Committees of the House  Mr. Speaker, unfortunately there was confusion at the beginning, and I voted both for and against. Had I been at the committee this morning, I would have voted to allow our former attorney general to speak. On this vote, I am voting for.

Committees of the House  Mr. Speaker, I could not have said it any better or more eloquently than my hon. colleague did. The reality is that, as I said a few times, if the Liberals do not like the message or what members are saying, they always try to change the channel and the conversation. They want Canadians to believe their version of the story and the reality is that the only people telling the truth are those in the opposition.

Committees of the House  Mr. Speaker, I tried talking about the topic the Liberals wanted us to talk about early on, but there were five points of order. They did not want Canadians to hear the message we had regarding Bill C-92, apparently. My hon. colleague across the way likes to scream and yell and perhaps Canadians will believe him a little more by doing that, but Canadians can see through this veil of the Liberals protesting far too much.

Committees of the House  Mr. Speaker, I am going to do the same as I did before. I respect our hon. colleague very greatly, and I respect all of my colleagues, and inserting gun debate into my intervention has no place. I will not enter it into today's discussion.

Committees of the House  Mr. Speaker, let us talk about relevance. Now my colleague across the way wants to enter into a dialogue about gun violence and gun policy. Let us stay focused on my speech and the discussion we had here today. How many points of order were there during my speech? There were probably five, which used up a considerable amount of time.

Committees of the House  Mr. Speaker, in the final six minutes I have, I will tie this back to the debate. If only our colleagues across the way could just have trust that I am going to do that. I want to bring up a comment that our colleague from Eglinton—Lawrence said in his intervention. He noted that today is a day when Canadians expect Liberals to deliver.

Committees of the House  Mr. Speaker, I will come back to what I said earlier, which speaks to the core of both Bill C-92, for our colleagues across the way, as well as the motion that we have before us. It is about trust and the lack of trust that Canadians have with the Prime Minister and indeed his team.

Committees of the House  The heckling is getting louder and they can speak as loud as they want. However, we are here today to talk about the broken promises that the Prime Minister and his team have levied against Canadians and the broken trust. They can shout all they want and they can heckle all they want.

Committees of the House  As colleagues across the way continue to poke fun and disparage her testimony, I hope the microphones can catch that. Now we hear that the Liberal members on the justice committee have sent a letter saying there is nothing further to see here, and that Canadians want the justice committee to move on.

Committees of the House  Mr. Speaker, I am proud to rise today and speak to the motion at hand with respect to SNC-Lavalin and the Champlain Bridge. We will have a lot to talk about over the next 20 minutes of debate and 10 minutes of questions. This is the first time I have had a chance to rise in the House after the events that took place in Christchurch.

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns  With regard to the government sending employees to the SHOT Show in Las Vegas, Nevada, in January 2019: (a) how many employees were sent from each department or agency; (b) what are the total expenses incurred by the government related to attending the event; (c) what is the breakdown of the expenses in (b) by (i) airfare, (ii) accommodation, (iii) meals and per diems, (iv) other transportation, (v) attendance or conference fees; (vi) other expenditures; and (d) what was the rationale for sending employees to the event?

Petitions  Mr. Speaker, I rise with a petition from residents of my riding and Canadians from coast to coast to coast who are calling once again on the Prime Minister to remove the attestation from the summer jobs grant program. I would remind the House that section 2 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms identifies, among other things, freedom of conscience, freedom of thought and freedom of belief as fundamental freedoms.

Petitions  Mr. Speaker, I too rise today to table a couple of petitions from Canadians from coast to coast to coast who are concerned and asking for the Government of Canada to establish conscience protection for physicians in health care institutions. The petitioners state that coercion, intimidation and other forms of pressure intended to force physicians in health institutions to become parties in assisted suicide or euthanasia are a violation of the fundamental freedom of conscience.

Committees of the House  moved: That it be an instruction to the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans that, during its consideration of Bill S-203, An Act to amend the Criminal Code and other Acts (ending the captivity of whales and dolphins), the Committee be granted the power to travel throughout Canada to hear testimony from interested parties and that the necessary staff do accompany the Committee, provided that the travel does not exceed 15 sitting days.

Justice  Mr. Speaker, for three hours and 40 minutes the former attorney general gave shocking testimony, revealing a sustained, coordinated and inappropriate attempt by our Prime Minister to subvert justice—