Mr. Speaker, I too want to present a petition signed by many petitioners. They are expressing concern that Louis Roy from the Quebec college of physicians has recommended expanding euthanasia to include babies from birth to the age of one year who are less than perfect. Recently, the Quebec college of physicians sent another witness to AMAD committee to double down, claiming further that this is not a moral issue and that Canadians have moved on. The killing of children is always wrong. These petitioners want to make sure that the House blocks every attempt at legalizing the killing of children.

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour and privilege to rise to table a petition on behalf of constituents from Courtenay, Cumberland and Royston in my riding. They cite that over 29,000 Canadians died due to opioid toxicity between January 2016 and December 2021. Those who died as a result of this preventable drug-toxicity crisis were loved and valued citizens of this country. The petitioners are calling on the government to reform drug policy to decriminalize simple possession of drugs listed in the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act; provide a path for expungement of conviction records for those convicted of simple possession; and, with urgency, implement a health-based national strategy for providing access to a regulated safer supply of drugs and expand trauma-informed treatment, recovery and harm-reduction services and public education and awareness campaigns throughout Canada. The petitioners cite that the current drug policies have proven to be ineffective in the prevention of substance use and exacerbate substance-use harms and risks, that the war on drugs has resulted in widespread stigma toward those who use controlled substances and that the war on drugs has allowed organized crime to be the sole provider of most controlled substances.

Mr. Speaker, I am presenting a petition on behalf of concerned Canadians about the culture of death that is happening under the current government, most specifically, with the recent development that Louis Roy of the Quebec college of physicians recommends the expansion of euthanasia to babies from birth to one year of age who have deformities and other various syndromes. This is a development the petitioners are concerned about. They believe that killing children is always wrong.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to present this petition. Petitioners are concerned with comments from the Quebec college of physicians, which recommended expanding euthanasia to “babies from birth to one year of age who come into the world with severe deformities and very serious syndromes”. As someone who had a sister who had Down's syndrome, I find this very disturbing. Petitioners also find any prospect of legalizing infanticide in this country deeply disturbing. Killing children is always wrong. Petitioners call on the House to block all attempts to legalize infanticide.

Mr. Speaker, Falun Gong is a traditional Chinese spiritual discipline, which consists of meditation, exercise and moral teachings based on the principles of truthfulness, compassion and tolerance. The Doctors Against Forced Organ Harvesting has gotten about 1.5 million petition signatures over 50 different countries and presented them to the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights calling for immediate action to end the unethical practice of forced organ harvesting in China. It is also calling for an end to the persecution of Falun Gong. This is a petition that is signed by a number of Canadians, and it is a pleasure for me to table it today. It is looking for members of Parliament from all political parties to do what they can.

Mr. Speaker, the following questions will be answered today: Nos. 885, 886, 888, 892, 893, 896 and 898.

Mr. Speaker, furthermore, if the government's response to Questions Nos. 882 to 884, 887, 889 to 891, 894, 895, 897 and 899 could be made orders for returns, these returns would be tabled immediately.

