Business of Supply  Mr. Speaker, absolutely, it seems it is only the Liberals who believe that we cannot walk and chew gum at the same time. I believe that to ensure Canadians get the help they need, the government needs to be held accountable. We have seen unprecedented spending over the last number of months.

Business of Supply  Mr. Speaker, the Liberals intend to continue to debate these facts but some things are not debatable, including when this scandal first broke and the WE organization said that it never pays speakers. Then the Prime Minister said to trust him, that all was good here and that we should listen to WE.

Business of Supply  Mr. Speaker, I do not want it to be a secret to anybody that I do not have confidence in this government. There is a constitutional responsibility of the opposition to hold the government to account. That is a time-honoured tradition, but it is also a fundamental of any democracy.

Business of Supply  Mr. Speaker, starting with the last question first, I believe the committee should be chaired by an opposition member because of what we saw at the finance committee. We had a Liberal chair shut down the committee simply so the committee could not do its work. We want to ensure that does not happen.

Business of Supply  Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill. Canadians are rightfully concerned about what is going on in this place right now. This morning they woke up to hear the Prime Minister and the Liberal House leader say that if this continues in Ottawa, they are going to force an election.

Business of Supply  Mr. Speaker, I appreciate that. That gives me an opportunity to clarify because the Liberal members across the way seem to be somewhat confused. It was the family, not just the Prime Minister, who received a benefit from the WE organization. As a matter of fact, having had the opportunity to pause and reflect on what exactly went on, we are talking about half a million dollars that flowed to the Prime Minister's family.

Natural Resources  Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister regularly attacks elected officials from the Province of Alberta, but yesterday he let his contempt for all Albertans slip out of his mouth yet again. He was justifying his paternalistic, Laurentian elite, Ottawa-knows-best attack on Alberta's energy sector, falsely claiming that Alberta has done nothing to address climate change.

International Trade  Mr. Speaker, last week trade officials confirmed at committee that the government had a policy of promoting the active involvement of Canadian companies in China's belt and road initiative. This expansionist foreign policy initiative is infamous for ensnaring developing countries into a debt trap, leaving them forever indebted to Beijing.

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns  With regard to communication between the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) and the government: (a) with the exception of media inquiries, did anyone in the government receive any communication from the CBC, during the 2019 writ period and if so, what are the details of the such communication including (i) date, (ii) sender, (iii) recipient, (iv) subject matter, (v) summary of contents; and (b) what are the details of any correspondence or briefing materials which have been provided to the Privy Council Office, the Office of the Prime Minister or the Department of Canadian Heritage regarding the CBC since September 11, 2019, including (i) date, (ii) sender, (iii) recipient, (iv) title or subject matter, (v) file number, (vi) summary of contents?

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns  With regard to the government’s policy on the political neutrality of Crown corporations: what is the government’s policy regarding Crown corporations commencing legal action or suing political parties during a writ period?

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns  With regard to taxpayer-funded legal representation, since November 4, 2015: has any cabinet minister, including the Prime Minister, retained taxpayer-funded independent legal counsel and, if so, (i) what was the matter related to, (ii) what was the rationale provided to the Department of Justice to authorize the independent legal counsel, (iii) what was the name of the independent legal counsel, (iv) what was the total cost of the independent legal counsel, (v) what was the hourly rate authorized by the government to pay for the independent legal counsel, (vi) why were government lawyers not used instead of independent legal counsel?

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns  With regard to “repayable” loans and contributions given out by the government since January 1, 2016: what are the details of all such loans and contributions, including (i) date of loan or contribution, (ii) recipient’s details, including name and location, (iii) amount provided, (iv) amount “repaid” to date, (v) description or project or purpose of loan or contribution, (vi) program under which loan or contribution was administered?

Natural Resources  Mr. Speaker, it has been a tough week for Alberta here in Ottawa. The Prime Minister has rammed through his anti-pipeline, anti-energy bills, Bills C-69 and C-48, and announced a carbon tax for the province of Alberta. These attacks are driving investment and opportunity out of the province.

Grande Prairie—Mackenzie  Mr. Speaker, we all know that tough times can bring out the very best in people. This past week, we witnessed this in my northern Alberta riding. As firefighters battled flames near High Level and Paddle Prairie, we witnessed an outpouring of support from the surrounding communities for evacuees and others affected by the fires.

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns.  With regard to the government’s investigation into the leak of information about the reported $10.5 million payout to Omar Khadr: (a) what specific measures did the government do to investigate the leak; (b) how many individuals were assigned to duties in relation to the investigation; (c) what were the findings of the investigation; (d) how much did the government spend on the investigation; (e) did the government refer the leak to the RCMP; (f) which departments and agencies were involved in the investigation; and (g) what are the details of any contracts related to the investigation, including (i) amount, (ii) date, (iii) vendor, (iv) description of goods or services?