Debates of Oct. 22nd, 2024

Reference to Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

Madam Speaker, I am not very proud of what the member for Winnipeg North just said.

The parliamentary secretary is impugning the motives of the hon. Leader of the Opposition who, may I remind you, has been here for almost 20 years and was a minister of the Crown. He does not need any lessons in ethics from anyone. We can trust his judgment. The parliamentary secretary implied that the Leader of the Opposition has a dark past. He does not. Shame on the member for Winnipeg North.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

This is a matter of debate. I am going to ask the parliamentary secretary to finish his question so that the hon. member who made the speech can answer it.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, I will withdraw the word “illegal”, but I do believe Canadians have a right to know why the leader of the Conservative Party is not getting that security clearance. There has to be some real justification. Does the member believe that the leader of the Conservative Party should be doing what the RCMP and so many others are recommending?

[Fraser Tolmie, Conservative, Moose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan, SK]

Madam Speaker, my colleague started off by saying that there was a short answer to this. Here is a short answer: release the names. Here is another short answer: call an election.

[Tracy Gray, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

Madam Speaker, in his speech, the member was talking about people at the top knowing what was going on. I am wondering if he could expand on that a little.

We know that the previous minister was involved in appointing the board chair. We also know that other board members were appointed. There is the existing minister. The government has done nothing. We know there were senior officials who would sit in on board meetings and who were privy to the actions being taken by the board.

I am wondering if the member could speak to the seriousness of people at the top seeing what was going on and doing nothing, as well as the massive amounts of conflicts of interest and corruption.

[Fraser Tolmie, Conservative, Moose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan, SK]

Madam Speaker, I am so out of the water when I hear of a culture of dishonour. As Canadians, we always want to strive and be part of something better and a culture of honour. Whether it is watching sports teams, like hockey or football teams, or in our politics, we should be striving for honour and we are not seeing that. What we are seeing is, “This is acceptable; I can get away with it and there will be no recourse." While they are at it, they are filling their bags and pockets full of money. It is disappointing. Canadians are unhappy.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

Before I go to debate, because of what just transpired not too long ago, I want to remind members to please be careful and be judicious with the words that they use, especially to describe specific members in the House of Commons, because it does cause disorder and then it causes points of order to be raised. I think that every member in this House is an honourable member. That is how they got to be here. There are words that are being used, adjectives, that cause disorder, and I would hope that members will prevent that from happening. They can choose a better way to do their debates.

This is not directed to anybody in particular, because this happens with many members in the House on all sides. Again, I want members to be respectful of each other. We can have healthy debates without making personal attacks or using words that cause disorder.

The hon. member for New Brunswick Southwest.

[John Williamson, Conservative, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

Madam Speaker, I would be remiss if I did not take a moment to congratulate my province's premier-designate, Susan Holt, who was elected Monday night.

Ms. Holt has the distinction of being New Brunswick's first woman premier, although we must acknowledge that voters did not elect her because she is a woman. She is a person of some achievement, who I hope will keep my province moving forward.

Ms. Holt is inheriting a province on a strong economic and fiscal foundation, and provided she governs as the centrist she campaigned as, she could be formidable by building on New Brunswick's recent achievements. Already, she has demonstrated some skill by opposing the federal carbon tax and more skilfully downplaying any association with the federal Liberals. It was as if the Prime Minister did not exist for the last 32 days in New Brunswick. It was a wise move, given that voters as well as Liberal members of Parliament are set to skewer their very disliked federal leader.

I would also like to thank Premier Blaine Higgs and the MLAs who have served under his leadership since 2018. I can say without a doubt that New Brunswick today has never been in a stronger position in my lifetime, both in terms of quality of life as well as opportunity compared to the rest of Canada. It is a great place to call home. Our economy is growing, work is available without going west and, today, other Canadians recognize our advantages by moving down east in record numbers. It is not bad at all.

Ms. Holt is now the steward of this prosperity and advantage. I hope that New Brunswick remains a successful province, and I am ready to work with the new provincial government on shared priorities so that my province is always heard in Parliament and within the federal government by its decision-makers.