With regard to the Globe and Mail report published on October 17, 2022, that the Office of the Prime Minister (PMO) knew of Laith Marouf's derogatory tweets a month before the contract with the Community Media Advocacy Centre was cancelled: (a) on what day did the PMO first become aware of the derogatory tweets; (b) who was the first person at the PMO to become aware of the tweet, and how did that person become aware of it; (c) what is the detailed timeline of any action taken within the PMO after it was informed of the tweets; and (d) is the PMO aware of any other derogatory or unacceptable tweets from entities which were awarded government contracts, and, if so, what are the details, including (i) which entities, (ii) the nature of the tweets, (iii) the date the PMO became aware, (iv) the value of the contract, (v) the date the contract was cancelled, if it was cancelled? With regard to the government's response to three police stations set up in Toronto by the Fuzhou Public Security Bureau, representing the government of China: (a) when did the government first become aware of their existence; (b) why didn't the government take any action to stop the establishment of these police stations; (c) what specific action, if any, will the government take to shut down these police stations and what is the timeline for such action; (d) has the RCMP opened any criminal investigations in relation to the actions of the Fuzhou Public Security Bureau or individuals acting on behalf of the bureau, and, if so, what is the status of any such investigation; and (e) is the government aware of the Fuzhou Public Security Bureau, or any other entity acting on behalf of the Chinese Communist Party, setting up police stations or other similar types of operations elsewhere in Canada, and, if so, what are the details, including the locations and names of the entities? With regard to the Canada Emergency Response Benefit (CERB), broken down by department, agency, Crown corporation, or other government entity: (a) how many government employees have been found to have made fraudulent claims for the CERB; (b) what amount of money is represented by the fraudulent claims in (a); (c) of the employees in (a), how many were (i) terminated, (ii) disciplined, but not terminated, broken down by type of discipline, (iii) not disciplined; (d) to date, how much of the fraudulent claim money has been (i) recovered, (ii) not yet recovered, (iii) written off; and (e) does the government plan to prosecute any of the individuals who made the fraudulent claims, and, if not, why not? With regard to sanctions imposed on Russian individuals in response to the Russian invasion of Ukraine: (a) what is the total number of individuals sanctioned to date; (b) of the individuals in (a), how many (i) have assets in Canada which have been seized, (ii) do not have any known assets in Canada; (c) what is the total number of entities sanctioned to date; (d) of the entities sanctioned in (c), how many (i) have assets in Canada which have been seized, (ii) do not have any known assets in Canada; and (e) what is the value of assets seized to date from (i) individuals, (ii) entities? With regard to the dental care provisions in Bill C-31, An Act respecting cost of living relief measures related to dental care and rental housing: (a) were the provincial or territorial ministers of Health consulted on these measures, and, if so, what are the specific details, including (i) who was consulted, (ii) how they were consulted, (iii) the dates of the consultations; and (b) were the provisions on the agenda for any federal, provincial, and territorial ministers' meetings, and, if so, which ones and on what dates? With regard to Bill C-21, An Act to amend certain Acts and to make certain consequential amendments (firearms): (a) what are the details of all studies, surveys and focus groups conducted by the government and related to the effectiveness of the measures contained in the bill, including, for each (i) who conducted the study, (ii) the type of study (focus group, survey, etc.), (iii) the number of participants, (iv) the participant demographics, (v) the questions asked and results, (vi) the methodology used, (vii) the website where findings are available to the public, if applicable; and (b) what are the details of each contract pertaining to (a), including, for each, (i) the vendor, (ii) the date of the contract, (iii) the value, (iv) which studies, surveys or focus groups were connected to the contract, (v) a description of goods or services, (vi) whether the contract was sole-sourced or awarded through a competitive bidding process? With regard to the impact of rising interest rates on the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC): what are the CMHC's projections on the number, total value, and percentage of CMHC insured mortgage loans that will be in a default situation based on (i) current interest rates, (ii) higher interest rates, broken down by 50 basis point intervals?

