Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply  Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the member for St. John's East on his return to the House. He is an experienced member who had a brief involuntary interregnum and I welcome him back to the chamber. On both of those points, it is in absolute good faith that we are engaging with pharmacare and starting a dialogue on dental care.

Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply  Mr. Speaker, it is a tremendous honour to receive my first question in the chamber in this new Parliament from a former parliamentary intern. I congratulate the member for Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon. We are now a group of three. Judy Wasylycia-Leis, whose name I can mention in this chamber as she is no longer here, was the first intern to be elected.

Criminal Code  Mr. Speaker, I want to compliment the member for West Nova for his work in contributing today and his contributions at the justice committee, which we will significantly miss as he goes back to practice in the fall. However, I want to draw on that legal experience and ask the member two questions that relate to the same feature.

Criminal Code  Mr. Speaker, I want to start by saying to the member for Victoria how refreshing it is to have him contribute to this evening's debate, especially hot on the heels of the contribution from the Conservative member who preceded him. His erudite analysis is a welcome contribution, and I will freely admit to him that we miss those kinds of interventions at the justice committee.

Criminal Code  Mr. Speaker, the notion that due process is somehow an erosion of democracy development is categorically false and it betrays the development that has occurred in the country and every other western democracy in the last 50 years. The notion that it is a great time to be a criminal, a quote from the member's statement, is insulting to all members in the chamber.

Criminal Code  Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to join the second reading debate on Private Member's bill, Bill C-206, an act to amend the Criminal Code. At the outset, I want to to acknowledge the laudable objective of the bill and thank the member from Yellowhead for giving us the opportunity to debate this important social issue this evening.

Justice  Mr. Speaker, with respect to the documents and the policy he referred to, it is extremely important to emphasize the truth for those Canadians watching us on television. There are three criteria for these agreements. First, there must be an admission of responsibility. Second, a penalty must be paid.

Justice  Mr. Speaker, we are well aware of the decision that was rendered yesterday in a matter that is currently before the court. That was a preliminary inquiry about an evidentiary threshold in an ongoing criminal matter. It would be entirely inappropriate for me as parliamentary secretary, or indeed for any member of Parliament, to comment on an ongoing criminal matter.

Justice  Mr. Speaker, I appreciate that the member has been a member of the House longer than I have, but I also appreciate that he does not have significant experience in legal matters. Let me just educate him about this one point. The reason why the sub judice convention exists is because we should not have elected officials who are involved in appointing judges potentially influencing a decision made by an appointed judge.

Justice  Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for his question. I have three things to say about deferred prosecution agreements. First, it was announced to Canadians through a gazetting process. Second, consultations took place around the country. Third, it appeared and was vetted at the finance committee of the House of Commons and was also vetted by a Senate standing committee.

Protection of Freedom of Conscience Act  Madam Speaker, it is a pleasure to speak today to Bill C-418, the protection of freedom of conscience act. The bill proposes to create two new Criminal Code offences, an “intimidation offence” as well as an “employment sanctions offence”. Those offences would seek to protect health care professionals' freedom of conscience by prohibiting the use of intimidation to compel practitioners to provide medical assistance in dying and by prohibiting employers from dismissing practitioners for refusing to take part in medical assistance in dying.

The Environment  Madam Speaker, the member for Kitchener—Conestoga raises a very important point. No one in this chamber would stand and defend the sewage dumping that occurred in those three locations. That is a tragedy for the marine ecosystem and for Canada at large. I would emphasize that we need to be more cognizant of those kinds of situations.

The Environment  Madam Speaker, there are four points to which I will respond. First, it is not a crisis when somebody from the Green Party gets elected. It shows the political culture in the country is maturing to the point where everyday Canadians are recognizing what the Green Party has known for a long time.

The Environment  Madam Speaker, I thank the member for her question. As I pointed out in my speech, we have already invested in land conservation and green energy. What I have not yet said is that we have also invested $20 million in public transit and $20 million in green infrastructure. We are making investments, we are putting a price on pollution and we are proposing this important motion.

The Environment  Madam Speaker, I rise today to speak to our government's motion about climate change, brought forward by the hon. Minister of Environment and Climate Change. I will be splitting my time with the hon. member for Lac-Saint-Louis. I applaud the minister for bringing forward the motion.