Moving now to the matter at hand, here is why there has been gridlock in Parliament. The Liberals have paralyzed the House of Commons. The Prime Minister and cabinet have chosen to ignore a lawful order from Parliament to table documents requested by the House of Commons. This, briefly, is the chronicle of events.

The Prime Minister and cabinet chose a group of well-connected elites to dish out $1 billion of taxpayer money through the Sustainable Development Technology Canada program. These chosen elites then gave the money to companies they either owned or had a financial interest in. When these acts of blatant conflict and corruption were reported to cabinet, the Liberals tried to cover it up. Mandarins and ministers were aware of taxpayer funds being misappropriated through SDTC, but instead of stopping this scam, the program administrators somehow funnelled even more taxpayer funds for ineligible projects from other federal departments. It was all approved by different ministers appointed by the Prime Minister.

Thankfully, Canada's Auditor General examined the program and exposed the conflicts, the cover-ups and Liberal corruption. My colleague, the hon member for South Shore—St. Margarets, initiated a parliamentary investigation into the corruption, which resulted in an order from the House of Commons that the government hand over all documents, unredacted. Unfortunately, this Liberal government will not follow the law by providing those documents to Parliament.

It is a long-established right, which is entrenched in our Constitution, bestowed on members of the House to send for and receive documents they deem necessary. Parliament's law clerk has confirmed and reinforced this fact to the committee I chair, public accounts, which he did this week.

The Liberal government's disregard of Parliament's order strikes at the very heart of our democratic institutions. This is about integrity, transparency and accountability of a government that supposedly serves Canadians. These values, which are fundamental to any functioning democracy, have been badly eroded over the course of the past nine years by this Prime Minister and Liberal cabinet.

This is not a matter of partisanship. It is a matter of principle. It is a matter of trust, trust that Canadians placed in this now tired government in 2015, nine long years ago, when voters were promised an era of transparency and openness. We will remember the lofty rhetoric that dissolved almost overnight. I want to remind everyone here, especially those in the benches opposite, that in 2015 the Liberals presented Canadians with a platform of change. They campaigned on the promise to be the most transparent and accountable government in Canadian history. We are faced with a reality that is entirely different, that is far removed from that province and has manifested itself into a taxpayer's nightmare.

What we have seen time and time again is a government that has failed to live up to its own promises. We have seen a government that has been mired in scandal after scandal, a government that has betrayed the trust of all Canadians. The green slush fund, otherwise known as the SDTC scandal, is the most egregious example of this betrayal. According to the Auditor General's report, SDTC was responsible for awarding nearly $390 million in taxpayers' money to projects where board members had direct financial interest. These nine board members, approved by the Prime Minister and the cabinet, were involved in 186 conflicts of interest. This was not accidental mismanagement. It was systematic corruption orchestrated by those in positions of power to benefit themselves and their associates.

One egregious example is that of Andrée-Lise Méthot, who was appointed to the SDTC board in 2016. Méthot runs a venture capital firm, Cycle Capital, which received $114 million in grants from SDTC during her tenure on the board, funds that directly benefited her personal investments. The value of Cycle Capital tripled during this period, thanks in no small part to the tax dollars funded through the SDTC program. How convenient it must be to sit on government-appointed boards and approve millions of dollars to one's own company. This blatant self-dealing is emblematic of a broader culture of cronyism that has infected this tired Liberal government.

Instead of focusing on innovation, the green slush fund became a piggy bank for well-connected Liberal insiders who used their influence to enrich themselves at the expense of hard-working Canadian taxpayers. The corruption did not stop with Méthot. Another board member, Stephen Kukucha, was also involved in conflicts of interest. A former political staffer to a Liberal environment minister, Kukucha used his position on the SDTC board to funnel $5 million to companies in which he had financial interests. Like Méthot, Kukucha saw nothing wrong with enriching himself through his government connections.

