Access to Information Act  Mr. Speaker, this time allocation motion is for a highly imperfect piece of proposed legislation that deserves much greater debate and consideration by the Liberal government. It has been condemned by Canadians across the spectrum, by those who would demand the right to know how they are governed through access to information.

Questions on the Order Paper  With regard to the decision taken by the World Heritage Committee of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) on July 7, 2017, to inscribe Hebron and the Tomb of the Patriarchs as a Palestinian site on the World Heritage List and on the List of World Heritage in Danger: what is the government’s official position on the UNESCO decision?

Budget Implementation Act, 2017, No. 2  Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for another exceptional speech here in the House. I would ask him to elaborate a little on the finance minister's invitation to go to out to the lobby and restate what he suggested were allegations that did not refer at all to the fact that they were facts and questions.

Budget Implementation Act, 2017, No. 2  Madam Speaker, I always appreciate my colleague's enthusiasm, but I will pick up from the end of his remarks when he talked about the government's promises for infrastructure spending, many billions of dollars worth of those promises postdated until after the next election. How does he excuse the $2 billion committed already, which has had to be reprofiled because the government could not get those $2 billion out the door?

Budget Implementation Act, 2017, No. 2  Madam Speaker, it is always a pleasure to see my colleague drill down on a particular shortcoming in a piece of Liberal legislation. It is true that the receivables are considered by accountants as assets. However, taxation before payment is yet another example of the theoretical application of the grasping that we have seen from the government.

Budget Implementation Act, 2017, No. 2  Mr. Speaker, coming back to the matter of trust and confidence that every Canadian taxpayer must have in the finance minister of the day, as Canadians had in the legendary Jim Flaherty, confidence that has been shaken by this finance minister, with his conviction for non-disclosure, his crash divestment of shares, and his contribution to charity after he was caught, I would like to ask my colleague to explain again to the Liberals why our continuing questions are so important, particularly under the legislative guillotine of time allocation we are seeing with this important bill brought forward by the minister, Bill C-63.

Budget Implementation Act, 2017, No. 2  Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his comments. I also want to congratulate him on his comparison between Bill C-63 and Lotto 6/49. I am sure my colleague hears just as clearly as the official opposition the Liberal claims of all the wonderful things they are doing for the Canadian economy and for the middle class.

Budget Implementation Act, 2017, No. 2  Mr. Speaker, I would like to come back to some of the discussion in the House earlier today when the official opposition and the NDP were raising questions about the finance minister's unwillingness to answer questions arising from his being found in violation of the Conflict of Interest Act, his willingness to accept guilt by paying a fine the Ethics Commissioner levied, and in returning to charity some of the ill-gotten gains he received from trades made during the past two years.

Budget Implementation Act, 2017, No. 2  Madam Speaker, the finance minister cannot seem to understand why we still have so many questions, so let us come at it another way. Fool Canadians once, shame on the finance minister. Fool Canadians twice, shame on us. The finance minister has admitted guilt by paying a fine levied by the Ethics Commissioner, as well as by surrendering millions of dollars of ill-gotten gains to charity.

Budget Implementation Act, 2017, No. 2  Madam Speaker, I will come directly to my question, which relates to the relevance of this minister presenting legislation in the House and his past behaviour in doing so. Why will he not answer these simple questions? Why is the Prime Minister allowing him to stonewall?

Access to Information Act  Madam Speaker, it is worth remembering that the Information Commissioner in an unprecedented response gave a full condemnation, top to bottom, of the bill. She basically said that Bill C-58 as it stood, notwithstanding the couple of tweaks and little turns that have been made, is a regressive piece of proposed legislation.

Business of Supply  Madam Speaker, I would like to ask my colleague about something that a number of members have discussed today, and that is the possible inability of the finance minister to recognize his ethical responsibilities; ergo, his conflict situation. We know he was born into wealth, married into great wealth, and has lived in a rarified atmosphere that the vast majority of Canadians cannot relate to.

Business of Supply  Mr. Speaker, I want to ask the hon. member something that has been touched upon a number of times in debate today; that perhaps the finance minister is incapable of recognizing his ethical responsibilities. That is why he is in a conflict situation. We know the finance minister was born into great wealth and he married into great wealth.

Navy Day  Mr. Speaker, today is Navy Day, a day dedicated to the men and women of the Royal Canadian Navy, the Canadian Coast Guard, and the exceptional sailor program. Our senior service traces its roots back to Tudor England, where a standing navy was established long before a standing army and, of course, an air force was still a theoretical Da Vinci dream.

Report Stage  Mr. Speaker, I might be a little more gentle than my colleague suggests, but the entire Liberal government, the frontbench, all those ministers who were wheeled out to defend the proposed legislation certainly would not smile with expectations of great things for Canadian society, but they constantly express their concern.