Business of Supply  Madam Speaker, our common goal should be to end the blockades. When members of the House of Commons call people who are doing the blockades “radical activists”, including members of the Mohawk nation, it does not in any way further a solution or cause those people to want to dialogue with the members of the House of Commons who are calling them radical activists.

Business of Supply  Madam Speaker, words have meaning. Words particularly have meaning when they are said in this House of Commons. Tone is important, particularly at a time when the country is facing this type of escalation. There are people who are frustrated. There are many people in my riding who are frustrated, and I empathize deeply with each and every one of them: the commuters who are impacted because they are unable to take the train to Toronto; the small business that is unable to get supplies; those who are facing shortages and need to lay off workers; those workers who are being laid off, and their families; farmers who are having trouble getting goods to market; or those who are worried they may be short of propane or chlorine.

Business of Supply  Madam Speaker, I always respect my colleague's speeches. He stated in his speech that he heard the government instruct the police, in this place, not to enforce the law. I have listened very carefully to the Minister of Public Safety, and I have listened very carefully to the other ministers who have spoken about this issue.

Rail Transportation  Mr. Speaker, we always share any concerns relating to Canada's official languages. The French language must be protected throughout the country for safety reasons. There is no question that the minister will review the situation as it relates to safety and language.

Labour  Madam Speaker, let me be very clear. This dispute is a provincial issue. We are aware of the dispute at the refinery. Our government has faith in and believes in the collective bargaining process. We encourage both parties to work together to resolve the dispute. The Government of Saskatchewan announced its intention to assist the parties, but again, this is a provincial issue.

Canada-United States-Mexico Implementation Act  Madam Speaker, I would note that the rhetoric of the current U.S. administration seems to shift from target to target to target with a lot of volatility. I cannot necessarily speak to the issue of rhetoric. I can say that the Canadian government stood resolutely for the points that Canada said we would make in the current NAFTA, meaning we resisted U.S. demands to remove the dispute resolution mechanism from NAFTA, which the Mexicans had agreed to in the initial deal with the United States.

Canada-United States-Mexico Implementation Act  Madam Speaker, one thing that is incredibly important is that we can all recognize the disastrous impact on Canada of not having a trade agreement with the United States, when literally millions of jobs in Canada depend on that trade agreement. Our officials who provided us with briefings this week made that clear.

Canada-United States-Mexico Implementation Act  Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question. I listened to the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs's answer to the question from the leader of the Bloc Québécois. She told him she was open to any proposals. I know the Deputy Prime Minister, and she is a woman who says what she thinks.

Canada-United States-Mexico Implementation Act  Madam Speaker, in closing, what I would say is this. This trade deal, while not perfect in every area, is better even than the previous NAFTA, is an incredible victory given the political context of our times and the current U.S. administration we were negotiating with. I am very proud to vote in favour of this trade deal.

Canada-United States-Mexico Implementation Act  Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise in the House today to speak to the new NAFTA. I would like to start by showing why this agreement is so important. More than 400,000 people cross the Canada-U.S. border every day for work. Every day, $2.4 billion in goods cross the border. About two million Canadian jobs are directly linked to free trade with the United States.

Business of Supply  Madam Speaker, what I said is that the substance of the motion is that the House call on the Auditor General to do something. That is what the motion is asking for. We all agree to do that. What we object to is misleading language in the preamble that selectively quotes from one report of the Auditor General and does not recognize that a second report was issued with contradictory information.

Business of Supply  Madam Speaker, one thing that has frustrated me over my last four years in Parliament has been when a motion has been put forward that has been deliberately designed to have one of the parties vote against it, because the party cannot agree with something that is totally outside the substance of the motion.

Business of Supply  Madam Speaker, I agree with the substance of the motion, as I said. What I object to is the misleading language in the preamble that selectively quotes one or two sentences from the entire report. However, in August 2018, the Auditor General released a revised report with contradictory information.

Business of Supply  Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for Kingston and the Islands. As we all know, we are in a minority Parliament, and in a minority Parliament, Canadians are looking for us to co-operate across party lines. We all say that. That involves efforts on all sides and it involves efforts on opposition day motions.

Business of Supply  Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his speech. I have a fairly simple question for him. The government has proposed an amendment that preserves the intent of the motion, namely to call on the Auditor General to conduct an audit. The government proposed deleting some words in the preamble that are not part of the motion, but are insulting to the government.