When questioned, he actually dismissed the $5-million payout as “a small amount of money”, but that small amount of money is a staggering sum for Canadian families who have seen their federal taxes rise to pay for government largesse. It represents the taxes paid by countless families struggling to make ends meet. For these Liberal insiders, it is just another example of how the system has been rigged in their favour and against everyday Canadians.

This scandal demonstrates a government that has completely lost its way, a government that has become more interested in serving the interests of a select few than in serving the people of Canada. However, this scandal is about more than just the misuse of tax dollars. It is about the erosion of trust. It is about the erosion of the very principles of good governance that we are all elected to uphold and to hold accountable. The scandals that have plagued the government, from the SNC-Lavalin affair to the WE Charity scandal, from the misuse of public funds in green energy projects to the Prime Minister's own ethical violations, have revealed that Canadians have a Prime Minister who is no longer capable of acting honestly for our country.

The green slush fund scandal is one of the most troubling examples of the government's failure to live up to its promise. Not only is it about the hundreds of millions of dollars in misspent and misallocated money, but it is also now about a government that is not prepared to follow an order of the House.

SDTC was established with the goal of fostering innovation in the Canadian economy. For many years before the Liberal government, it was well managed. It was a program in which projects would be funded on merit. What was a lifeline for innovators became a Liberal vehicle for corruption and cronyism.

According to the Auditor General's report, a staggering 390 million tax dollars was allocated to projects in which board members were in a direct conflict of interest. That hard-earned taxpayer money went to projects where decision-makers stood to benefit personally. This is not just a failure of oversight but also a violation of trust. It is a betrayal of the very principles of transparency and accountability to taxpayers.

This scandal, sadly, is not an isolated incident for the government. Earlier, I alluded to a broader pattern of corruption and ethical lapses that have plagued the government since it took office. We all remember the SNC-Lavalin affair, in which the Prime Minister himself was found to have violated ethics laws by attempting to interfere in a criminal case to benefit a corporation that was connected to the Liberals. We all remember the WE Charity scandal, in which millions in tax dollars was funnelled to an organization with close ties to the Prime Minister's family. Who could forget the numerous ethical breaches involved in the firing of Vice-Admiral Mark Norman?

These scandals are not just the result of poor decision-making or bad management; they are the result of a culture of corruption that has taken root within the government. It is a culture in which well-connected insiders are rewarded while ordinary, everyday Canadians are left behind to pick up the bill. Rules apply to everyone else but not to those in positions of power and authority.

What is even more troubling is the government's response to these scandals. Instead of taking responsibility, instead of acknowledging its mistakes and working to fix them, which would be the honourable route, it has chosen to obfuscate, deny and hide the truth. When Parliament ordered the production of documents related to this green slush fund scandal, the government responded by heavily redacting those documents, making it impossible for Parliament to fulfill its duty of holding it accountable. There is no other reason for us to be here than to approve funds it requests and then to hold it accountable for the spending of those dollars. What we are seeing from the Liberals is not the behaviour of a government that values transparency but that of a government with something to hide.

The cost of this corruption is not just financial; the true cost of this scandal goes far beyond tax dollars. Canadians have lost faith in the government. Who can blame them? They see their hard-earned tax dollars being misused and mismanaged and a government that refuses to admit wrongdoing. It sets a precedent that breeds further corruption and incompetence throughout the bureaucracy.

It is a time when millions of Canadians are struggling to make ends meet. Food bank usage has reached a point where we see that families can no longer afford to eat without donations or assistance. Seniors are being forced to make difficult choices just to keep food on the table. Meanwhile, the government has been handing out hundreds of millions of dollars to its well-connected friends.

It is an insult to every Canadian who works hard, pays their taxes, plays by the rules and expects in return that those in power, those in government, will be honest. Instead of this, tax money went to projects that were tainted by conflicts of interest and projects that did not qualify for funding without underhanded tactics to give well-connected Liberals an edge over others. This is the true cost of their corruption. It is the cost borne by the Canadian taxpayers, who are being asked to shoulder the burden of higher federal taxes each and every day because the government has lost its way, lost its ability to manage and lost its ability to be straight with Canadians.

