National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians Act  Mr. Speaker, I very much appreciate that question, because truly the security of all Canadians and protecting Canadians is paramount here. I respect what the member is saying, but we also see that it is in the hands of one individual. I am recommending that this committee, when sworn to the Privy Council, would have the right so that the information remains with them.

National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians Act  Mr. Speaker, I would really like to thank the member for Perth--Wellington for asking that question, because that is something Canadians need to know. This is not the way parliamentary committees work. Parliamentary committees are able to vote for their chair and that is important.

National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians Act  Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to stand here today in the House to discuss Bill C-22, the national security and intelligence committee of parliamentarians act. I stand here after reading hours of previous debate from this parliament as well as previous parliaments, media reviews of this bill as well as the bill itself.

Ethics  Madam Speaker, last fall, the minister disclosed that he had a personal relationship with the Irvings. The Ethics Commissioner has banned him from any dealings with the Irvings. Apparently he does not think it applies to cocktails with Irving lawyers and lobbyists. Given that the minister is in charge of all litigation involving the government, could the minister tell us how many ongoing cases the federal government has with Irving or with Cox & Palmer?

Ethics  Madam Speaker, the Minister of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard recently stated, “law firms are not able to confirm whether any person or company is a client, as such matters are confidential”. An easy Google search revealed that Cox & Palmer represents the Irvings.

Government Expenditures  Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Liberals claimed that Brookfield relocation services apologized to them, yet today it was confirmed that no such apology was ever issued. As a matter of fact, all we got was more damning evidence. In a statement yesterday, Brookfield confirmed our assertion that Telford and Butts claimed expenses with no justification or receipts.

Government Expenditures  Mr. Speaker, I am going to ask that the minister take this seriously, please. The Prime Minister's friends were shamed into giving some of that money back. However, everyone knows that a bank robber who returns part of the loot does not get away without repercussions. Telford and Butts occupy the most powerful unelected positions in the government.

Government Expenditures  Mr. Speaker, Canadians are expecting more from their government, not just the same old party antics and spending scandals that we saw in the 1990s and the early 2000s. There are many new faces in the government, but they have the same old Liberal sense of entitlement. Where is the leadership?

Government Expenditures  Mr. Speaker, Canadians are tired of waking up every day to a new Liberal expense scandal. Yesterday, Brookfield Global Relocation Services shared that two prime ministerial aides, Butts and Telford, would have been briefed on their services and made fully aware. For the past week, these two individuals have been stating they did not know.

Government Expenditures  Mr. Speaker, for days the Liberals have defended personalized cash payouts for the Prime Minister's best friends. On Friday, after being caught, they said the expenses were unreasonable because they had no justification or receipts. The Prime Minister's poor judgment allowed him to sign off on something his friends now call unreasonable.

Government Expenditures  Mr. Speaker, it is clear that the Liberal House leader only knows her approved talking points. Ironically, they were probably written by the staff to whom she forked over all of the money. Approved personalized cash payouts for moving expenses must be accounted for. We have no answers.

Government Expenditures  Mr. Speaker, the minister is hiding behind the so-called rules, these same rules that they are talking about today. They had the choice. Each and every minister had the choice. The environment minister should be able to answer this question. She signed off on this money. She should be able to tell us where it went.

Government Expenditures  Mr. Speaker, the environment minister gave her staff over $116,000 to come to Ottawa. Her office admits that only $28,000 was actually used for moving. After getting caught, other Liberals have admitted their claims were unreasonable. When will the minister come clean and explain to Canadians what they got for the rest of the money?

Immigration to Atlantic Canada  Madam Speaker, it is with the combined efforts of every level of government and the welcoming nature of all Canadians that we continue to be a nation known for our warm reception of newcomers, providing the foundation for seamless integration into our society. We recognize that by promoting continued immigration, we stand to benefit both economically and culturally.

Government Expenditures  Mr. Speaker, here is the bottom line. The Prime Minister signed off on these expenses and wrote his best friends six-figure cheques. Yesterday, Gerry and Katie were willing to take the fall for their best friend, the Prime Minister. How can Canadians trust this Prime Minister's judgment when their hard-earned money always seems to end up in personalized cash payouts?