Thank you, Mr. Chairman,
I'm coming at this because I think the motion is out of order and ask you to consider the point.
In his motion Mr. Wrzesnewskyj asks the public accounts committee to get to the bottom of serious criminal issues. Mr. Chairman, as far as I'm aware, no charges have been laid. There may be some allegations of criminal activity here, but if no charges have been laid, why are we dealing with serious criminal charges?
In Mr. Wrzesnewskyj's opening remarks, he talked about bogus internal investigations, funds misappropriated, types of violations, criminal investigations, and so on, with absolutely no proof or substantiation of any kind.
Mr. Chairman, as I've said many times, the public accounts committee is an institution of accountability. We're not an institution of management or investigation. We are not here to take over where the RCMP, the City of Ottawa police, or anybody else failed. Our job is to hold the government accountable before Parliament.
Now there may be reasons why no criminal charges were laid. We may want to find out why no criminal charges were laid, but I'm not interested in any way, shape, or form in approving a motion that talks about serious criminal issues and in bringing people forward to talk about bogus internal investigations and funds misappropriated when no charges have been laid and no charges may ever be laid.
Now, if Mr. Wrzesnewskyj wants to go down this road, I say he goes down this road by himself. It seems as though he's talked to everybody involved and has the whole story, so why are we being involved? It's not our job, Mr. Chairman.
Therefore, I would ask that you rule the motion out of order. If there's a failure to do that, we should defeat the motion as it's currently presented.