Mr. Speaker, the first petition I would like to present today is on behalf of the village of Lytton, which was decimated by fire on June 30, 2021. We are coming up on the two-year anniversary. When this petition was written, Lytton was still under an evacuation order. That was lifted two days ago. Since the rebuilding has yet to begin, all of the businesses that were destroyed are asking very clearly of the government to forgive their CEBA loans. We presented one petition, and the government neglected that request, so we are again asking it to forgive the CEBA loans of the businesses that have not been able to be rebuilt that really need an extra hand from the Government of Canada.

Mr. Speaker, the second petition I would like to present today is on behalf of the people of Agassiz, who are trying to build a regional aquatic centre. This project was inspired by a progressive approach to reconciliation. All of the local first nations have worked with the District of Kent to get the Lets'emot community and aquatic centre built. So far, the federal government has only committed $450,000. The petitioners are calling on the Government of Canada to increase that number and increase access to swimming pools for children living on reserve.

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour and privilege to table a petition on behalf of my incredibly and deeply frustrated constituents of Union Bay, which has become a test pilot for unregulated shipbreaking. They cite there are significant risks not only to the environment but to workers who are associated with shipbreaking due to the presence of a wide variety of hazardous materials in end-of-life marine vessels. Unlike other jurisdictions, Canada lacks standards on shipbreaking and unregulated shipbreaking activities, which are putting our oceans, coastal communities and workers at risk, including the people of Baynes Sound in Lambert Channel. The lack of domestic oversight of shipbreaking and disposal of end-of-life marine vessels frustrates Canada's ability to ensure compliance with its international obligations under the Basel Convention. The petitioners are calling on the government to develop enforceable federal standards to reduce the negative environmental and social impacts of shipbreaking that meet or exceed those set out in the EU ship recycling program, and to provide assistance through loans or grants to long-term reputable shipbreaking companies, like those in Port Alberni, to facilitate implementation of new federal standards into their operations. Finally, the petitioners are calling on the government to develop a strategy for recycling end-of-life federally owned marine vessels so that this is not taking place in communities like mine, putting jobs and the environment at risk.

Mr. Speaker, I am rising today on behalf of many Canadians who support Bill C-262. They want to see Canadian companies represent our country well abroad, with a meaningful concern for human rights, and not just on a voluntary basis but on a basis where they are required to do so by government and where there are meaningful consequences for them if they do not ensure that they are adopting best practices in respect of human rights and reporting out on that regularly.

Mr. Speaker, I also rise today on behalf of Canadians who support Bill S-243, an act to enact the climate-aligned finance act. The petitioners do not just want to see government policy align with climate objectives in this era of climate change coming home to roost; they also want to see private capital and private investment align with our climate objectives through clear benchmarks, good reporting and meaningful consequences for those who do not ensure that their economic activity is coherent with Canada's goals and the world's goals for reducing emissions and mitigating the worst effects of climate change.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36, I rise to present a petition to the House on social affairs and equality. My constituents have petitioned in support of including seniors aged 65 to 74 in the 10% increase to old age security payments, which was provided to seniors 75 and older in July 2022. Furthermore, if such a policy were to be implemented, my constituents also call herein for retroactive payments to July 2022 for those aged 65 to 74.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to have the opportunity to present two petitions today on behalf of the Pakistani community in Regina and southern Saskatchewan, who are concerned about the recent political turmoil in Pakistan. The first petition calls on the Government of Canada to use all reasonable avenues of diplomacy to influence the Pakistani regime to hold free and fair elections that are consistent with the rule of law and the constitution of that country. This is, of course, following the recent arrest of former Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan, who is attempting to once again let his name stand in general elections in Pakistan later this year. The second petition calls on the Government of Canada to use its membership in the International Monetary Fund to require that both the issuance of new loans and the extension of existing loans to the Pakistani regime be conditional on the holding of free and fair elections in that country. This sounds like a very reasonable measure to take, given that free and fair elections in Pakistan are in the best interests of Canada, Pakistan and the international community. I am pleased to have the opportunity to present these petitions here today in the House of Commons.

Mr. Speaker, the following questions will be answered today: Nos. 1471, 1475 and 1481.

