Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Just to recap, because it was a number of days ago, at the end of Thursday's meeting, we witnessed a surprise filibuster from the Liberals to talk out the clock until the meeting ended. Thankfully, we were able to suspend this meeting. I thank colleagues for that, because I do believe that this is an important issue.
While the Liberals' intent was to avoid a vote at the end of the last meeting regarding the order of production of documents regarding the complete contribution agreements for the net-zero accelerator fund, which was the topic of major conversation from all parties with the environment commissioner before us, this was that same program for which the environment commissioner had discovered that due diligence was not always, if rarely, done before approval of any of the government funding.
The commissioner also found that there was really no clear demonstration of the project's value for money in reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
The commissioner had also found that the initiative was not part of any coherent or comprehensive industrial policy on decarbonization whatsoever.
The commissioner also found that there was a risk of double-counting when tracking emissions reductions, which is of major concern, particularly given that the government made the announcement of its national inventory reporting that same day.
The commissioner found that the government did not follow some of the principles of calculating emissions, which throws into doubt the numbers they announced just a couple hours prior to that.
The commissioner found that, in one project, the department did not include all relevant information in the greenhouse gas assessment exercise, breaching the principles of transparency and completeness.
I could go on about the commissioner's compelling testimony that day, but I think my point is understood and recapped effectively for members and Canadians.
The reality is that the Liberal government has badly mishandled its $8-billion program. Given that the environment commissioner can't come to conclusions as to whether we received value for money, I have no idea how Canadians could possibly figure out if there's been value for money.
Unfortunately, there seems to be a pattern emerging from the Liberals in filibustering.
I had the chance to visit my colleagues at the government operations committee a couple of weeks ago, where we were looking at the intended release of the contracts regarding the electrical vehicle battery plants that have been announced with major subsidies to foreign companies by Canadian taxpayers to bring in Chinese parts and components and have them assembled by foreign workers at the company's choosing.
Obviously, I think it's fully reasonable in that case, just as in this case, to request that the contracts be provided. Obviously, there can be redactions made. I think my colleagues don't want to see any sensitive data released if there are legitimate reasons, but willingness needs to be there to release the contract. We were talking about billions and billions of dollars and a government unwilling to release this.
It's a trend of broken promises. Unfortunately, I don't have time to go through the entire list of broken promises from this government, but this is a reminder that the next time the government says that it is going to spend $8 billion on something, I think it's reasonable to ask where it's going and what results it is achieving.
This Prime Minister, once upon a time, said that sunshine was the best disinfectant. Once upon a time, this government was going to be open by default. Once upon a time, this was going to be the most transparent government in the history of Canada. Clearly, these are broken promises on the fronts we have looked at in terms of the carbon tax emissions modelling assumptions and data that we have been denied access to, the same as the electric vehicle contracts at another committee.
I hope that my Liberal colleagues will perhaps cease the desire to break those promises, move back towards a desire to be open by default, release the contracts, vote in favour of this motion and not force opposition parties to come together to seek out this information.
Canadians and anybody who watched the testimony of our environment commissioner before us would have the very same questions we are asking.
I hope that we can get quick, unanimous consent to support this motion, hand over the contracts to both the environment commissioner and this committee to make sure that we can review them and get an understanding if there is, in fact, value for money through those.
I know there's a long speaking list, but my hope is that we can get through this very quickly so that we can finish any other committee business and get on to our next study.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.