Discussion · Government Orders
Jean-Denis Garon Bloc Québécois
“I will vote to make the Prime Minister answer questions at committee. A new budget is coming and he has taken on special duties, so he needs to answer for them. If he can cut government spending by 15%, he can cut an hour from his schedule to show up.”
“Madam Speaker, I have sat in the House for five and a half years, and this is the first time I am going to vote on a motion that calls on the Prime Minister to appear in committee. My colleague is talking to us as though we spend our weeks asking the Prime Minister to waste his time in committee. This is a specific situation. There is a budget coming up. The Prime Minister has given himself special responsibilities and must be able to answer for that. What are we to make of the fact that the Prime Minister is capable of cutting government spending by 15% in a G7 country, but is unable to cut back on something else to free up an hour to appear before a committee? We know the Prime Minister is capable of making cuts. Surely he can cut 15% of the time devoted to something on his schedule, such as a meeting. He could come to Parliament Hill a little earlier. He is a hard-working man. He has long workdays. He is capable of appearing before a committee, given the special circumstances. Seriously, I think my colleague might be proud of his Prime Minister when he hears him testify. He might be pleased with what comes out of it. He might discover that this is what it means to believe in the parliamentary system. I urge him to show a little open-mindedness.”
-
Reply to a debate question
Signal 37 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
Madam Speaker, I have sat in the House for five and a half years, and this is the first time I am going to vote on a motion that calls on the Prime Minister to appear in committee. My colleague is talking to us as though we spend our weeks asking the Prime Minister to waste his time in committee. This is a specific situation. There is a budget coming up. The Prime Minister has given himself special responsibilities and must be able to answer for that. What are we to make of the fact that the Prime Minister is capable of cutting government spending by 15% in a G7 country, but is unable to cut back on something else to free up an hour to appear before a committee? We know the Prime Minister is capable of making cuts. Surely he can cut 15% of the time devoted to something on his schedule, such as a meeting. He could come to Parliament Hill a little earlier. He is a hard-working man. He has long workdays. He is capable of appearing before a committee, given the special circumstances. Seriously, I think my colleague might be proud of his Prime Minister when he hears him testify. He might be pleased with what comes out of it. He might discover that this is what it means to believe in the parliamentary system. I urge him to show a little open-mindedness.