Discussion · Government Orders

Jamie Schmale Conservative

“The Liberals say they support private property rights, but their actions in court show the opposite. In 2018, they chose not to defend these rights in a lower court. Because of that choice, they are not allowed to argue for them in higher courts now.”
  • Question or comment in debate

    Signal 40 of 100

    Much of this statement went to praise, blame, greetings, routine procedure or general stories rather than reasons, requests or specific points.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate everything the member for Edmonton Northwest has done on the indigenous northern affairs committee. I have learned a lot from him, and I look forward to continuing to work with him on this very important file. The member for Winnipeg North, just a few moments ago, read a statement; in normal circumstances, this would be a good thing. However, everything repeated in that script was the exact opposite of what the Liberals were doing. They decided in 2018, in a conscious decision, not to argue fee simple property rights in court. This means that if a party does not do it in the lower court, they cannot do it on appeal, and if it gets to the Supreme Court, they cannot do it there either. How do the Liberals expect to use this argument when they are not allowed to?

No comments yet.

Comment rules