Questions Passed as Orders for Returns  With regard to the introduction of the new icon launched on May 3, 2024, by the Canadian Army: (a) when did the planning of this new icon begin; (b) how long did it take to design this icon; (c) what are the details of all contracts related to the design of the icon, including (i) what outside contractors were involved, (ii) how much each contractor was paid, (iii) whether any related contracts were sole sourced, and, if so, which ones, (iv) how long the contractor took to complete this work, (v) when this work was completed; (d) how much did it cost overall to design this icon; (e) how many staff, if any, were involved in the design of this icon; (f) which members of the Department of National Defence were involved in the approval of this icon; (g) who gave the final approval to utilize this icon; (h) what costs, if any, were associated with the promotion of this icon once the work was completed, in total and broken down by type of cost; (i) what are the costs (i) incurred to date, (ii) projected to be incurred, to initiate the use of the new icon, including, but not limited to, the placement on advertisements, uniforms, stationary, broken down by category; (j) who approved the (i) communications plan, (ii) tweets, related to the release of the new icon; (k) what are the details of all contracts related to communicating the launch of this icon, including (i) what outside contractors were involved, (ii) how much each of these contractors were paid, (iii) whether any related contracts were sole-sourced, and, if so, which ones, (iv) how long it took them to complete this work, (v) when this work was completed; (l) what are the details of all contracts signed related to the promotion of this icon, including (i) what outside contractors were involved, (ii) how much each of these contractors has been, or will be paid, (iii) whether any related contracts were sole-sourced, and, if so, which ones, (iv) how long it took them to complete this work, (v) when this work was completed, (vi) whether any advertising was purchased, and, if so, how much and on which platforms; (m) what are the details of all contracts related to the surveys, focus testing, public opinion testing, or any other research about the new icon, including (i) what outside contractors were involved, (ii) how much each of these contractors were paid, (iii) whether any related contracts were sole-sourced, and, if so, which ones, (iv) how long it took them to complete this work, (v) when this work was completed; (n) how many staff, if any, were involved in the surveys, focus testing, public opinion testing, or any other research about the new icon; and (o) for each focus group or public opinion research that was conducted, (i) what questions were asked, (ii) what topics were analyzed, (iii) what were the results?

Budget Implementation Act, 2024, No. 1  Madam Speaker, I would argue humbly that the member is disconnected. If he goes and knocks on the doors in his riding, there is nobody who is going to accept what he just said because the lived reality of Canadians is not one of prosperity; it is one of hardship right now, and it is one of lack of hope for the future.

Budget Implementation Act, 2024, No. 1  Madam Speaker, the fact on food bank usage and people not being able to eat is that under the current government, food bank usage has skyrocketed. Not as many children needed to use food banks in 2015 as they do today. In fact, that number is astronomically higher. With regard to homes and affordable housing, everybody's rent has doubled.

Budget Implementation Act, 2024, No. 1  Madam Speaker, I want a country where people do not feel like they have to leave it to get ahead, yet that is exactly what the government has done. Regarding this tax, primary care doctors, when we are in a primary care doctor shortage, are saying that they cannot stay in this country because of it.

Budget Implementation Act, 2024, No. 1  Madam Speaker, I want to speak this evening about the concept of the government's assertion about tax fairness in this budget. I would like to read into the record some facts that push back on the government's assertion that a fairly significant tax increase it has included in this budget is only going to affect a very small number of Canadians.

Criminal Code  Madam Speaker, I rise to debate this bill today, and I would like to focus my comments on a specific aspect of coercive control, for which there remains very few easy-to-access and easy-to-deploy de-escalation tools for victims. It is my hope that parliamentarians in the other place will consider the addition of these components to this bill, particularly as it pertains to specific tools to assist law enforcement officials in stopping coercive control from happening.

Ethics  Mr. Speaker, it is a little suss. Come on. They have a numbered company, a 50% stake, and then a mysterious “other Randy” is stepping up to take the blame. Did the minister bother asking the employment minister what the other Randy's last name was before he held the bag for him today?

Ethics  Mr. Speaker, here is a news flash for the government. We would not have to ask the same question over and over again if the government answered the question. Would that not that be nice? It would be so nice. Therefore, I will try once again. This is clearly suss. I cannot actually believe that the Minister of Employment had the audacity to say that it was the other Randy.

Online Harms Act  Mr. Speaker, I have outlined in detail why the bill is irremediable. It is not fixable, and members do not have to take my word for it. The Atlantic magazine, hardly a bastion of conservative thought, has a huge expose this morning on why the bill is so flawed. I suspect it is why the government has only allowed it to come up for debate now.

Online Harms Act  Mr. Speaker, the unfortunate thing is that the government is close to the end of its mandate and does not have a lot of public support across the country. The reality is that even if the government members said that they were going to split the bill, which they just said that they were not going to do, the bill would not likely become law.

Online Harms Act  Mr. Speaker, with regard to resources, I asked the Parliamentary Budget Officer to conduct an analysis of the resources that the government was anticipating for the creation of its bureaucracy, because I believe that those resources would likely be much better allocated to other places.

Online Harms Act  Mr. Speaker, third, the government must actually enforce laws that are already on the books but have not been recently enforced due to a extreme lack of political will and disingenuous politics and leadership, particularly as they relate to hate speech. This is particularly in light of the rise of dangers currently faced by vulnerable Canadian religious communities such as, as the minister mentioned, Canada's Jewish community.

Online Harms Act  Mr. Speaker, we must protect Canadians in the digital age, but Bill C-63 is not the way to do it. It would force Canadians to make unnecessary trade-offs between the guarantee of their security and their charter rights. Today I will explain why Bill C-63 is deeply flawed and why it would not protect Canadians' rights sufficiently.

Online Harms Act  Mr. Speaker, the bill has received widespread condemnation from groups of all political stripes because it forces Canadians to make unnecessary trade-offs between their security and their charter rights. As well, the bill would force much-needed reforms into a long, onerous regulatory process with no clear end in sight.

Business of Supply  Mr. Speaker, I am concerned about the government's dogmatic adherence to one specific policy instrument with regard to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, which is the consumer carbon price levy, or the carbon tax. It does not seem to be working in terms of meeting Canada's climate targets.