With regard to individuals that had their Canada Child Benefit (CCB) payments reduced in March 2023, broken down by province and territory: what is the total (i) number of families in receipt of CCB who had an overpayment for which recovery began in March 2023, (ii) number of families whose March 2023 CCB payments were reduced by more than 25 percent as a result of an overpayment recovery, (iii) amount recovered in March and April 2023? With regard to exemptions given by the government to certain ski resort areas related to the Prohibition on the Purchase of Residential Property by Non-Canadians Act: (a) why was the area around Whistler Blackcomb allowed to be exempted from the act; (b) why was the area around Sun Peaks not exempted; and (c) which ski resorts or surrounding communities requested an exemption and (i) received it, (ii) did not receive it? With regard to the Indigenous Tourism Fund announced in budget 2022, as of May 1, 2023: (a) how much money remains in the Fund; (b) how much money has been transferred to funding recipients; (c) what are the details of all funding recipients, including, for each, the (i) name, (ii) location, (iii) type of business; and (d) how much of the fund has been spent on administrative costs?

Mr. Speaker, if the government's responses to Question Nos. 1470, 1472 to 1474, 1476 to 1480, 1482 and 1483 could be made orders for return, these returns would be tabled immediately.

Is that agreed? Some hon. members: Agreed.

Is that agreed? Some hon. members: Agreed.

With regard to government funding allocated within the constituency of Winnipeg Centre for fiscal year 2022-23: what is the total funding amount broken down by (i) department or agency, (ii) initiative, (iii) amount? With regard to usage of the government's fleet of Challenger aircraft, since February 1, 2023: what are the details of the legs of each flight, including the (i) date, (ii) point of departure, (iii) destination, (iv) number of passengers, (v) names and titles of the passengers, excluding security or Canadian Armed Forces members, (vi) total catering bill related to the flight, (vii) volume of fuel used, or an estimate, (viii) amount spent on fuel? With regard to the Prime Minister's trip to New York in April 2023 for the Global Citizen summit: (a) what hotel did the Prime Minister stay at; (b) what was the paid room rate for the Prime Minister’s hotel room; (c) between April 25 and 29, 2023, what was the total amount spent on accommodations in the New York City area for the Canadian delegation or any other Canadian government official, including diplomats; (d) what are the details of all hotel accommodations in or around New York City that were paid for by either Global Affairs Canada, the Privy Council Office, or the Office of the Prime Minister between April 25 and 29, 2023, including, for each location where expenditures were made, the (i) name of the hotel, (ii) number of rooms for each night, (iii) room rate, (iv) total amount paid by the government? With regard to usage of the government's Airbus CC-150 Polaris aircraft, since February 1, 2023: what are the details of the legs of each flight, including the (i) date, (ii) point of departure, (iii) destination, (iv) number of passengers, (v) names and titles of the passengers, excluding security or Canadian Armed Forces members, (vi) total catering bill related to the flight, (vii) volume of fuel used, or estimate, (viii) amount spent on fuel? With regard to government grants and contributions since January 1, 2016, broken down by fiscal year: what is the total amount of government grants and program contributions given to any telecommunications company, broken down by (i) date, (ii) company, (iii) program, (iv) project description, (v) amount requested, (vi) amount received? With regard to disability benefit applications received by Veterans Affairs Canada (VAC) since January 1, 2016: (a) how many applications were received, broken down by medical condition; (b) for each medical condition for which applications were received, how many were (i) received, (ii) accepted, (iii) denied; and (c) how many instances have occurred where veterans who were medically released from the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF), had their VAC disability benefit application denied for the same condition from which they were released from the CAF? With regard to housing units owned by the Department of National Defence (DND): (a) how many housing units does DND own, broken down by location; and (b) how many and what percentage of the units in (a) are (i) occupied, (ii) vacant? With regard to Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada’s auction of the 3,500 megahertz band of wireless spectrum, conducted on July 29, 2021: (a) for each of the wireless spectrum licences auctioned off, which entity (i) originally purchased the license at the auction, (ii) currently owns the licence; and (b) for each instance where the current owner is different than the original owner, what are the details of the transfer, including the (i) previous owner, (ii) new owner, (iii) license and description of what was transferred, (iv) date of the transaction, (v) date of the ministerial approval? With regard to the Federal Economic Development Agency for Southern Ontario, between January 1, 2020 and May 1, 2023: how much funding did Business Improvement Areas located within the City of Niagara Falls, the Town of Niagara-on-the-Lake, and the Town of Fort Erie receive each year, broken down by each individual Business Improvement Area? With regard to Health Canada’s website currently titled “Report a side effect to a vaccine: Consumers”: (a) why was the website changed in December 2020 to prevent consumers from reporting vaccine injuries directly to Health Canada; (b) why did the website change back on February 28, 2023 to allow consumers to resume reporting vaccine injuries to Health Canada; (c) who authorized the changes in (a) and (b); (d) how and on what dates were (i) health care providers, (ii) the general public, (iii) provincial and territorial health ministers, (iv) provincial and territorial immunization authorities, (v) regulatory bodies, (vi) local health authorities notified of each of these changes; (e) for each notification in (d) did it mention a legal obligation to report adverse reactions; (f) what efforts did Health Canada take to inform vaccine recipients of their ability to report adverse reactions through the website; and (g) what were the expenditures incurred by the government promoting the efforts in (f), broken down by type of expense? With regard to instances, since November 4, 2015, where the government awarded a grant or contribution to a for-profit corporation that has since went out of business or ceased operations: (a) how many such instances have occurred with respect to a grant or contribution valued over $10,000; and (b) what are the details of such instances, including, for each, the (i) recipient, (ii) date the grant or contribution was awarded, (iii) type of grant or contribution (grant, non-repayable loan, etc.), (iv) purpose of the grant or the contribution, (v) announced value, (vi) amount paid out, (vii) amount recovered by the government, if applicable, (viii) summary of what happened to the company, if known, (ix) date the company went out of business or ceased operations, (x) location of the company headquarters?