With regard to Prairies Economic Development Canada (PrairiesCan): (a) what is the total amount of project funding announced by the agency since its inception; (b) what is the total amount of project funding where the funding has actually been transferred to the recipient since the agency's inception; (c) what is the breakdown of (a) and (b) by year; and (d) what are the details of all projects which have been funded by the agency to date, including, for each, the (i) location, (ii) date of announcement, (iii) project description, (iv) amount of funding being provided by PrairiesCan, (v) percentage of total project costs represented by the amount in (iv), (vi) start date, (vii) expected completion date, (viii) amount of PrairiesCan funding actually delivered to the recipient to date, (ix) recipient? With regard to the Post Living Differential (PLD) allowance offered by the Department of National Defence to Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) members, broken down by Canadian Forces bases, region and year in the past 10 years: (a) what is the amount of PLD allowance offered to members, in dollars and percentage of salary; (b) how many members receive the PLD allowance; (c) how many members do not receive the PLD allowance; (d) how many members are living in single versus family units; (e) when did the department last undertake a comprehensive review of the PLD levels; (f) are there plans to undertake a review of the PLD allowance; and (g) what criteria is used to determine whether the PLD allowance is offered or not? With regard to the claim by the Minister of Housing and Diversity and Inclusion, that he used the month between finding out about Laith Marouf's comments and speaking out publicly about them, to consult with departmental officials on the government's legal options for withdrawing the money from the Community Media Advocacy Centre: (a) what are the details, including a specific timeline, for any consultations held in the month following July 20, 2022; (b) what are the titles of all departmental officials who were consulted; and (c) on what date and by what method (email, verbal consultation) was each official in (b) consulted? With regard to the Tourism Relief Fund: (a) what is the complete list of criteria used by officials to determine the fund recipients; (b) how many applications for funding were received from British Columbia; (c) of the applicants in (b), how many were granted funding; (d) how many (i) businesses, (ii) non-profits, have received this funding in British Columbia; (e) of the recipients in (d), how many received (i) repayable, (ii) non-repayable, contributions; and (f) what is the timeline for when an application is received, when a decision is rendered, and when it is communicated to the applicant? With regard to the government's response to foreign governments recruiting retired personnel from the Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF): (a) what is the Department of National Defence's policy with respect to retired personnel from the RCAF accepting contracts or other paid work from foreign governments; (b) is the Department of National Defence aware of any former RCAF members accepting contracts or other paid work from the People's Republic of China since January 1, 2016; (c) if the answer to (b) is affirmative, (i) what is the nature of that work, (ii) what is the total (dollar, contribution) value of that work, (iii) how many former RCAF members are involved, (iv) how many former RCAF members were CF-18 pilots, (v) what national security steps, if any, have been taken to prevent sensitive information from being divulged to an adversarial foreign government; (d) is the Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development aware of any attempts by diplomatic staff from the People's Republic of China or other officials to recruit former members of the Canadian Armed Forces; (e) if the answer to (d) is affirmative, (i) what steps has the Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development taken to prevent such recruitment activities, (ii) have any diplomatic staff from the People's Republic of China been expelled from Canada as a result? With regard to the Roxham Road border crossing: (a) how many individuals have used the Roxham Road border crossing to enter Canada, broken down by month since January 1, 2021; (b) what are the ongoing monthly costs related to the crossing, including costs associated with processing individuals crossing the border; (c) what is the breakdown of (b) by type of expenditure; (d) how many officers or employees from (i) the RCMP, (ii) the Canada Border Services Agency, (iii) Citizenship and Immigration Canada, have been assigned to duties related to the border crossing or the individuals who crossed into Canada at that location; (e) what are the details of all contracts awarded by the government since January 1, 2021, in relation to the border crossing, including, for each, the (i) vendor, (ii) date, (iii) amount or value, (iv) description of goods or services, including the volume, if applicable; (f) for each contract in (e), was it sole­ sourced or awarded through a competitive bidding process; and (g) for each sole-sourced contract in (f), why was there not a competitive bidding process? With regard to expenditures on communications professional services (codes 035, 0351, and 0352) since April 1, 2021, broken down by department, agency, Crown corporation, or other government entity: what are the details of each expenditure, including (i) the date, (ii) the amount, (iii) the vendor, (iv) the description of goods or services, (v) whether the contract was sole-sourced or competitively bid? With regard to the claim on the government's website that 10 percent of Canada's greenhouse gas emissions are from crop and livestock production: (a) what is the breakdown of that percentage by type of crop or livestock (beef, pork, wheat, canola, etc.); and (b) for each type of crop or livestock in (a), what portion of the percentage is created by each stage of production (seeding, harvest, slaughter, milling, etc.)? With regard to individuals who have entered Canada at irregular border crossings, since January 1, 2020, broken down by month: how many individuals entered at such border crossings, broken down by province or territory, and by area (e.g., near Emerson, Manitoba)? With regard to minors being warned of imprisonment or fines if they broke the previous quarantine requirements for certain individuals returning to Canada, since April 2020, broken down by year: how many travellers under the age of 18 received such warnings, broken down by age and type of warning (email, phone call, physical visit to property, etc.)? With regard to the Pacific Integrated Commercial Fisheries Initiative (PICFI), broken down by fiscal year since its inception: (a) what projects have received funding and who was the recipient of the funding; (b) what was the amount of funding delivered to each project in (a); (c) how many Indigenous commercial fisheries have received funding and which First Nations peoples do they represent; (d) what is the total amount of funding received by each commercial fishery in (c); and (e) what is the total amount of funding spent to date through the PICFI?

