Mr. Speaker, “with great power comes great responsibility.” Many will recognize this expression from the wise words of advice Uncle Ben gave to a young Peter Parker in relation to his alter ego, Spider-Man. While this proverb has certainly been popularized again in the modern era by Spider-Man comics, its meaning is found throughout human history, such as the tale of the sword hanging by a single hair over the head of Damocles while King Dionysius permitted him to experience being king for a day. It is not only a powerful mantra for everyday living, but it is fitting for the situation we find ourselves in within the House of Commons today with the motion we have been debating for the past several days.
It is an immense privilege and responsibility to sit in this place, to be sent here by our neighbours to our nation's capital, to be their voice in the halls of power. The Westminster system is unlike any other form of government. This is the House of Commons, where the common citizen is chosen by other common citizens to be sent here to represent them. We have the government of the day, the Prime Minister, the Privy Council ministers, deputy ministers, assistant deputy ministers, and thousands of bureaucrats. Canadians may well believe that those people have power, but in the Westminster system, quite the opposite is true. Everyday citizens of Canada hold the power through the people they send to the House of the common people. Canadians are the boss and we, in this place, are their servants, sitting in their chair for a very brief moment in the long arc of history.
This is parliamentary supremacy, a term that is not often used outside of academia, but what does it mean? Why does parliamentary supremacy matter to the marine mechanic in Pointe au Baril, the cranberry farmer in Bala or the server in South River? It matters to them because it means that they hold the power and that, collectively, the members in this place who represent them are far more powerful than any cabinet minister or even a prime minister. We are the people's voice and the people's voice is supreme.
A majority of citizen representatives in the House of the people has demanded the production of documents related to a $390-million spending scandal of the government's making. Despite that parliamentary supremacy, the government, the cabinet and the Prime Minister have simply refused. This is not even the first time the Liberal government has ignored an order from the people's representatives to produce documents. Canadians may well remember the Winnipeg lab document scandal. Parliament ordered documents to be released that pertained to Canada's top infectious disease laboratory where two scientists were intentionally working to benefit the Chinese Communist Regime. The government fought to keep those documents hidden from the people, ignoring orders and even taking the former Speaker of the House to court to hide the truth, not just from us in the House of Commons, but from all Canadians.
There can be no dispute that oftentimes in this place we exchange partisan jabs in question period. It can be a very ruckus affair with heckling and plenty of theatrics. In certain circumstances, there comes a matter so fundamental to the functioning of the House, a matter so fundamental to the rights of Canadians, those citizens who sent us here to speak for them, that we must hit the pause button on the regular business of this place to protect the very purpose of this place and the rights of the Canadians who sent us here.
How did we get here? In 2001, the government of Stephen Harper created an organization that would, “Demonstrate new technologies to promote sustainable development, including technologies to address issues related to climate change and the quality of air, water and soil.” This organization was to funder public-private partnerships to commercialize new green technologies. It was called Sustainable Development Technology Canada. Since its creation, it invested in over 300 projects all across the country.
It was a great idea that worked very well until the current Liberal government was elected. In 2017, just before the current government took office, the Auditor General reviewed Sustainable Development Technology Canada and delivered a very positive report indicating that the organization was operating appropriately. Then, late in 2018, then industry minister Navdeep Bains started to complain about the then chair Jim Balsillie. He was a chair who was leading the organization well, according to the Auditor General.
Minister Bains complained that Mr. Balsillie had been critical of some government legislation. Imagine that. Then in 2019, Minister Bains began appointing Liberal friends and insiders to the board of directors of Sustainable Development Technology Canada.
It is important to note that Sustainable Development Technology Canada was not an agency completely independent from the government. The Minister of Industry appointed the board, and several staff members from Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada would regularly sit in on meetings and monitor the activities of the board. Minister Bains then appointed Annette Verschuren, someone who was receiving Sustainable Development Technology Canada funding through one of her companies, to be the new chair of the board. Immediately, red flags should have gone up. This new chair, the steward of this fund, the person who was tapped to oversee its operations and hand out money, was a recipient of the same money she was supposed to be watching over.
