Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Professor Franks, thank you for being here today. I think your testimony was most enlightening.
I would like to begin by saying that, the minister lied and that’s factual. On April 23, 2010, in response to a question on the order paper—so, it’s written down; it’s not something that was said or that could have been interpreted—she said that the decision not to fund KAIROS was made by CIDA. On December 9, so several months later, she said the opposite in committee. But, we have on paper the fact that she said that it was CIDA’s decision and that she had endorsed it. So, as you mentioned, we are faced with two cases of misrepresentation on the part of senior public servants, simply to support the government’s position.
You mentioned Statistics Canada and the matter of the mandatory long form. Obviously, here in committee and in the House, we are talking about Ms. Oda's false statement, and also about false written statements that imply that CIDA supported the government’s decision to cut funding to KAIROS. In addition to the lie, we are dealing with the falsification of a document because, regardless of whether there was a place on the form for Ms. Oda to indicate that she didn’t want to fund KAIROS, all she had to do was not sign the document. Instead of that, someone added a “not” and she signed it. The two other people who had signed previously without the “not” discovered later that they had signed a document that had been falsified after the fact. I feel there is a governance problem there.
First, in British parliamentary system, trust is the basis of support to the government. In this case, the trust of parliamentarians was breached. I would like to know whether you think that we could go so far as a contempt of Parliament based on the facts and how Ms. Oda acted. Secondly, there is the ministerial responsibility that concerns the way Ms. Oda behaved in this matter. Shouldn’t she resign?
I am asking you this question because I saw, at the end of your presentation, that you were not willing to go so far as to recommend it to us. But could this go so far as contempt of Parliament concerning the government’s governance and to a demand for the resignation of the minister who breached the trust of parliamentarians?