lavish travel to London paid by lobbyists who would like to make pollution free again?

Royal Canadian Mounted Police  Mr. Speaker, the champagne Conservatives should take a long, hard look in the mirror when they are using a situation that the Commissioner himself has said is closed. It is a way to obstruct committee from looking into the spending on a lavish trip for five Conservative members paid for by lobbyists who want to make pollution free again.

Committees of the House  Mr. Speaker, I was a regional councillor under the Harper government, and one of the reasons I ran for federal office was the lack of investments in our communities and the lack of partnerships at the federal level to invest in our communities. If our communities are not able to produce economically, the country suffers.

Committees of the House  Mr. Speaker, once again, the member opposite was probably not listening to the countless examples of projects that the investments in the Infrastructure Bank are delivering on. What we have heard time and time again from communities is that, yes, we need traditional infrastructure programs to deal with the needs communities are facing right now, but in addition to that, we need big, bold ideas, which is what the Canada Infrastructure Bank represents, to build projects that, frankly, sometimes municipalities and communities cannot do on their own.

Committees of the House  Mr. Speaker, my answer to that is we can do both. Canada can be bold when it comes to addressing the infrastructure gaps in this country. We have committed, for example, to long-term, sustainable, permanent transit funding to do just what the member opposite has said: to ensure that provinces, territories and municipalities can do long-term planning.

Committees of the House  Mr. Speaker, by no means am I suggesting that the Liberal infrastructure plan is only good because it is better than the Conservative's plan. I am suggesting that I cannot believe the Conservatives would block the ability to modernize legislation to deal with national security matters and have picked the topic of infrastructure, where their record is so abysmal.

Committees of the House  Mr. Speaker, once again, I actually feel bad for Conservatives today, because the report the member is referring to and the recommendations made by Conservatives actually came out before we did an additional study on the Canada Infrastructure Bank. The later study spoke about governance issues, changes that have been made and improvements on getting projects built.

Committees of the House  Mr. Speaker, I feel for you, but I can imagine right now that behind the scenes here, there are Conservative staffers texting and furiously saying, “Interrupt her speech, ruin those clips and do not let her keep going”, even though that is precisely why the Conservatives do not even interrupt with actual procedural issues and instead it is just debate.

Committees of the House  Mr. Speaker, the fact that Conservatives want to fire people in these communities is tearing down communities, tearing them apart and not building up economies for indigenous populations and for rural Canada. I also want to talk about the Tshiuetin Railway project. This would be the first indigenous-owned railway in Canada.

Committees of the House  Mr. Speaker, I will not be surprised that the Conservatives are going to try to interrupt my speech continually, because the facts matter and they do not want to be confused by them. They do not want Canadians to actually realize that their record on infrastructure is abysmal, so I am sure they are going to keep interrupting.

Committees of the House  Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today on this topic. I have to wonder, however, if the Conservatives made a very critical error in their strategy. It is interesting to me that the member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan actually used the issue of the Canada Infrastructure Bank to filibuster the legislation that was scheduled to be discussed today, which actually would allow and authorize the minister of industry, where he considers that investment could be injurious to national security, to review such things.

Committees of the House  Mr. Speaker, it seems I have hit a very specific nerve with the Conservative Party. It seems I am alluding to exactly what they are afraid of, which is that they are not serious when it comes to matters of national security. They are reckless when it comes to producing meaningful legislation that would actually keep Canadians safe.