Mr. Chairman, the motion I presented is a follow-up to questions I asked on two occasions, i.e., to Messrs. Bélair and Badun, regarding the mandate that had been given to lobbyist Sandra Buckler at a time when she had not properly been registered as a lobbyist.
The issue was brought to the attention of the Public Accounts Committee in April 2005. Somehow, the proposal that Royal LePage call on the Auditor General was only adopted six and a half months later. In the meantime, the president and vice-president of Royal LePage confirmed that Ms. Buckler had done lobbying work for the company. The questions asked of those representatives were intended to find out whom she had met and what her mandate was. On two occasions, those two people did not deny that Ms. Buckler's mandate was to ensure that the process not be completed.
Furthermore, it was well-known at the time, and even publicized in the media, that Ms. Buckler was in a very close relationship with a Conservative member of Parliament. We might want to further consider the following facts: when the Auditor General issued her report on Royal LePage, she indicated that the contract had been awarded unjustly and unfairly, but that same day, Minister of Public Works Michael Fortier stated that the contract was valid, and he did so without awaiting the Public Accounts Committee's report on testimonies given by the witnesses.
I am raising the issue of whether there is a link between the fact that Ms. Buckler is currently working in the Prime Minister's Office, that she lobbied for Royal LePage and that the current Conservative minister did not await the committee's recommendations before making such a quick decision regarding the Royal LePage contract.
These are the reasons why I am asking that Ms. Buckler appear before us. The purpose is for her to provide the committee with clear answers, which we have yet to receive.