Public Services and Procurement  It was their government, Mr. Speaker. Then the minister paid out $5 million in bonuses to the officials who implemented the disastrous Phoenix pay program. Add that to hundreds of thousands of dollars for the Prime Minister's trip to a billionaire's island and tens of millions paid to the executives of Bombardier.

Public Services and Procurement  Mr. Speaker, I mentioned that Elvis had been spotted more than the minister. I wish he were here, because he would have given more sensible answers. I will go to Phoenix quickly. Every bit of access to information shows clearly that the government was told not to go ahead and delay it a bit longer, but it went ahead with it for no reason.

Public Services and Procurement  Mr. Speaker, yesterday the deputy minister for Public Services and Procurement Canada shamefully confirmed that those involved in the Liberal Phoenix fiasco are going to be receiving performance pay in spite of the colossal failure of the rollout. The minister and the government are content rewarding failure and avoiding responsibility for the issues that continue to hurt tens of thousands of Canadian public servants.

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns  With regard to travel expenses for departmental employees between November 5, 2015, and February 16, 2017, what was: (a) all extended travel pay, broken down by (i) amount spent, (ii) department (iii) branch or sector, (iv) staff title; and (b) all “weekend travel home” pay, broken down by (i) amount spent, (ii) department, (iii) branch or sector, (iv) staff title?

Questions on the Order Paper  With regard to executive performance pay or bonus payments made by Public Services and Procurement Canada to its employees since November 4, 2015: (a) what is the total amount paid out; (b) how many individuals received payments, broken down by (i) the dates that each individual was awarded executive performance pay or bonuses, (ii) the branch and region that each individual belonged to at the time they received executive performance pay or bonuses; (c) what is the average amount of the payments; and (d) what is the highest amount of the payments?

Questions Passed as Orders for Return  With regard to Table 6 “Horizontal Items (dollars) – Funding to support the management of the Canada-U.S. softwood lumber initiative, including negotiations towards a new agreement, ongoing monitoring of exports, and legal preparations for possible trade remedies action” in Supplementary Estimates (A), 2016-17, used before negotiations officially resumed on February 5, 2017: (a) what was the allotment used for legal fees, and related to this allotment, (i) how much was spent on a retainer for legal counsel, (ii) how many of these lawyers worked directly on the softwood lumber initiative; (b) which departments provided the funding, broken down by the amount spent by each department; (c) what expenses were claimed by the lawyers who were retained, broken down by individual lawyer and their claimed (i) travel expenses, (ii) accommodation expenses, (iii) meal expenses, (iv) incidental expenses, (v) per diems; (d) how many government employees or full-time equivalents were assigned to provide legal advice on this matter; (e) how many outside lawyers were retained; (f) how many hours per month did each of the lawyers in (d) and (e) spend working on the softwood lumber initiative; and (g) how many meetings were held relating to the softwood lumber initiative, and who was present at each of meeting, broken down by meeting?

National Defence  Mr. Speaker, Canada must pull its weight internationally. With this budget's $8.5-billion cut to military equipment spending, this is becoming less and less possible. The Liberals are not only putting at risk the livelihoods of tens of thousands of skilled industry workers, we are also pushing the schedules for our shipbuilding strategy further and further away.

National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians Act  Mr. Speaker, I agree with my colleague from the NDP. We often hear that committees in Parliament are their own masters, yet here we have a committee where the master was appointed by the PMO many months before this legislation even appeared. Basically it seemed to be a bone thrown to the committee chair as payment for past services, or perhaps as an apology for not getting a PS role or a cabinet role.

National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians Act  Mr. Speaker, the bill is very clear that ministers can interfere and suppress information. We saw in our operations committee, just a couple of weeks ago, that the government uses national security exceptions to skirt rules on purchases of paperclips and photocopy paper, yet somehow he wants us to believe that ministers will not interfere in major issues that may embarrass the government.

National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians Act  Mr. Speaker, I want to read further from the Canadian Bar Association regarding clause 16, which would allow ministers to hide or muzzle: Put simply, section 16 would gut the proposed law.... It would create a broad and largely standardless ‘out clause’ for Ministers to exempt themselves from the Committee’s disclosure regime.

National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians Act  Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to speak to Bill C-22, an act to establish the national security and intelligence committee of parliamentarians and to make consequential amendments to certain acts, or, as I call it, another piece of bad legislation to cover for a campaign promise the Liberals made without really thinking it through.

Preclearance Act, 2016  Mr. Speaker, there are a lot of benefits to this bill. I used to be in the tourism industry. I was a very proud hotelier and convention centre manager. I grew up and have worked throughout B.C., and I can say that Rocky Mountaineer is an excellent example of a private sector company which took over a failing government railway, expanded it, and created many thousands of jobs throughout B.C.

Preclearance Act, 2016  Mr. Speaker, I am for the bill, but I am against time allocation. There have been a lot of grave concerns brought forward by our colleagues in the NDP, and these issues have to be addressed. They are very serious issues. We are not served by bringing in closure on debate. I wish the government had chosen a different path.

Preclearance Act, 2016  Mr. Speaker, I support the bill, but there are questions that have to be answered. We want to get the bill to committee, but I see no value in invoking closure on this debate before the elected representatives for the Canadian people have had a chance to stand here and ask the government their questions.

Preclearance Act, 2016  Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in the House today to speak to Bill C-23, the pre-clearance act. This act is another example of quality negotiations completed by the previous Conservative government and left for the current government to carry over the finish line. I am glad it is managing to do so, despite needing closure.