Debates of Oct. 10th, 2024

Reference to Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs

[Andrew Scheer, Conservative, Regina—Qu'Appelle, SK]

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I wonder if you could clarify; I believe the rules about putting out absences or presences are about specific members. I would also point out to the NDP House leader that there are several Conservative members here ready and willing to—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, I have a point of order. The opposition House leader just said there are many Conservatives here. Where? Are they hiding—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Carol Hughes]

This is becoming a debate on who is here and who is not. Again, I want to remind members, we do have quorum, and I think that was the main question.

I am sure the hon. member for Flamborough—Glanbrook is wishing to continue his speech.

[Dan Muys, Conservative, Flamborough—Glanbrook, ON]

Madam Speaker, the $40 million in ad scam was certainly no small sum, but that is one-tenth the amount of money we are talking about with this current scandal. When we look at the current scandal, we have a government refusing to turn over documents, as is the will of Parliament, to the RCMP. Back then, the ad scam was a scandal that actually brought down the government. There was the Gomery commission, which was set up to investigate.

It did not just question lower-level bureaucrats or party functionaries. It questioned high-profile individuals, the very heart of the Liberal government of the time, to explain their roles in the misuse of public money. Political operatives, heads of agencies, senior ministers, even the prime minister at that time, were dragged in front of an inquiry. That scandal actually brought down the Liberal government of the time.

We find ourselves here today talking on a motion of privilege about a scandal that has ten times the financial impact of what we saw back then. What we see from the current Liberal government is stonewalling. The Liberals refuse to hand over the documents that the House has ordered. We have to ask what they have to hide. How bad are the SDTC documents that they would require Parliament to grind to a halt rather than face the consequences of handing them over unredacted?

The Gomery commission exposed a culture of corruption within the Liberal Party that was deeply rooted at that time. This culture seems to have permeated to the current government, which puts personal gain over the interests of Canadians. Now, with the SDTC scandal, we see the same playbook. Liberal insiders are benefiting from the misuse of taxpayer dollars, while the government does everything it can to avoid accountability.

Canadians deserve transparency, accountability and leadership that understands the value of every taxpayer dollar. The government in the early 2000s, at the time of the ad scam, was held accountable for its misdeeds and faced the electorate, who sent a very clear message about the need for transparency. Just as the ad scam marked the end of an era for that Liberal government, we certainly hope it is the beginning of the end for the current government, so we can have a new type of government to lead this great country.

Let us not forget about another, more recent example of Liberals' rampant misuse of taxpayer money, the arrive scam scandal. An app that arguably could have been developed with a case of beer and a few techie people in the basement of someone's house over the weekend was going to cost taxpayers $80,000 but in the end ballooned to $60 million. That is what we know about so far.

At the centre of that scandal was, as we know, GC Strategies, which was a two-person IT firm that actually did not do any of the work but rather was simply a middleman, brokering contracts. Even the subcontractors did not perform a lot of the work or make an app that worked properly. This is, again, another example. The reason we raise this is because it speaks to a pattern.

Taxpayers deserve answers about what is happening here with the Liberal government and this particular green slush fund scandal. I wonder how Canadians can trust the government when it refuses to follow basic principles of transparency and hand over the documents, as requested by Parliament, to the RCMP. How can we believe in a government that has repeatedly put the interest of its ministers, insiders and friends above the interests of Canadians?

The SDTC scandal is just the latest in a long line of breaches, cover-ups and corrupt behaviour. The Liberal government has shown us time and time again that it will do whatever it takes to protect itself and its friends. We saw that in its proroguing of Parliament back with the WE Charity scandal, but also in its refusing to release documents with the Winnipeg lab scandal, and other cover-ups.

There is a very clear pattern. The government chooses secrecy over transparency, corruption over accountability, greed over public good.

