My understanding of this particular cybersecurity initiative is that the Global Payments network giant invested $510 million in this to, essentially, prevent cybersecurity fraud, and it's providing 270 jobs to people. There were a significant number of student co-operatives created. Essentially, it's enhancing our security for consumers. My understanding is that the intention of the initiative is to ensure that the security required to protect consumers is being increased over time, and there's innovation happening, with the company having invested quite a significant amount in the process.
What I'm trying to glean is this: Is it the opposition's intention here that, somehow, there's a contribution agreement that has been violated, that the terms of that agreement have been violated? What would be the rationale for what is proposed here? It reads, “and that the committee report to the House to express its concern regarding the value for money for taxpayers on the nearly $50 million....”
I guess this is what I'm trying to determine here: Is the intention to recoup those funds in some way? I mean, the government grants all kinds of dollars out for various purposes, and this one is to enhance cybersecurity for payment processors. Obviously, there is some benefit in that to Canadian consumers, and a sizable number of jobs. Is that the intention?