He wanted to live like a king.
Interestingly, how this story broke to Canadians is through the American media. The American media caught up with the acquisition, this purchase on Billionaires' Row, and it was listed in the name of His Majesty the King.
That sparked interest. That sparked curiosity. It was only then that Global Affairs confirmed, “No, no, no. It's not King Charles who is looking for an alternate residence, a secondary or a tertiary residence. No, no, no. It's for the consul general.” Then the story started to break, and we started to learn about all of these impressive amenities: the Venetian marble, the full suite of Gaggenau appliances.
I did some research on Gaggenau. Gaggenau is the most expensive appliance manufacturer in the world. Kings, I'm sure, have Gaggenau appliances. Shahs and sheikhs have Gaggenau appliances. The coffee maker alone is $5,000. If memory serves me correctly, the refrigerator alone is $19,000.
There are three bedrooms, because it's important that Tom Clark and his wife have access to extra bedrooms. You never know when Justin will want to go down to Manhattan. Perhaps they have an extra room for him to sleep in.
In addition to that, we have all of the other amenities available to occupants of Billionaires' Row. We have the golf simulator. We have the full-length swimming lanes. We have the paddle courts.
Yes, Tom Clark is living the life of luxury and is living the life of a king. There are news articles basically profiling that.
It really concerns me, as a lawyer and a former participant in the justice system, in terms of when people come to committees. I always say that, depending on the nature of the issue and the witness, although there is no formal requirement to swear or to affirm to tell the truth, by its very nature, a committee is set up so that individuals are expected to tell the truth. When they don't tell the truth, and it's confirmed that witnesses have not told the truth, there is a process in Parliament that these individuals can receive their just consequences.
A case in point is Kristian Firth. All members of this committee remember Kristian Firth, who ultimately had to face the wrath of appearing at the bar of the House of Commons to answer to his deliberate lies.
I take lying at committee very, very seriously, but it wasn't just Tom Clark, although the motion is centred around Tom Clark. This is one of the questions I posed to the minister today. We've heard from a litany of government officials who, in essence, confirmed 100% the lie that Tom Clark shared with this committee during his last appearance, that he had no involvement.
If it was said once, it must have been said a hundred times repeatedly over the course of several months, since we started this study in the late spring or early summer.
We're not asking that those officials be recalled, although I think there are political grounds to do that. This particular motion is centred very squarely on Tom Clark.
I know that Mr. Jowhari, in his statement at the outset, claims that this is a useless exercise, that the report is a fait accompli, that there's going to be no evidence of any political connection whatsoever.
With all due respect to Mr. Jowhari, the fact that I'm now referencing everything that I have in relation to the political story—