Let me clear. The cost of this corruption is not just the billions of dollars of mismanaged funds. It is also the erosion of public trust. Canadians are struggling right now, and they are seeing $400 million going to line the pockets of Liberal insiders, all while small businesses are fighting to stay open, mortgage holders are renewing their mortgages and facing a whopping increase in their mortgage payments, and seniors are going to the grocery store. We have seen a 36% increase in grocery prices in Canada, which is ahead of what we have seen in the U.S., so grocery inflation is worse here. All of these things are happening, and our communities are struggling with the fact that money is being wasted and with the carbon tax. What we see from the Liberal government is our hard-earned tax dollars being wasted by going to the pockets of Liberal insiders.

The government has focused on protecting its friends rather than helping Canadians, and Canadians see this. Every dollar of that money that was misused by the government, every dollar that was funnelled to friends and insiders, is a dollar that could have went to a family to help put food on the table, to a struggling small businesses, to a community that is struggling with various issues or to defending our north, but instead it went to the pocket of a Liberal insiders. Canadians have had enough, and they are tired of the excuses. They are tired of the corruption, and they are tired of a government that refuses to be held accountable.

The Conservative Party is committed to restoring that accountability, and we believe that taxpayers' money should be respected and should be spent responsibly on projects that actually benefit Canadians, not enrich the pockets of insiders. Taxpayer dollars need to be monitored properly and conflicts of interest need to be eliminated. We have seen the Auditor General comment on the 186 cases of conflict of interest. Safeguards need to be put in place. It is time for a change.

Only a Conservative government would make the changes necessary to restore accountability and put Canadians first to ensure that taxpayer dollars are respected and spent on projects that actually make a difference. We will fight for that transparency. We will fight for that accountability. That is why we are asking that the will of Parliament be respected and that the documents be turned over, unredacted, to the RCMP.

Before I close, I would like to move that the amendment be amended by adding, after proposed subparagraph (a)(ii), the following: (ii.1) the Privacy Commissioner of Canada, who respected the order of the House and deposited unredacted documents; (ii.2), Paul MacKinnon, the former deputy secretary of the cabinet, governance. He was briefed by the Privy Council Office in the context of the Winnipeg lab documents, that in the event that parliamentarians press for the release of confidential information, the appropriate minister or ministers should take responsibility for the decision to provide or to withhold the information, and who, in turn, advised the government House leader that, consistent with the principles of responsible government, the ultimate accountability for deciding what information to withhold from or release to parliamentarians resides with the responsible minister.

[Leah Taylor Roy, Liberal, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

Madam Speaker, he has been referencing the waste of taxpayer dollars and I agree. Filibustering in the House is certainly a waste of taxpayers' dollars. We have had a ruling from the Speaker saying that this matter should go to PROC. The subamendment just suggested by the member is something that could be considered by PROC, rather than extending this filibuster further. There are important matters that taxpayers and my constituents expect us to be dealing with.

Will the member agree to put this to PROC, as has been ruled by the Speaker, and end this filibuster?

[Dan Muys, Conservative, Flamborough—Glanbrook, ON]

Madam Speaker, we are talking about $400 million. The Auditor General has identified 186 cases of conflict of interest. There has been a motion in Parliament to produce the documents. The simple answer for the government is to produce the documents, unredacted, for the RCMP. If someone breaks into our home and steals something, do we send that to a committee or do we call the police?

What I would suggest that we are saying, if there is nothing to hide, turn over the documents to the RCMP.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Madam Speaker, I get a kick out of listening to each of the Conservatives. It is like a crocodile knocking on one's door, offering to babysit their children and saying, “Trust me on transparency.” If someone has no sense of the history, it might sound like a great idea to let the crocodile in the house, but we do have a sense of history.

There is a blatant hypocrisy in the Conservatives talking about accountability on documents, when Stephen Harper was found in contempt of Parliament and shut down Parliament for three months. It was found to be threatening the very Constitution. What was that over? That was over the issue of the torture of people in Afghanistan. It let down Canada's standards around the world and suppressed evidence that parliamentarians had a right to. Stephen Harper did not care at all about transparency, and neither did the Conservatives because they shut down Parliament and refused to let us work.

When I hear the Conservatives talking about transparency and accountability, I refer to Tony Clement and his $50-million slush fund, to Nigel Wright and the secret $90,000 cheque, and to Brian Mulroney and money in a brown paper bag being paid in a hotel room. That is Conservative accountability and transparency in a nutshell.

