Mr. Speaker, yes, I asked the school to withhold payment on that contract until we have had a chance to look at it.
This is actually an interesting example because the member, in his question, is wrong. The individual concerned was never convicted of any crime. One needs to be careful about coming into this chamber and raising concerns about people without checking the facts. One cannot necessarily draw all one's information from an article in the papers.
It is true, however, that the individual did have a problem within the department for which he was working before and, as a result of some concerns that were raised, was asked to resign and did so.
It is also true that when this matter was referred to the courts the person was given an absolute discharge. The judge who looked at this gave the individual an absolute discharge.
The company that applied for the standing order in this particular case certified that the individual had--I am sorry, I am going to blank on the name--a security clearance form which he had in fact obtained. The Ottawa Police performed a standard kind of check and there was no evidence of any problem.
On that basis, the school went ahead with the contract. It was only when the person's name became apparent and somebody realized that there had been a situation with another another employer that the situation was identified. The proper steps were followed. The public servant who undertook the file did the right thing. There is still a question about the evidence that was provided on the standing order and I am awaiting an opinion from officials on that.