Mr. Speaker, I would ask that all remaining questions be allowed to stand at this time.

Pursuant to Standing Order 67.1, there will now be a 30-minute question period. I invite hon. members who wish to ask questions to rise in their places or use the “raise hand” function so the Chair has some idea of the number of members who wish to participate in the question period. We will begin with the member for Mégantic—L'Érable.

moved: That in relation to Bill S-8, An Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, to make consequential amendments to other Acts and to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations, not more than five further hours shall be allotted to the consideration of the report stage and five hours shall be allotted to the consideration at third reading stage of the said bill; and That, at the expiry of the five hours provided for the consideration at report stage and the five hours provided for the consideration at third reading stage of the said Bill, any proceedings before the House shall be interrupted, if required for the purpose of this Order, and in turn every question necessary for the disposal of the said stage of the Bill then under consideration shall be put forthwith and successively without further debate or amendment.

Mr. Speaker, Parliament is about to rise for the summer, but once again, the government is showing us that, despite its coalition with the NDP, it cannot manage the House agenda without having to ram through legislation by using time allocation motions. This is unfortunate, because the government is responsible for the agenda and the business of the House. If only it had managed things differently, we could have gotten through the bills that it wanted to see passed before the summer without having to adopt all these time allocation motions. As we saw this week, the worst part is that the government even moved a time allocation motion to change the Standing Orders, which is completely unacceptable and breaks with every tradition, since major changes are normally made by consensus. Will the Liberals admit that they are simply incapable of managing the House and that they could not care less what the opposition parties think?

Mr. Speaker, I have great respect for my hon. colleague and had the opportunity to spend my first few years as a member of Parliament on the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities with him. Unfortunately, in this particular instance I have a different perspective. The use of time allocation, I remind him, was a routine part of proceedings before we formed government in 2015. There are many hundreds of examples when former House leader Peter Van Loan used the exact same tool to put forward significant omnibus legislation when the opposition wanted to have a say. The reality is that, as a result of our trying to get a number of things done as we approach the summer session and as a result of certain tactics being deployed by His Majesty's loyal opposition, we found ourselves in a scenario where we were being threatened with filibusters that would potentially continue through to the end of the session and that were going to delay important things from getting done. This is a particular piece of legislation that has been well litigated in this chamber and the other, and we now have an opportunity to move forward on an issue for which I expect there is largely agreement between multiple parties. This will enable us to move over to other priorities I know people in parts of Canada care deeply about, whether it is protecting the environment, advancing health care reforms or including investments that will make life more affordable. We need to be able to have these debates and complete legislation in a timely way, and I am going to be pleased to see Bill S-8 form part of Canadian law hopefully in the very near future.

Mr. Speaker, first of all, I just want to say that there was a problem with the interpretation as you were rereading the motion, but the interpretation was working when the government member read it, so we were able to hear it then. With that, I thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question for my colleague, for whom I have a great deal of respect, concerns the competence of his House leader. We have seen him run roughshod over the practices and traditions of the House by amending the Standing Orders without unanimous consent and by imposing time allocation. We sat late all week. We worked a lot of overtime last week and even before that. Summer is right around the corner, and several bills are being rushed through. We have been sitting a lot. Does my colleague think that in addition to trampling on the practices and traditions of the House, his House leader is bad at planning?