Yes, I don't need the approval of Liberal members for the material that I'm going to ask questions on.
This one is very straightforward. It's a decision tree on paragraph 121(1)(c) of the Criminal Code, under “Frauds on the government”. It's by the RCMP. They've populated information on the document. It asks a series of questions with respect to Justin Trudeau's visit to the Aga Khan's island Bells Cay: “Was Mr. Trudeau a government official? Yes.” “Did Mr. Trudeau accept a benefit from the Aga Khan? Yes.” “Did the Aga Khan have dealings with the government? Yes.” Then it says, “Did Mr. Trudeau have the consent in writing of the head of the branch of government for whom he worked? Unknown.” At that point, it says, if yes, then the final verdict would be “not guilty”. It goes on to say, if no, “Did Mr. Trudeau know that what he accepted was a benefit from a person who had dealings with the government? Yes.” If yes, it says, “Final Verdict: Guilty of Fraud on the Government”.
Now, we know that in fact Mr. Trudeau did not have a consent in writing from the head of the branch of the government for which he worked, because that question was put to him in the House of Commons. In the House, it was asked, “Did the Prime Minister give himself permission to take that free holiday in 2016?”, to which Justin Trudeau replied, “Mr. Speaker, no.” He was asked again on April 26, 2020. Again the answer was no.
Conservatives put the question to the Prime Minister to answer the only open question on whether or not the RCMP should lay a charge of fraud on government against Prime Minister Justin Trudeau in the case of his illegal vacation to Bells Cay. It was certainly law-breaking in that it broke the Conflict of Interest Act. The question is, did it break paragraph 121(1)(c) of the Criminal Code?
Commissioner, did the RCMP call Mr. Trudeau and ask him the question?