Public Accounts Committee on Oct. 8th, 2026

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Go ahead on a point of order.

[Ron McKinnon, Liberal, Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC]

I believe this is off-topic. I would desperately like to hear about the $34 million and how—

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

I'm not sure...again, that is not a point of order. The member was, I thought, giving us a run-through of where this is and a bit of history.

Mr. Cooper, you have the floor. As you know, I grant latitude but, particularly, it's—

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Sturgeon River, AB]

It's certainly pertinent, and with the greatest respect to Mr. McKinnon, for whom I have a lot of respect, he said that this is just one big “slander”.

I'm reviewing some of the facts, including the fact that there were 186 conflicts involving board members, including instances in which board members left the room. The board then voted to funnel money into their company, and then they came back into the room. Someone else left the room, and then the board voted to funnel money into that member's company. On and on it went, 186 times, rinse and repeat. We had a chair of the board who funnelled money into her own company and moved the motion to funnel money into her own company.

There were also all the violations of the SDTC act, including $38.5 million in illegal COVID relief payments, as well as tens of millions of dollars that went out the door improperly, contravening the contribution agreement with ISED and violating the SDTC act. Indeed, the Auditor General found that $59 million went to ineligible projects.

[Ron McKinnon, Liberal, Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC]

I have a point of order.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Go ahead.

[Ron McKinnon, Liberal, Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC]

I really believe that relevance is a valid point of order. None of this stuff is relevant to the motion at hand.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

I'm not sure I agree with you, Mr. McKinnon. We had 10 meetings on this subject. There was ample evidence of malfeasance, and I've heard nothing from Mr. Cooper that suggests he's talking about something so off-topic that it's outside the authority of this committee. It was a pretty damning report, and the committee review was hardly better.

I'll go back to—

[Ron McKinnon, Liberal, Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC]

Be that as it may, this is not the motion before us now. We're not dealing with the broader situation. I would like to hear arguments for why we should be of this opinion. I have not heard anything yet. The broader situation that you speak of is certainly legitimate, but not for this debate, I would suggest.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

I take the position that Mr. Cooper is going through some of the problems with the program.

I'll turn the floor back to Mr. Cooper.

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Sturgeon River, AB]

I know the Liberals really don't like the facts involving the green slush fund, which was a web of self-dealing conflicts and mismanagement.

[Ron McKinnon, Liberal, Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC]

I have a point of order.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Yes, Mr. McKinnon.

[Ron McKinnon, Liberal, Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC]

The Liberals desperately like the facts. We just want to hear them.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

It's back to you, Mr. Cooper.

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Sturgeon River, AB]

This motion arises from a response from Minister of Industry Mélanie Joly to an Order Paper question brought by Conservative member Luc Berthold, who asked ISED for an accounting of how many monies have been recouped: How many taxpayer dollars have been recouped by the government?

In reply to Mr. Berthold's Order Paper question, the minister acknowledged that there were five ineligible projects totalling $34 million and the Liberals had...the minister had decided not to recover those monies—

[Ron McKinnon, Liberal, Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC]

I have a point of order.

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Sturgeon River, AB]

This is absolutely within the realm of the motion. The motion, Mr. McKinnon, is that—

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Just one second. I'll come right back to you. You can pick it up there.

Yes, Mr. McKinnon.

[Ron McKinnon, Liberal, Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC]

Mr. Cooper has just said that the Liberals decided these were not recoverable. It was an independent board that made the determination, not the Liberals.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

That is a point of debate, Mr. McKinnon.

Mr. Cooper, you have the floor again.

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Sturgeon River, AB]

The buck stops with the minister. It's within her department.

By the way, if the member wants a history, I can provide a long history of the cover-up that occurred under the current finance minister when he was minister of industry, including suppressing and blocking the release of a fact-finding report and tampering with evidence according to a whistle-blower, among other evidence that came to the attention of this committee in the last Parliament.

I can go there, but for now, I will note that the minister, in response to the question put by Mr. Berthold, said that there was $34 million that went out the door improperly to ineligible projects. The minister acknowledged it. This is a damning admission, on its face, of gross mismanagement that occurred on the government's watch.

Further to that, notwithstanding that 34 million tax dollars went out the door improperly, Minister Joly said that it was not “in the public interest” to recover those funds, due to what she characterized as “sound stewardship of public funds”. It was “not in the public interest” to recover 34 million tax dollars that went to ineligible projects, and this constituted “sound stewardship of public funds”, according to Mélanie Joly.