[Dan Muys, Conservative, Flamborough—Glanbrook, ON]

Madam Speaker, the NDP, the coalition partners of the Liberals, will try and deflect from the matter at hand, which is the production of documents to the RCMP.

I can tell members what people remember of the Harper government. I will be going to the eighth fair and festival this coming weekend, and I can tell members what constituents are saying and what they remember about the Harper government. They remember the lowest inflation in 40 years, the best-performing economy in the G7, and the cost of their mortgage or their rent being half of what it is now. Those were good times. That is what people remember, and that is what we are fighting for. We want to get back to Canadians actually being able to afford to live in this country.

[Xavier Barsalou-Duval, Bloc, Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC]

Madam Speaker, I have the opportunity to sit on the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities with my colleague.

In my experience, every time we say the word “document”, panic sets in on the other side of the House, that is, with the members of the governing party. It is as though they have gone mad all of a sudden and feel the need to stop everything, block everything. A kind of hysteria suddenly breaks out, and they usually begin stonewalling. They try to buy time and actually discourage us when we ask for documents.

Last June, the House voted to demand that the government produce documents. We have yet to see them. How does my colleague explain the fact that the Liberals, who paraded about, talking about transparency before taking power, did the exact opposite once in power when asked to produce documents? Canadians and Quebeckers deserve government transparency; they deserve to know more about this.

[Dan Muys, Conservative, Flamborough—Glanbrook, ON]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from the transport committee for his excellent question. He is exactly correct. The answer is quite simple, and it is to produce the documents. If there is nothing to hide, why would it be so difficult to produce the documents and turn them over to the RCMP? He raises an excellent point, whether on behalf of Quebeckers or on behalf of all Canadians, that this is the will of of Parliament. We want the documents turned over to the RCMP, which is investigating this slush fund.

I would also like to congratulate the member on the concurrence of the report of our committee, the transport committee, on shoreline erosion, on which the Conservatives worked together with him at committee. It was interesting when it came to the debate of that report earlier this week. I am sure the member for Winnipeg North had not read the report. He had a very flowery speech of many words, as my colleague from Fort McMurray—Cold Lake pointed out, but not a lot of substance.

[Mel Arnold, Conservative, North Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

Madam Speaker, I would like to ask my colleague what is at the base of this debate that is taking place? I believe it is the fact that the majority of the House ordered the government and the Prime Minister to produce these documents

Is that not really the root of this whole debate? The government and the Prime Minister are defying the will of 338 elected members, or at least the will of the members of opposition parties.

[Dan Muys, Conservative, Flamborough—Glanbrook, ON]

Madam Speaker, my colleague from North Okanagan—Shuswap's question distills this down to the essence of what this is about, which is the will of Parliament to produce the unredacted documents and turn them over to the RCMP. If there is nothing to hide, why would that be so difficult? Why is there this stonewalling by the Prime Minister and the government to turn over the documents related to the SDTC scandal to the RCMP?

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, let me provide a bit of an answer for the member opposite.

The RCMP and the Auditor General have been very clear in their comments on this Conservative tactic. They are very uncomfortable with what the Conservatives are doing. This new-found faith they seem to have was never applied when Stephen Harper provided redacted documents.

What adds insult to the issue is that the Conservatives are not saying that they want to get the unredacted information so they can give it to MPs. They want to hand it directly over to the RCMP, even though the RCMP is objecting to the manner they are suggesting. Why should we listen to the Conservative Party over the RCMP?

[Dan Muys, Conservative, Flamborough—Glanbrook, ON]

Madam Speaker, we are talking about $400 million. The Auditor General said that there were 186 cases of conflicts of interest. We trust the Auditor General that, where there is smoke, there is fire. That is why the will of Parliament, the 338 MPs who were sent here to speak on behalf of our constituents, to watch out for how their taxpayer dollars are spent and to ensure that money is respected and is spent wisely, is asking for these documents to be sent over to the RCMP, where there is an ongoing investigation. If there is nothing to hide, why is that so difficult?

