Thank you, Mr. Chair.
We have ministers of this government who were found guilty of violating the Conflict of Interest Act. That's a serious matter. That should be grounds for being immediately fired from cabinet, but the Prime Minister has a problem, because he's been found guilty twice. The Prime Minister is a serial lawbreaker. What is a serial lawbreaker going to do about ministers who have also broken the law? Well, I guess he'd have to fire himself if he were to fire them. Canadians would very much look forward to the opportunity to fire the Prime Minister, if we can finally get on with having a carbon tax election.
Speaking of the culture of corruption in this government, I alluded to what I thought, and many Canadians thought, was the disgraceful performance by the Liberal member for Edmonton Centre, Mr. Boissonnault, when he insulted Jody Wilson-Raybould when she gave her powerful testimony before the justice committee in the spring of 2019. I can tell you that his performance at that committee hearing certainly contributed to his defeat in the 2019 election by the voters of Edmonton Centre. If he puts his name on the ballot going into this next election, he'll be fighting for third place.
Needless to say, Mr. Boissonnault resigned from cabinet in disgrace two weeks ago. Mr. Boissonnault has, nonetheless, a lot to answer for. We're going to demand that He should come to committee and sit in front of committee to answer questions about some very serious matters. Indeed, now that he has resigned from cabinet, he has gone into hiding. He was scheduled to appear before the ethics committee on the very day that he resigned from cabinet.
Is that a coincidence? I think not. I think it was very well timed. He made the decision to resign because he didn't want to appear before the ethics committee. This is why we were debating yesterday in the House a concurrence motion asking that Mr. Boissonnault appear before INAC. It was specifically relating to the fact that his shady pandemic profiteering PPE company falsely and fraudulently held itself out as being a wholly indigenous-owned company.
Mr. Boissonnault's company held itself out as such with respect to two federal government contracts. The Liberals said when Mr. Boissonnault was still sitting in cabinet that there was nothing to see there because Mr. Boissonnault's shady pandemic profiteering PPE company didn't receive any contracts from the federal government. Well, that's good. I'm glad that his company, Global Health Imports Corporation, didn't receive contracts, but that misses the point, or at least part of the point. It misses what is really the main point, which is that Mr. Boissonnault's company misrepresented itself as being wholly indigenous-owned. That raised questions about his suitability, his fitness, to serve in cabinet.
Let's be clear about why Mr. Boissonnault's company held itself out as being wholly indigenous-owned. It was in a blatant attempt to give it an advantage in the government's procurement selection process. In short, what Mr. Boissonnault and his business partner Mr. Anderson sought to do was steal contracts that would have gone to legitimately owned indigenous businesses bidding on federal government contracts. That is about as low as it gets. It is cultural appropriation in its most offensive form, or among its most offensive forms, and it's fraud.
The Prime Minister stood behind Mr. Boissonnault in the face of that. The Prime Minister kept him in cabinet. The Prime Minister even went so far as, when he was at a conference in Brazil, to publicly affirm his confidence in the then minister Boissonnault. He did so notwithstanding that it had been more than a week since Global News reported that Mr. Boissonnault's company had held itself out falsely and fraudulently as being wholly indigenous-owned.
It's not as if Mr. Boissonnault denied that this happened—not at all. It's not in dispute. That's what his company did while he was active in the company, while he was one of two partners working at the company and handling its operations on a day-to-day basis. This was before he was returned to the House of Commons in 2021. This was sometime in 2020 or 2021 but prior to his return to the House of Commons. It was only when—