As a member of His Majesty's loyal opposition, I have a solemn duty, as do all members on this side of the House, to hold the government to account. Our system of government is based on the principle of responsible government, where the executive is answerable to the legislature, that is, Parliament, and by extension, through members of Parliament, to the people of Canada. This is not just a theoretical concept; it is a fundamental principle of our democracy that we must defend at all costs. However, time and time again, the government has shown contempt for Parliament and the democratic process that we are supposed to keep in check.

The refusal to provide unredacted documents to the House and the Liberals' repeated attempts to cover up the truth by protecting former officials and staff members are part of a pattern of behaviour that is deeply concerning. When the Speaker of the House rules that documents must be provided, it is not a suggestion; it is an order. It is the will of the House and it must be respected. The government's decision to redact the documents is a clear violation of our collective parliamentary privileges, and it is an affront to the democratic principles that underpin our system of government.

The question we must ask ourselves is this: What is the government trying to hide? Why is it so determined to keep these documents out of the hands of Parliament and parliamentarians? If there is nothing to hide, why not provide the documents in full and allow the truth to come to light? Sunshine, of course, is the best disinfectant.

In the years since this scandal was first exposed, I suspect two things have happened. First, an army of bureaucrats and government staff members have combed through the thousands of documents we are looking to get our hands on. Second, the Liberals have collectively agreed among themselves that the true cost of this scandal is not $390 million, but a much larger figure that they want to keep to themselves at all costs.

This is also a political nightmare for the Liberals because it could well mean the annihilation of members of Parliament in the government at election time. A government deputy minister said that this scandal is worse than the Chrétien-Martin sponsorship scandal, and we all know that that scandal, the ad scam scandal, ended the Martin and Chrétien governments. SDTC is so devastating that it would do great harm to the Prime Minister, cabinet and the Liberal Party if the books were opened and revealed to the public.

The green slush fund scandal is not just about the misuse of tax dollars. As I said before, it is about the principle that no one, not even the Prime Minister, is above the law. It is about the principle that those who are entrusted with the stewardship of public funds must be held to the highest standards of accountability and transparency. The refusal of the government to provide the documents requested by Parliament is a clear violation. It is an attempt to subvert Parliament to shield those responsible for this corruption from accountability. Let me be clear: Parliament must not allow this to happen.

When all three main opposition parties are in agreement, it is a signal that trust has been broken across the country. In the upcoming election, Canadians will have the opportunity to choose a different path. I stand today to say that Conservatives will bring forward a government that Canadians can trust, a government that will be responsible stewards of their tax dollars and will always act in the best interests of the people who elected us to serve them. If we are given that opportunity, we will ensure that those in positions of power are held accountable for their actions. This means real consequences for ethical violation and conflicts of interest. We will also ensure that taxpayer dollars are spent wisely and responsibly. This means ending the culture of cronyism that has taken hold in the Liberal bench, means ensuring that public contracts and grants are awarded based on merit and means a better day and turning the page on the corrupt government.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, I am concerned that in speech after speech, we hear a great deal of misinformation being spread.

Let me give an example. The member said that the government has paralyzed the House of Commons. The motion itself says that we should take the issue to the procedure and House affairs committee. Every member who has spoken knows that.

The only reason we are still debating it today is because Conservative after Conservative chooses to stand up, even though it is their motion. It is a Conservative motion that it go to committee. The Conservatives feel that it should continue to be debated endlessly. As a result, we are not able to debate government agenda items that deal with citizenship, victims of sexual assault, online harms and so much more.

How can members opposite justify their actions when they are filibustering their very own motion?

[John Williamson, Conservative, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

Madam Speaker, all the government has to do, to get on with its business that it claims is so important, is to release the documents as Parliament ordered, unredacted, as per the law clerk who said it is obliged to do.

That would end this and that would ensure the government is able to get ahead of its priorities. However, the government is not willing to do that, and that is why we are debating this, to ensure the rights of parliamentarians are upheld and the government does exactly what it is required to do, producing the documents, unredacted.