Where there is smoke there must be fire. The point we have been trying to make throughout this privilege debate is that these documents could simply be turned over to the RCMP, as was the will of Parliament and the will of the motion, and that it be done within a certain period of time, which was not done by the government.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Carol Hughes]

I have taken into consideration the hon. member for Flamborough—Glanbrook's subamendment, and he will reread it to make sure that it is in the proper format. I will make a determination from there.

[Dan Muys, Conservative, Flamborough—Glanbrook, ON]

Madam Speaker, I move that the amendment be amended by adding, after the proposed subparagraph (a)(ii), the following:

(iii) the Privacy Commissioner of Canada, who respected the Order of the House and deposited unredacted documents,

(iv) Paul MacKinnon, the former Deputy Secretary to the Cabinet (Governance),

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Carol Hughes]

The amendment to the amendment is in order.

The hon. member for Tobique—Mactaquac.

[Richard Bragdon, Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

Madam Speaker, it is a privilege as always to rise in this, the people's House, to bring forward the concerns of Canadians. I do that today with mixed emotions. I do that recognizing the weightiness of the matter that is before the House and what is being considered by the House, but also with hope about is coming in the future.

The motion we are debating is on the fact that the privilege of this House was violated. The Speaker gave a very clear directive and has ruled that indeed our privilege was violated in that the documents should be unredacted and released to the RCMP for investigation. It has been very clear, and a majority of this House has spoken to that and voted to that effect.

Right now, the Prime Minister and his government are ignoring the will of the people's House. They are not acting in accordance with the wishes of the duly elected representatives from across this country and across parties. This goes beyond partisanship. This is the will of Parliament that was clearly expressed. Right now, what is holding up everything else in this House is the fact that the Prime Minister is not listening to what the Speaker has asked of him. It is time that the Prime Minister listened to the will of this House, the representatives of Canadians from coast to coast.

There is no doubt that right now there seems to be a malaise across the country from coast to coast to coast. There is a heaviness on Canadians, and all this current circumstance, situation and scandal does is further the cloud that hangs over our heads, and in particular the heads of this government. Nearly $400 million, nearly a half a billion taxpayers' dollars, has been spent and issued to friends and has been deemed, in over 186 cases, to have been issued in direct conflict of interest. This is raising serious concerns across the country among Canadians as to how their tax dollars are being utilized and really how they are being abused by this current government. However, this only adds to the state of malaise and the shaking of confidence that is going on within the hearts of Canadians.

It does not matter where I travel or whom I speak with, and I think that everyone here would recognize that part of the job of parliamentarian is to consult with those who send us to this place, to spend time hearing their concerns, and take time to sit down, maybe over a cup of tea or at a community function, and hear what they are saying. I can tell members I have the privilege of visiting and talking with Canadians in my region and those in New Brunswick and hearing what they are saying, and what they are saying is very clear.

It is direct. They are tired of what they are seeing. They are frustrated, but more concerning is that they are truly troubled by what they see happening within Canada. I hear it expressed over and over again. This does not feel like the Canada that we grew up in. This does not feel like the Canada that we have come to love and adore. There is a cloud over us, and somehow they are wishing and longing for that cloud to break.

We are in the midst of this uncertainty and malaise. We have scandal after scandal and dysfunction after dysfunction, and it seems that the great ship of Canada is rudderless, lost upon a sea in a gale without a sail, wondering who is at the helm steering the ship. Canadians are getting concerned, and they are saying that we need a change in direction and that if we do not get that change in direction, they are very worried about the direction that we are going as a country. It is time for change, and that voice is being heard more and more in every conversation that I have.

I was reflecting on what I would share today, and it is funny how things come back to me. I recalled a book that I had read many years ago. It was written by someone who worked in a senior position in the White House, a previous administration of over two decades ago. This lady was writing of her experiences, and she was telling how after a very traumatic event in her time of service she was taking the commuter train on her way back to the White House, and she was rocked and emotionally distraught.

