Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I apologize to all of the witnesses for wasting your valuable time with this.
That's not to say that Ms. Rempel Garner can't put forward a motion; it's her prerogative to do so.
I'm very happy to finally hear Conservatives talking about the need to fight climate change and reduce GHG emissions. Since I got here four years ago, I've battled them every day in committee and the House with the hopes that one day they would admit that climate change is real and that we need to fight it with every effort at our disposal. Traditional indigenous knowledge actually has a lot to offer to us in terms of that paradigm shift and the systemic change we all know is needed.
Anyway, in terms of the motion, Sustainable Development Technology Canada has been around for quite some time. We know there were allegations of mismanagement. We also know that the minister acted immediately to issue a third party assessment, which has produced a report. Members at the ethics committee are studying this. There are actually two committees currently actively studying this issue. Both ethics and public accounts are working on this.
The ethics committee has been provided with a redacted version of the report, which just redacts the personal information of the people involved so that they don't have any threats against their person. It protects their privacy and confidentiality while still laying bare the details for committee members so that they can get into and really look at the report from a governance perspective to see where there may be challenges with SDTC and its governance practices. Therefore, there is more than enough there in terms of the public accounts and ethics committees both studying this.
I will also note that on November 2, the public accounts committee had the deputy auditor general appear and give testimony. I have read that testimony, and there is some really good testimony there. We also have Minister Champagne, the Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry, appearing before the ethics committee. I think that's actually happening right now.
If anybody really wants to hear about this, we could either put it up on a screen or maybe go down the hall and listen to the testimony. Maybe we should consider adjourning the meeting for today and just visit that committee, because obviously the Conservatives would rather study that than Mr. Cannings' motion, which I think is a better use of our time at this committee.
We also have Standing Order 106(4), which means we have an emergency meeting tomorrow of the industry committee on this topic as well.
This would be the fourth committee that would be studying SDTC, if the Conservatives had their way. I believe our time is valuable. The proper place for this study is with the ethics and public accounts committees. Perhaps two committees looking into it is enough.
However, if the Auditor General officials have announced that they're doing a full audit of this, shouldn't we all put our faith in the Auditor General's work and wait until that investigation and audit is complete before making our judgments on it? For me, if the Auditor General officials are actually looking into it, which is a good thing, we need to let them do their work. I don't see why we would do another investigation here at this committee, which would be redundant, given the fact that at least two other committees are looking into this, and perhaps a third as of tomorrow.
I really think that the committee's resources and time are valuable. We have witnesses before us who bring a lot of wisdom and knowledge to our conversations, and we need to get on with that study.
Lastly, there is also a third party investigation going on regarding the HR practices at SDTC. That's in addition to the Auditor General's audit. That's been proactively commissioned by the minister, as well. The minister found out about the allegations of mismanagement and asked for a third party review. That review has been done, and the accounts of STDC have been frozen until the various allegations are remedied. There is an action plan that SDTC is putting in place to address some of the allegations of mismanagement by the end of December. All of those things were already under way before the Auditor General said they were going to do an audit.
To me, there has been a lot of investigation into this matter already. I don't see why we would forgo the important work at this committee as well. I'll leave it there, but that's where I stand on this.