Ethics  Mr. Speaker, the answer on this line of questioning remains the same. Prosecuting a legal proceeding on the floor of the House of Commons is inappropriate and does not align with the House of Commons Compendium of Procedure.

Ethics  Mr. Speaker, this clearly indicates why the rules of the House of Commons do not support prosecution on the floor of the House of Commons. This would be inappropriate, as this court case is ongoing.

Ethics  Mr. Speaker, the question by the hon. member clearly demonstrates why we do not prosecute cases on the floor of the House of Commons. He is asking for evidence. That is totally inappropriate, and that line of questioning remains inappropriate.

Ethics  Mr. Speaker, it has become quite clear that the Conservatives keep trying to indirectly prosecute this case on the floor of the House of Commons. We have a judiciary, courts and the rule of law for a reason, and we will be following that process.

Business of Supply  Mr. Speaker, I really appreciate the personal notes my hon. colleague puts in his speech and his experience. What has that taught him about the right to address these kinds of serious security issues in our country?

Foreign Affairs  Mr. Speaker, our government has an unwavering and steadfast commitment to the security of Israel and its right to live in peace. Canada and Israel have enjoyed a continuous and mutually beneficial partnership that has advanced the shared values and interests of our two democraci

Foreign Affairs  Mr. Speaker, our government supports Israel's right to live in peace with its neighbours within secure boundaries. We also support the right of Israel to protect the security of its citizens from attacks. Our government is continuing the long Canadian tradition of remaining clo

Justice  Mr. Speaker, the answer is going to remain the same. As members may know, there is a legal rule and a rule of convention called the sub judice rule, which restrains parliamentarians on statements made about ongoing legal proceedings, especially criminal cases before the courts.

Justice  Mr. Speaker, it would be inappropriate for me to comment or speculate on any matter on an ongoing criminal trial. The member knows that committee studies and multiple Speakers' rulings have found that the House should abide by the sub judice convention. As per the House of Commo

Ethics  Mr. Speaker, the independence of our judicial system is absolutely key to our democracy. Therefore, it would inappropriate for me or any other member of the House of Commons to comment on any issue that is currently before the courts.

Ethics  Mr. Speaker, members are expected to refrain from discussing matters that are before the courts or tribunals or courts of record. However, that answer was provided to the House Leader of the Official Opposition yesterday.

Justice  Mr. Speaker, because the member's question touches on an issue that is currently before the courts, it would indeed be inappropriate to comment. We do believe in the independence of our judicial system, and we will allow it to do its work.

Justice  Mr. Speaker, on this side, we believe in an independent judiciary, while the opposition members keep trying to indirectly prosecute a court case on the floor of this House. That is not the role of this House, it is the role of the courts.

Ethics  Mr. Speaker, the government will not comment or speculate on matters referring to an ongoing justice matter. We do believe in an independent justice system. I will remind the members opposite that sub judice rules may be breached by public statements that risk prejudicing matter

Ethics  Mr. Speaker, the sub judice rule dictates that members are expected to refrain from discussing matters that are before the courts or tribunals, which are courts of record. The sub judice convention is to protect the parties in case of a waiting or undergoing trial, and persons w