It turns out red flags did go up. Minister Bains, the Prime Minister's Office and the Privy Council Office were all warned. They were all told of the risks associated with appointing this conflicted chair.
In an alternate universe where Canadians had a competent government that was accountable and responsible and followed the rules, an appointment like this would never have been made in the first place. Of course, that is not what happened, because Canadians do not have a competent, responsible government. We have a scandal-plagued, incompetent Liberal government that has proven time and time again that with every issue they tackle, they make it worse, and that the interests of their well-connected friends and supporters, or the interests of those close to them, always come before the interests of Canadians. We saw it with the WE Charity scandal. Friends of the Liberal Party were quietly and quickly awarded a government contract worth $40 million, until the member for Carleton found out and started digging.
In June 2019, Minister Bains, after having received some sound advice that appointing an individual to lead a public fund whose companies benefit from that fund was a bad idea, ignored the advice and appointed her anyhow. Did this new chair implement a radical change in culture? Did she lead with integrity and honour to ensure that conflicts of interest between public funds and private interests did not occur? Absolutely not. In fact, the new Liberal board chair went on to create a corporate environment where conflicts of interest were not just merely tolerated but facilitated. Other members of the board went on to award public money, Canadians' money, to companies in which board members held stock or leadership positions.
I think it is important for everyone to understand what “conflict of interest” means. The Oxford dictionary describes it this way: a situation in which a person is in a position to derive personal benefit from actions or decisions made in their official capacity.
In this case, Liberal board members' individual interests were enriched by their actions in their professional and public duties. That is a problem, and Canadians understand that. We can forgive the average Canadian, who is not likely as familiar with the fancy boardrooms that Liberal insiders frequent, but it is not really that complicated to excuse ourselves or remove ourselves from situations where we are or are perceived to be in a conflict of interest. It is a perfectly legitimate action to take. In fact, it is the law.
There are simple and straightforward procedures to avoid a conflict of interest. It is the honourable thing to do. It is an act of integrity, of being faithful to our public role and our solemn responsibility to the citizens of this country, whose money we are spending and whose trust we must strive to earn every single day. However, the Liberal insiders on the Sustainable Development Technology Canada board did not care about that public trust. They did not care about honour or integrity. Even more galling is that these dishonourable Liberals did it all out in the open. They were so arrogant and pleased with their self-enrichment at the expense of the Canadian taxpayer that they did not even try to hide their corruption.
Officials from Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada witnessed 186 conflicts at the board but were apparently powerless to do anything about it, that is, until November 2022, when heroic whistle-blowers raised their concerns about the goings-on at Sustainable Development Technology Canada with the Auditor General. What did those whistle-blowers say when they appeared at a parliamentary committee? One of them said:
One of them said:
I don't think the goal and mandate of the Auditor General's office is to actually look into criminality, so I'm not surprised by the fact that they haven't found anything criminal. They're not looking at intent. If their investigation was focused on intent, of course they would find the criminality....
I know that the federal government, like the minister, has continued saying that there was no criminal intent and nothing was found, but I think the committee would agree that they're not to be trusted on this situation. I would happily agree to whatever the findings are by the RCMP, but I would say that I wouldn't trust that there isn't any criminality unless the RCMP is given full authority to investigate....
Again, if you bring in the RCMP and they do their investigation and they find something or they don't, I think the public would be happy with that. I don't think we should leave it to the current federal government or the ruling party to make those decisions. Let the public see what's there.
He also said:
Just as I was always confident that the Auditor General would confirm the financial mismanagement at SDTC, I remain equally confident that the RCMP will substantiate the criminal activities that occurred within the organization.
...I think the current government is more interested in protecting themselves and protecting the situation from being a public nightmare. They would rather protect wrongdoers and financial mismanagement than have to deal with a situation like SDTC in the public—