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

Madam Speaker, I know that the member for New Brunswick Southwest has done a great job as chair of the public accounts committee on these hearings and is more knowledgeable about the situation than most members in this place.

However, I would like to ask him a question, because I think the members had an update. I believe nine government departments have provided unredacted documents, 19 government departments have provided redacted documents and two government departments have refused.

Now if it is okay for nine government departments to produce unredacted documents, why is it not okay for the other 19 government departments to produce unredacted documents? Is it because of what is in them, or is it just because the hypocrisy of the government knows no end?

[John Williamson, Conservative, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

Madam Speaker, the member, the soon-to-be minister, has answered his own question.

In some cases, we have unredacted documents. These departments have followed through on the order from Parliament, which is here to hold the government accountable. However, in many other departments, the documents have come back redacted, indicating there is something to hide, something that must be explosive.

The Auditor General just delivered a letter to the public accounts committee yesterday, indicating that on the study she did into SDTC, while it was narrow in scope, she believed the findings could be mirrored elsewhere throughout that program, meaning the waste and the corruption is greater and deeper than we first realized.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, the member has acknowledged that they are filibustering it, because they want the government to produce unredacted documents. We have provided thousands and thousands of sheets of paper. The motion they are talking about is to take those papers, get them unredacted and hand them over to the RCMP. Now, the RCMP, the Auditor General of Canada and the former deputy law clerk have said they do not support this tactic.

The Conservative Party is playing a game. It is as simple as that. The member knows that. Why should the Liberal government take the Conservative side over what the RCMP, the Auditor General and the former deputy law clerk are saying? Why would we believe the Conservative Party, and play their silly game?

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Liberal, Alexandra Mendes]

Order. The hon. member for New Brunswick Southwest.

[John Williamson, Conservative, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

Madam Speaker, it is because the government has an order from the Parliament, passed by a majority of members of the House, not just Conservatives, for the government to produce the papers.

Time and time again, whether it is the Winnipeg lab documents or this case, the government is more interested in covering up secrets than in coming clean with Canadians. The filibuster here is on the government side. Release the papers unredacted as Parliament has demanded you do.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Liberal, Alexandra Mendes]

I cannot release anything.

The hon. member for Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou has the floor.

[Sylvie Bérubé, Bloc, Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC]

Madam Speaker, I wholeheartedly agree with my colleague that the government should not be handing over redacted documents. However, when the Harper government was in power, from 2006 to 2015, certain significant events occurred that should not be forgotten.

For instance, there were lobbying cases. Accusations were levelled at certain members of the Conservative government. The Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics also criticized the government for the way it was managing its professional ethics regulations. There were reports. The Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner examined several cases involving Conservative government members, including some named in a report indicating possible rule violations.

Does my colleague think that the Conservative government would do better than the Liberal government?

[John Williamson, Conservative, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

Madam Speaker, that is a good question. When we formed the government, there were some questions, but our government worked with Parliament to produce the documents. I am talking about the documents concerning Afghanistan that caused a kerfuffle. In the end, we found a way to allow the opposition parties to have access to those documents. This government is not prepared to do the same now and that is why we are here today.

[Martin Shields, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

Madam Speaker, my hon. colleague has been in the House for many years. One of the things he mentioned first in his speech was the Vice-Admiral Norman controversy. Right out of the gate when the Liberals were elected, they created the first controversy right out of their first meeting.

The important part of the issue is the money. Following the money is really of critical importance so that people believe that there is transparency and responsibility for their money.

I would like to ask my longtime colleague in the House, based on his experience, what his response is to how important it is to follow the money.

[John Williamson, Conservative, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

Madam Speaker, I think that is why the issue has seized the House. Not only is it a question of hundreds of millions of dollars being misspent, hundreds of ethical violations, conflicts of interest and now a cover-up, but on top of that, which is bad enough as it is a steaming mess, today there is a government that is not even willing to submit itself to Parliament, which it is required to do.

