Criminal Code  Mr. Speaker, it is not a comfortable topic for me to discuss, but I have been victimized online. I try not to make debates about me in the House because I represent 120,000 other people. However, if I saw something like this of me spreading and going viral online, through Telegram channels, WhatsApp or whatever, I think it would victimize me.

Criminal Code  Mr. Speaker, I would first like to say that I will be sharing my time with the member for Abitibi—Témiscamingue. There has been a lot of debate on this topic. I would like to present something to all political parties that has not been discussed in this House, which I really feel needs to be considered at committee.

Public Safety  Madam Speaker, admittedly, it is a little concerning to hear that the government is still consulting and working on the buyback program and does not have clear direction for the House, given that we are about 30 days out from the amnesty expiring. Even when talking about firearms coming off the street or whatever, we can have a whole policy discussion about firearms ownership in Canada, but at the end of the day this is really about timing.

Public Safety  Madam Speaker, I believe that the Minister of Public Safety was appointed to cabinet about two months ago, so my question is whether he has received his mandate letter yet from the Prime Minister. Particularly, if he has received the mandate letter, could he provide the House with an update on the status of the amnesty for firearms and whether it is in place until October 30?

Committees of the House  Mr. Speaker, on decorum, I think it has been a weird, unexpected few days in here, and I would just like to remind colleagues that there are reasons why people are dragged into your chair, albeit they have probably changed over time. I know that I would not want to have to sit in your chair and manage me, so on behalf of everybody in here, thank you for stepping into an unexpected breach today.

Rick O'Brien  Mr. Speaker, I move for my colleague from Winnipeg to continue to be heard.

Apology by the Speaker  Mr. Speaker, as chair of the Canada-Slovakia parliamentary friendship group, it is my obligation to point out that the individual in question who was recognized on Friday was part of the division that was used against the Slovak National Uprising, which was the military uprising organized by Slovak resistance movements during World War II, comprising the anti-Nazi political faction of the Slovak nation, which is my heritage.

Public Safety  Madam Speaker, there is a common theme among Liberal responses. After eight years of the Liberals being in government, they say it is not their job. That is what the member opposite is saying here. The reality is the buck stops with the government. It and Parliament write the directives and rules under which these decisions are made.

Public Safety  Madam Speaker, in 2018, the House was seized with a very emotive and serious issue. This was the transfer of Terri-Lynne McClintic, a child killer, from a maximum-security prison to a much less secure facility, a healing lodge. I remember the debate in the House and reading the stories of how the families of the victim were retraumatized through this decision.

Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act  Madam Speaker, the last Liberal speaker questioned whether or not my colleague had talked to any leaders in Atlantic Canada about whether or not they wanted the bill. I wonder if the member could speak to the fact that most premiers in Atlantic Canada asked for the carbon tax to be removed.

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns  With regard to the news that Navigator Ltd. has been hired to support the work of special rapporteur David Johnston: (a) will payment for this firm be made by the government; (b) if the answer to (a) is affirmative, what are the details, including the (i) total value of the relevant contract, (ii) date the contract was signed, (iii) end date of the contract, (iv) stated purpose of the contract, (v) details of the goods and services provided, (vi) manner in which the contract was awarded (sole-sourced, competitive bid, etc.); (c) are there any other contracts with any other external service providers to support the work of special rapporteur David Johnston; and (d) if the answer to (c) is affirmative, what are the details, including the (i) total value of the relevant contract, (ii) date the contract was signed, (iii) end date of the contract, (iv) stated purpose of the contract, (v) details of the goods and services provided, (vi) manner in which the contract was awarded (sole-sourced, competitive bid, etc.)?

