Discussion · Government Orders
Kevin Lamoureux Liberal
“This bill is not about corruption. It is about buying equipment for our military and helping Canadian businesses that make military gear. We spent 2% on defence, while her former government only spent 1%. How can she justify what she said?”
“Mr. Speaker, the member is blind to the reality that this bill has nothing to do with corruption or character assassination. It has everything to do with providing strength to our Canadian Forces through military procurement and enhancing the Canadian industries related to military expenditures. That is the reality of it. Unlike the period when she was a member of Stephen Harper’s caucus, when they spent 1%, this Prime Minister’s caucus has not only committed but realized 2%. How does she justify her remarks?”
-
Question or comment in debate
Respect 73 of 100
This statement targeted a person rather than their actions or views: “the member is blind to the reality”.
See full analysis
Official Hansard
Mr. Speaker, the member is blind to the reality that this bill has nothing to do with corruption or character assassination. It has everything to do with providing strength to our Canadian Forces through military procurement and enhancing the Canadian industries related to military expenditures. That is the reality of it. Unlike the period when she was a member of Stephen Harper’s caucus, when they spent 1%, this Prime Minister’s caucus has not only committed but realized 2%. How does she justify her remarks?