Mr. Speaker, I would then ask that all remaining questions be allowed to stand.

Is that agreed? Some hon. members: Agreed.

Mr. Speaker, I am here to give notice under Standing Order 52(2) that I will be seeking leave today, Monday, December 5, 2022, to propose an emergency debate regarding missing and murdered indigenous women, girls and two-spirit people. Last week, the Winnipeg Police Service announced charges against an alleged serial killer for the murder of Morgan Harris, Marcedes Myran and one other loved one who is still being identified. This follows an earlier charge of May 2022 for the murder of Rebecca Contois. Our community is reeling from the loss of our precious sisters and what has been part of an inquiry into missing and murdered indigenous women and girls, something that the Prime Minister has identified as a genocide. We need closure. We need to talk about it and address it immediately to get support to search for our loved ones. We need closure and to search for our loved ones who, the police believe, are in the Brady Road landfill site. I am requesting this. We need resources. Our women continue to be murdered. We need resources to find our loved ones, and we need to discuss this right away. We need closure.

I wish to inform the House that I have received notice of a request for an emergency debate. I invite the hon. member for Winnipeg Centre to rise and make a brief intervention.

I thank the hon. member for Winnipeg Centre for her intervention. However, I am not satisfied that her request meets the requirements of the Standing Orders at this time.

Mr. Speaker, it is always fascinating hearing my colleague and friend across the way present herself in the form of a speech to the chamber. One of the biggest issues I have with the Conservative Party is that there are many members within it that will say, on the one hand, that we need to spend some money. We heard a lot today about spending on different areas from some of her colleagues. Then on the other hand, we hear from other colleagues who say that we need to stop spending money. There seems to be an inconsistency at times. The overall theme of the Conservative Party seems to be to chop and cut programs and to cut back on government expenditures. I wonder if my colleague could provide her thoughts on what areas, and which departments in particular, she believes we should be looking at cutting programs or funding dollars.

Mr. Speaker, the only party in this chamber that has an addiction to spending and a spending problem is the Liberal government.

Mr. Speaker, my colleague opposite just talked about government spending. The Auditor General and the PBO have talked about a lot of areas where the government has been ineffective in spending. In fact, I believe there is an article that says: Ottawa spends billions yet the number of homeless in Canada may be rising. An Order Paper question that I had showed that the government spent $400 million on airport COVID testing after the rest of the world had lifted requirements for COVID testing. I believe these contracts are going forward every day. The government also spent $1 billion on the WE Charity scandal. Spending is not an end in and of itself. Would the member agree that there are areas where the government has spent erroneously, and perhaps it behooves the government to do a bit of an audit before making statements like the one that was just made?

Mr. Speaker, agreed. The fact is that the government brought in more tax dollars and more revenue than expected because of inflation. Everything costing more meant more taxes paid to the government on the same item. However, when it had this windfall, instead of paying down the debt, the government spent unscrupulously again. It is time to control that spending so that Canadians can finally get their heads above water and do not have to give up their homes. Otherwise, we will have an even greater homeless problem in this country.

Mr. Speaker, what are the member's thoughts in regard to the Conservative election platform where they said that they actually supported a price on pollution? That was in the last election and not that long ago. Her party said that it supported a price on pollution. Now it seems to have changed its mind. Can the member explain why the Conservatives have changed their minds?