She looked at the time, and she remembers very clearly when she looked down at her watch, and it hit her. She thought, “Right now, I personally, and our country collectively, and our world collectively, are ten minutes past normal.” Hence the name of her book, Ten Minutes from Normal.

What I hear, coming from Canadians coast to coast to coast, is something very similar. Canadians feel like we, as a country, are somewhere past normal, and not just 10 minutes but perhaps nine years. They are feeling a malaise and a heaviness in their hearts, saying that we are not the country we used to be, we do not have the priorities we once had and we do not have the confidence that we used to have.

Canadians are not used to seeing the displays that we are seeing in our streets. It has troubled and rocked all Canadians, and I am sure it did all members of this House, to see the Canadian flag being burnt, and hear chants of “Death to Canada” and death to our allies going up from our streets.

People are concerned. They are saying that this is not the Canada they envisioned. This is not the Canada of their childhood. This is not the Canada where we could dream of having families, building a home, and being able to live, thrive and pursue those things that they thought were lofty ideals but yet felt were still attainable. Right now, there is insecurity. There is fear. Canadians are feeling like they are a long ways past a place called normal. They are almost longing for normal like a long-lost friend.

I am hearing it from our seniors. They are dealing with the rising cost of living, and they are wondering, on a fixed income, how they can make ends meet at the end of the month. Then they see billions of dollars going out the door, and hundreds of millions of dollars being spent on those who are well-connected to government. That troubles them. They get frustrated.

I hear it in the voices of young couples who are dreaming of one day building a home, but that seems so distant. Now they are wondering when they can actually move out of mom and dad's place. They are not even sure if they can afford rent, because it has doubled and tripled in some places.

I hear it in the voices of families who are struggling just to pay the bills. They have more bills at the end of the month than they have paycheques. They are wondering how they can keep their kids in sports, let alone plan to pay for their college or university. They are struggling under the burden of the soaring cost of living.

I see it in the faces of our energy and resource workers, and those who work in our mills and our factories. Their livelihoods have been assaulted through oppressive legislation and burdensome and cumbersome regulation. They are saying all they wanted to do was make a good living for their family. They are crying out for change. They are saying that we are somewhere past normal, where an honest day of work made a decent paycheque, where Canadians could still dream and even maybe take the odd vacation with their family. That is getting further out of reach for more Canadians.

Citizens are feeling increasingly threatened by rising rates of crime. Even in rural communities like the areas I represent, they are genuinely concerned. The addictions epidemic is touching family after family. Despair has been rising. Why is this happening? It is because we are like a people adrift and our leadership has no vision for the future of our country. Inscribed on our beloved Peace Tower, right here in Centre Block, is that famous verse, timeless and true, “Where there is no vision, the people perish”.

Right now, in Canada, we are struggling as a result of a visionless leadership, and a Prime Minister and a government that seem to have no overarching goals or high ideals for us to attain, other than preserving their place in power. Right now, Canadians are saying that they want to be the priority again. They want their dreams and aspirations to be attainable again. They want to be able to make a decent living, provide for their families and pursue those things that they have longed for.

Canadians love our country and want what is best for our country. They are saying that what we need is a leadership that gets it.

Well, I have hope that on this side of the House, there is vision for a future Canada where Canadians can prosper and pursue their dreams. On this side of the House, under the leadership of the member for Carleton, the Leader of the Opposition, we have a vision where taxes can be axed, budgets can be fixed, houses can be built and crime can be stopped. It is a common-sense, Conservative vision that is from the ground up and not from the top down. It is coming from the people across this country who are desiring a positive change and a return to the Canada that they love and cherish. That opportunity is before us, and it is rising from our people.

