Evidence of meeting #149 for Public Accounts in the 44th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was sdtc.
A video is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Williamson
Why don't we hear from Mr. Perkins and then I'll come right back to you?
Conservative
Rick Perkins Conservative South Shore—St. Margarets, NS
Just on some of the points that have been raised, obviously the committee is in charge of its own destiny. We have gone through a few witnesses, but one of the reasons why committees add witnesses during the study, as we know, is that we get testimony that prompts new evidence or other questions, which has certainly been the case when it comes to what we had from former Liberal minister Bains and the contradictions between some of his testimony. It was hard for him really to contradict a lot of things because he didn't answer a lot of things, but the few things he did answer proved to be different from other witness testimony we had.
This committee has not heard from the witnesses, both the one we put forward, I believe, as well as the ones the Bloc put forward for consideration. I'm always confident, Mr. Chair, that the clerk is always able to figure out the appropriate timing and the number of witnesses to have at the table to fit in a reasonable structure so that we can get to these issues. Personally, I don't think it's necessary to wait for some work plan. I don't think there are a lot of outstanding witnesses other than these ones from the original motion.
I would think that we are able to walk and chew gum at the same time and put forward more witnesses. If that takes a couple of meetings more, I think a $400-million question of what happened to taxpayer money is worth the time and effort.
It always surprises me that folks don't want to get to the bottom of what's happened with regard to the 82% of the conflicts of interest and, quite frankly, contradictory testimony on what happened, the management practices at the place and the relationship between the board members who were appointed, handpicked by the Prime Minister, and put on this board, and the cultural change that happened when the chair, who didn't apply but was asked to take over, sat there, and who has said some things that seem to be very different from what we're hearing from other witnesses.
I'll leave it at that, Mr. Chair, and just say that I think we can go forward with this, put these witnesses on the list and let the clerk sort out the timing.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Williamson
Well, I will say this: I don't want this to become a debate about what the clerk does and does not do. The clerk and I work together. However, as chair, I am the one who decides on priorities regarding witnesses. Direct your concerns to me, not to our hard-working clerk.
Ms. Khalid, you have the floor. Then it's Mr. Cooper.
Liberal
Iqra Khalid Liberal Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON
Thanks, Chair.
I want to reiterate...because I don't think my questions were answered. Perhaps you can take note.
I would really appreciate it if we could find out how many meetings are left, and the number of witnesses left. Adding in the witnesses presented in this motion and the amendment, how many meetings does this add to what we currently have? When are we going to finalize this study?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Williamson
I'll answer that before I hear from Mr. Cooper.
There are 13 witnesses remaining. Two of them are ministers, which brings us down to 11, in terms of the ones we have any ability to invite. Two invited witnesses have already been scheduled for after the recess, which leaves us with nine, most of whom are former board members. I have been bundling those in groups of two or three. I would say that a handful of meetings remain to get through the current witnesses. There are four being proposed today, looking at both the amendment and the subamendment.
Mr. Cooper.
Conservative
Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Let me say that, when it comes to the number of meetings required when we are dealing with $400 million that improperly went out the door through non-compliance with contribution agreements, and multiple conflicts.... We ought to have as many meetings as it takes to get to the bottom of what happened at SDTC.
I know the Liberals opposite would love nothing more than to shut—
Liberal
Iqra Khalid Liberal Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON
I have a point of order, Chair.
I don't think the member opposite should be making any insinuations about what we do and do not care about. We have been just as active as participants in these meetings, and continue to be. I would like to see a little more collaboration in terms of how we're going to proceed forward. I don't think my questions have been unreasonable in any way.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Williamson
Thank you, Ms. Khalid. Your point is taken.
Mr. Cooper, you have the floor again.
Conservative
Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB
Mr. Chair, we've seen time and again how the Liberals run interference and interject with points of order that are not legitimate points of order but rather points of debate, including when Former Liberal Minister Bains came before this committee. Time and again, Ms. Khalid and Mr. Drouin—
Liberal
Conservative
Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB
—intervened, obstructed and tried to block members of the opposition from posing questions about what Former Liberal Minister Bains knew, when he knew it, what he didn't know or chose to ignore. The Auditor General's report on SDTC was damning about what happened under Former Liberal Minister Bains' watch. We saw an outrageous display on his part—with the assistance of Ms. Khalid and Mr. Drouin—when he refused to answer the most basic questions—
November 4th, 2024 / 1:55 p.m.
Liberal
Conservative
Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB
—the first time he appeared before this committee.
Conservative
Conservative
Liberal
Francis Drouin Liberal Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON
No, no. I love the sanctimony of the colleague opposite.
Can we get back to the business of the committee? That would be helpful. This is not advancing anything.
Conservative
Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB
It falls very much within the business of this committee and the motion before this committee.
Liberal
Francis Drouin Liberal Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON
No, it doesn't, really.
Let's talk about how many more meetings we want, then get back to business. Then you can leave your Facebook clip somewhere else.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Williamson
Why don't we let Mr. Cooper finish up? Then I'll[Inaudible—Editor]
The floor is yours.
Conservative
Conservative
Conservative
Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB
We saw, with the assistance of Mr. Drouin and Ms. Khalid, their running interference to protect the minister from answering questions. The first time he appeared before this committee, he did not really answer any questions that were put to him. So blatant and so consistent was his obstruction throughout that hearing that we had a very long debate in which former Liberal minister Bains came close to being found in contempt by this committee.
Now, in the end, after the Liberals filibustered for hours and hours and hours, taking us until, I think, 9:00 or 9:30 to protect former Liberal minister Bains, we agreed to allow him an opportunity to come back. He came back. He continued, in many instances, to not answer questions. In other instances, he gave testimony that contradicted what this committee had heard from other witnesses.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Williamson
Mr. Cooper, I'm going to interject.
I said I would suspend for QP. It's two o'clock, so I'm going to suspend this meeting.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Williamson
I call this meeting back to order.
I see a few substitutions. Mr. Angus, I'm not sure if you've done something or we've done something, but it's good to have you here.