Talk about gaslighting, Mr. Chair. This is an insult to taxpayers to say it's “not in the public interest” to recover $34 million. How could it be possible that it's “not in the public interest” to recover $34 million that went to ineligible recipients? At the very least, Mr. Chair, Canadians deserve transparency about this decision, and the Liberals have provided zero transparency in addition to recovering zero taxpayer dollars.

Canadians deserve a cost-benefit analysis. The minister says it's in the public interest. She provides no cost-benefit analysis to justify why the government is walking away from 34 million taxpayer dollars. No legal rationale has been provided. There is no substantive explanation as to why it is, according to Mélanie Joly, “not in the public interest” to recover $34 million that improperly went out the door.

Is it because, for example, there were no standard clawback provisions in the agreements? Who drafted these agreements? Who allowed tens of millions of taxpayer dollars to go out the door to ineligible projects with absolutely no mechanism available to recover the funds? If this is the case, if it's the reason the Liberal government has decided not to recoup the funds, then it would speak to, in addition to gross mismanagement and corruption, staggering incompetence layered on top of that, of which there certainly was plenty at SDTC, or the green slush fund, as it's become so famously known—for very good reason.

Then there's the question, in terms of transparency, that I referenced—and Liberals really don't like to be reminded of it, but I'll remind them again—about 330 million tax dollars that went to companies that board members had interests in. There were 90 cases in which board members voted directly to fund companies that they had an interest in, totalling $76 million. There were tens of millions of dollars—hundreds of millions of dollars more involving other conflicts of interest; there were 186 conflicts of interest in total.

The question is this: Of the companies that were ineligible as recipients, were any the companies of board members who were involved in conflicts of interest, who benefited from funnelling money into their companies while they sat on the board? Canadians deserve answers regarding that, but we have no answers.

Instead, what we have is effectively a cover-up by Mélanie Joly and the Liberals. I say it's effectively a cover-up because this decision not to recover 34 million tax dollars was done in secret. They tried to hide it from Canadians.

It was only because of the Order Paper question put forward by Mr. Berthold—an Order Paper question being one of the few procedural tools that we and the opposition have to compel the government to provide a response—that we got the bare minimum response from the minister. She was forced to acknowledge that, gee, there was $34 million that they decided not to recover, and then she tried to gaslight Canadians by claiming that it was in the public interest and that this was consistent with sound stewardship of public funds, with absolutely no explanation, no cost-benefit analysis, no legal rationale—nothing. We're supposed to take it at face value. Give me a break. It's outrageous.

It's part of a pattern. I was here through all of those hearings at this committee. I can recall when the Auditor General appeared several times in relation to this massive scandal.

I can recall when the whistle-blower came to this committee and spoke about how the current finance minister, when he was the minister responsible for ISED, blocked the release of the RCGT fact-finding report, interim report, in May 2023. According to the whistle-blower, the minister tampered with evidence, including trying to water down findings of the RCGT report, delaying its release until September. When it was released, the minister stood by the board, despite the overwhelmingly damning evidence and findings in that report. Yes, it was a cover-up then, and it's a cover-up now.

Mr. Chair, in closing, it's not at all obvious how it's not in the public interest to recover $34 million, but it certainly is in the interests of Liberal insiders who profited handsomely at SDTC, a.k.a. the green slush fund. Canadians deserve answers, but above all else, they deserve their money back. This is an opportunity to send a clear signal to the minister to do just that.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Thank you, Mr. Cooper.

I have Mr. Falk next, and then I'll go to Ms. Yip after that.

Mr. Falk, you have the floor.

[Ted Falk, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

MP Michael Cooper has done a marvellous job of recapping some of the events that led this committee to, back in September 2024, unanimously vote to condemn the blatant disregard of taxpayer funds. They called on the government to recover the erroneously awarded funds. It was a unanimous decision of this committee, for those of you who might have been here at that time. They unanimously condemned the blatant disregard of taxpayer money, and they voted that the government should recover those funds.

It's particularly egregious that the Liberal government appointed board members to the sustainable development technology program—more commonly known as the green slush fund—who would have put themselves into such a precarious conflict of interest position. In the instances that Mr. Cooper has already identified, there were 90 cases in which board members of the green slush fund participated and voted in a discussion about a contract, despite being in a conflict of interest.

There were also serious governance issues found.

[Ron McKinnon, Liberal, Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC]

I have a point of order.