I could not help but reflect on an old story. It took me back because I find when we are talking about these matters and we are talking with Canadians, we hear almost a homesickness in their voices. They are longing for a place called home. It is like the Canada they love. They are saying, “Oh, I feel homesick for that.” Have others ever experienced homesickness? I have. As a young person, I remember feeling it. It is not a good feeling. It is a lonely and rough feeling to experience, and it was captured so well by the great actor who has now passed. Members will recognize his name: the great Robin Williams. Perhaps some members have watched the old film that has been out several years now, Patch Adams. It is a great story, a story of Dr. Patch Adams. It is amazing and Robin Williams does a great job in it. He opens the movie with this monologue, and it captures what we are experiencing. It says:

All of life is a coming home. Salesmen, secretaries, coal miners, beekeepers, [waitresses and mill workers]...all of us. All the restless hearts of the world, all trying to find a way home. It's hard to describe what I felt like then. Picture yourself walking for days in the driving snow; you don't even know you're walking in circles. The heaviness of your legs in the drifts, your shouts disappearing into the wind. How small you can feel, and how far away home can be. Home. The dictionary defines it as both a place of origin and a goal or destination.... Or as the poet Dante put it: In the middle of the journey of my life, I found myself in a dark wood, for I had lost the right path. Eventually I would find the right path....

I conclude with this. Canadians are discovering the right path. They have been wandering, as it were, a long way from home, wondering if they could ever get back there, but they are discovering the right path before them and that will lead them to a home; to a Canada where opportunity abounds, freedom thrives and where we can all belong and where we can all become all that we once dreamed of. That home is not that far away and we can get there if we make the right choices in the coming election. I appreciate this time. It is a joy to be before this House.

[Jennifer O'Connell, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety]

Madam Speaker, I listened to the member opposite's speech, and I would like to ask him a question. Is it the anti-terrorism scandal, the Phoenix scandal, the G8 spending scandal, the F-35 scandal, the Senate scandal or the Elections Act scandal that saw one of the Conservative members actually going to jail and leaving in leg irons? Are those the days of, and I wrote this down, leadership with “high ideals” that he wants Canada to return to?

[Richard Bragdon, Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

Madam Speaker, I am glad to talk to this. Canada was respected around the world without question at that time. We were respected and when our prime minister spoke, he was heard at that time. I have come to understand, very much so, that many Canadians, when that question is put them, reflect back and say, “Wow, we were much better off nine short years ago when we were there.”

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Carol Hughes]

I will stop the member there.

If members who have already asked a question have other questions, they should wait until the appropriate time. I would ask members to please not interrupt other members when they have the floor.

The hon. member for Tobique—Mactaquac has 30 seconds left for his response.

[Richard Bragdon, Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

Madam Speaker, when we reflect on a time when Canada was respected around the world, we were achieving possibilities, were not denigrating our workers and were not attacking the very sectors that provide much of the prosperity that this country has leaned upon. Many of the provinces and regions of the country do not have as much wealth to generate, and we are thankful that we had a prime minister, a little over nine years ago, who fostered an atmosphere where people could grow, develop, thrive and prosper. He was proud of our energy sector, proud of our resource sector and proud of what Canadians could build. He stood up for Canada and stood up for Canada's workers rather than talk down Canada's regions, talk down Canada's livelihoods and talk down Canadian workers. Canadians had a prime minister who stood on their side, and I think they want one who will do the same thing.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Madam Speaker, I found my colleague's speech entertaining. I appreciated his quote from Patch Adams, an excellent movie starring Robin Williams. I also liked hearing about his vision for Canada. The Bloc Québécois has a wonderful vision for Canada's future, too. We envision a Canada that lives in accordance with its values and its vision of multiculturalism. We envision a wonderful country with nine provinces and three territories, whose neighbour is an independent Quebec that also lives in accordance with its values, such as environmentalism, secularism and government transparency.

Lack of transparency is not solely down to the Liberals being in power. There always has been a lack of transparency. There was a lack of transparency under the Conservatives as well. I find it strange that the Conservatives say the Liberals lack transparency and honesty considering that these issues have come up over the decades and have always made Quebeckers feel very uncomfortable.

Of course, we agree that the documents requested by the House of Commons must be tabled in the House of Commons. The motion we are talking about today calls for this matter be referred to a committee, and the amendment adds instructions we agree with.

Can my colleague talk to us about this lack of transparency epidemic running through the federal government?

Does he see any solution to this kind of problem, which seems to keep occurring no matter the political stripe of the government in power?