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns  With regard to the government responses to Order Paper questions (OPQ) and the information contained in the package released by Natural Resources Canada (NRCAN) to Access to Information Request A-2022-00489: (a) since January 1, 2016 what instructions, definitions, directives, or other advice has the Privy Council Office (PCO) provided any departments, including those sent through the Parliamentary Returns Control Assistance System with the use or the development of (i) so-called “high-level limitation language”, a term used throughout Access to Information Request A-2022-00489, (ii) other means of not directly responding to each part of a question, and what are the details of each instance, including for each, the (A) date, (B) instruction, directive, or advice, (C) recipient, (D) relevant OPQ numbers; (b) are communications risks considered when departments develop responses to OPQs, and, if so, (i) what is the protocol, (ii) what measures are in place to ensure that Parliamentarians who submit OPQs receive responses that are complete and are not politically manipulated; (c) since January 1, 2016, what government-wide practices, protocols, or procedures have been developed to provide justification for not directly responding to each part of a question; (d) when the term “inherent risk” is used in relation to the use of so-called “high-level limitation language” or other means of not answering a question, what type of risk is being assessed; (e) on which other responses to OPQs in the 44th Parliament did (i) NRCAN, (ii) any other department or agency, strategize on how or if to use “high-level limitation language” or otherwise non-responsive language in a response to an OPQ; (f) for each instance where so-called “high-level limitation language” was used to avoid answering each part of a question, what was the reason for the non-answer, broken down by OPQ number; (g) did the Office for the Coordination of Parliamentary Returns in the PCO authorize NRCAN to use “high-level limitation language” to avoid directly answering any OPQs, and, if so, who authorized such as response, broken down by each question where such a non-answer was given; (h) what did Kyle Harrietha, the former Minister of Natural Resources’ Deputy Chief of Staff, mean when he wrote that the Speaker of the House of Commons is going to “tut tut”; (i) how was the “high-level limitation language” used in the government’s response to Q-974 arrived at, including who came up with the language that was used; (j) who decides when NRCAN uses “high-level limitation language” to avoid directly answering a question; (k) was the Minister of Natural Resources informed that he was signing an incomplete response prior to him signing the response to Q-974, and, if so, why did he sign the response; (l) what is NRCAN’s explanation for how multiple departments come up with identical language when using “high-level limitation language”; (m) who in the PCO, the Office of the Prime Minister or the Office of the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons was involved in the development of the template and language used in the response to Q-974; and (n) what was the rationale for using “high-level limitation language” in the response to Q-974 as opposed to directly answering the question?

Questions on the Order Paper  With regard to the passport design unveiled on May 10, 2023: (a) what are the details of all spending related to the redesign of the new passport, broken down by item and type of expense; (b) who were the artists and companies that were used for the design and images in the new passport, and how much was each paid for their work; (c) what are the details of the consultations related to the redesign, including, for each consultation, the (i) names of organizations or individuals consulted, (ii) date, (iii) form (roundtable, online questionnaire, etc.), (iv) outcome, recommendation, or feedback provided; (d) during consultations, did anyone support removing Terry Fox from the passport design, and, if so, who; (e) during consultations, did anyone voice support for removing Nellie McClung from the passport design and, if so, who; (f) during consultations, did anyone voice support for removing the Vimy Ridge Memorial from the passport design, and, if so, who; (g) during consultations, did anyone voice support for removing Quebec City from the passport design, and, if so, who; (h) what is the total cost of all consultations which have occurred to date; (i) what is the breakdown of consultation costs by date and line item; (j) have any outside consultants or service providers been involved in the development of the new passport’s design, and, if so, what are the details of each consultant or service provider's involvement, including the (i) name of the individual or firm, (ii) contract value, (iii) date of the contract, (iv) description of the goods or services provided; (k) how many government employees or full-time equivalents worked on the redesign and consultations; and (l) what are the (i) travel, (ii) hospitality, costs associated with the redesign and consultations incurred to date, in total, and broken down by year and type of expense?

Points of Order  Mr. Speaker, in light of your ruling made yesterday, I believe if you seek it, you will find unanimous consent for the following motion: That, the house direct the government to provide complete answers to members—

Online News Act  Madam Speaker, this is exactly the type of misinformation the Liberals want their controlled media sources to spread to Canadians. The reality is that, when he raises that issue of Australia, Australia amended its legislation so that Facebook and Google could work with journalists to create deals to support journalism in ways that go directly to journalism, outside of the legislative framework, understanding that they cannot have a one-size-fits-all approach.