House debate  Mr. Chair, the minister commented on the number of judges who have been appointed under our mandate as a government and on the judicial diversity that is reflected in those appointments. I wonder if he could elaborate, in the brief time that remains, as to why promoting a diverse bench is a good unto itself that is being pursued so vigorously by our government.

House debate  Mr. Chair, with respect to the LGBTQ2 issue, the minister raised important aspects of Bill C-16. I wonder if he could comment on Bill C-75, which I also understand would take an anomaly in the Criminal Code, which is that consensual sexual relations of same-sex couples who are adults are not criminalized, but currently consensual sexual relations between youth ages 16 and 17 are criminalized.

House debate  Mr. Chair, I think it is important that several things were outlined in the minister's speech. I would like to start with the question of victims. From the work I have been doing as parliamentary secretary and the work that the committee has been doing on bills such as Bill C-84, where there was an important amendment to implement an offender registry for bestiality crimes, and Bill C-75, in relation to victims of intimate partner violence, I know that addressing the needs of victims is at the core of what we are doing as a government.

House debate  Mr. Chair, I would now like to address the issue of access to justice. The minister raised this very clearly in the remarks that commenced this debate. He talked about access to justice as a general proposition. He talked about immigrant and refugee legal aid. We know what has been going on, particularly in my home province, Ontario, under the new Conservative government led by Premier Ford.

House debate  Mr. Chair, I want to turn to the issue of youth. We know that youth is a priority for our government and for the Prime Minister, who maintains responsibility as the minister responsible for youth. That has a component of hearing the voices of youth, but also responding to youth's needs.

Ending the Captivity of Whales and Dolphins Act  Madam Speaker, I rise today to join this important debate on Bill S-203, an act to amend the Criminal Code and other acts with regard to ending the captivity of whales and dolphins. Both I and my constituents in Parkdale—High Park have anticipated this piece of legislation for some time since it moved from the Senate to this House.

Ending the Captivity of Whales and Dolphins Act  Madam Speaker, I thank the leader of the Green Party for her contribution to today's debate and for her contributions every day in the House. They are always welcome and always to the point. I want to ask her about an important aspect she mentioned in her comments today on Bill S-203.

Democratic Reform  Madam Speaker, in all fairness, we will take no lessons from the other side about making changes to the electoral system. The legacy of the unfair elections act has been long, and we heard about it extensively in 2015. We acted promptly to deal with it. With respect to the social media platforms and the position they are taking today, we find that disappointing.

Democratic Reform  Madam Speaker, we categorically reject the premise of that entire question. First, Bill C-76 was fundamental to ensuring the stability of the democracy in this country in response to the unfair elections act. Second, when we are talking about elections and electoral fairness, we need to talk about online platforms, including social media companies.

Parliamentary Internship Programme  Mr. Speaker, there have been consultations among the parties and I believe you will find agreement for the following motion regarding the parliamentary internship programme, of which I am a proud former intern: That the House: a) recognize the fiftieth anniversary of the Parliamentary Internship Programme, founded in 1969 through a motion of this House, which operates on a non-partisan basis under the auspices of the Speaker, and is administered by the Canadian Political Science Association; b) congratulate the ten current interns, alumni, and staff of the Parliamentary Internship Programme; and c) reaffirm its support for this outstanding experience for young professionals to learn about and participate in Parliament.

Justice  Mr. Speaker, let us hear what the actual director had to say: No other factors were considered in this decision, nor was there any contact or influence from outside the PPSC, including political influence in either the initial decision to prosecute Mr. Norman or in the decision to stay the charge today.

Justice  Mr. Speaker, what I can say in response to that question is that the investigation was handled by the RCMP. The decision to prosecute was made by the director herself. The decision to stay the charges was made by the director herself. I want to highlight the comments of Mr. Norman's counsel once again.

Justice  Mr. Speaker, it is quite unfortunate that it has come to this. In the last four months we have had two occasions when the director of public prosecutions has felt it incumbent upon herself to issue public statements about non-interference. The first was in February, when she talked about comments that related to a different matter that was being elaborated on in this House.

Justice  Mr. Speaker, the minister played no role in the decision to stay proceedings. He was not aware of the decision made by the director of public prosecutions in this case. The PPSC acts independently, but in this case, it is acting on behalf of the Attorney General of Ontario, which, under the Criminal Code, is responsible for overseeing the case.

Justice  Mr. Speaker, once again, I will emphasize three key points. First, the decision to investigate was made by the RCMP. Second, the decision to lay a charge was made by the Public Prosecution Service of Canada. Third, the decision to withdraw the charge was also taken by the Public Prosecution Service of Canada.