We authorize members of Parliament in the House to spend the money, but we also exert our authority to see how those dollars have been spent and to ensure value for taxpayers. The government wants to hide that. It is in breach of an order of Parliament, and we are going to hold it accountable.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Madam Speaker, I have a quick question for my colleague. Which issue does he think is more serious? Is it the contents of the SDTC documents, because we want to know what is in them, and we want them sent to the RCMP so charges can be laid, or is it the fact that the government is not respecting the will of Parliament?

I think that is very serious. It is a major affront to democracy. I do not know how Parliament can continue to continue moving forward. I am sorry, it must be the influence of the House. If the government does not comply with an order, what does that mean for its credibility? Which is more serious, after all? Is it the affront to democracy or the contents of the documents? If the latter is the more serious issue, that is even worse. That is scary.

[John Williamson, Conservative, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

Madam Speaker, I completely agree. This is about holding the government to account for its decisions. As I said before, the Conservative Party is not alone in demanding this. The Bloc Québécois, the NDP and the Conservative Party are unanimous on this issue. The government must answer to Parliament and produce these documents.

[Shannon Stubbs, Conservative, Lakeland, AB]

Madam Speaker, today I am happy, on behalf of the people of Lakeland, to join the debate started by common-sense Conservatives because of the Liberals' repeated pattern of entitled and immoral abuse of Canadian tax dollars under the guise of programs ostensibly about issues that all Canadians care about. After nine years, the Liberals' corruption is just not worth the cost. The entire House of Commons asked for the Liberals to release documents about their major scandal but like always, the Liberals cover it up.

The Liberals presented the Sustainable Development Technology Canada fund, known accurately now as their personal green slush fund, as vital for investments to address climate change but it lacks transparency, fails to produce any results and, as always with these guys, serves the interests of Liberal insiders instead of Canadians. That is the Liberals' clear pattern: funnel other people's money into their friends' companies and pockets; sometimes get caught; evade, delay and obfuscate; and then finally, use every tool they have and all of their power to cover it all up and blame everyone else.

People might be inclined to dismiss this topic as just the way things are. They may say it is politics, that they are all the same, or that this is some political process or navel-gazing exercise where politicians talk to hear themselves speak about some obscure, out-of-touch process or parliamentary issue that does not really matter to everyday Canadians. However, that just is not true. It is, in fact, the uniquely Liberal pattern of mismanagement, wasteful spending and obvious ethical breaches apparently endorsed by the Liberals' coalition partners in the NDP and Bloc, since they do keep voting to prop them up and keep them in power, even though those so-called opposition parties do have the ability to stop it.

The government must release the $400-million slush fund scheme records that show Liberal appointees funnelled Canadian tax dollars into their companies and their cronies' companies. The scale is simultaneously shocking and, horrifyingly, not surprising. We have nearly half of the billion-dollar slush fund of misused tax money with 186 conflicts of interest. What is wild here is that despite warnings about the conflicts of interest the head of the slush fund had, the Liberals put her in that key role anyway.

Another board member was the founder and CEO of a company called Cycle Capital. It so happens that the environment minister has personal shares in Cycle Capital and worked as a strategic adviser for it for over a decade. During that CEO's time on the slush fund, companies in which Cycle Capital invests received more than $100 million of tax dollars from the scheme. The Liberals took the head of Cycle Capital from the slush fund to the Liberals' Canada Infrastructure Bank, where she voted to give $170 million to her own company. We can talk about a conflict of interest. This is just one of many examples.

In my neck of the woods, and in my colleague's riding of South Shore—St. Margarets, we all know what they say of something that walks like a duck, swims like a duck and quacks like a duck. I am confident Canadians can see what is happening here for themselves.

Conservatives say if the Liberals have nothing to hide, then there is no reason to not release the documents. Since the Liberals are willing to stop all the work of the House of Commons, the people's place, to refuse to disclose the slush fund records, then they should just call a carbon tax election and let Canadians decide. Canadians deserve transparency and accountability. None of the government's money belongs to politicians, bureaucracies or government appointees. It belongs to Canadians. These are the kinds of things that people get fired for in the private sector. In governments that actually care about ethics and fiscal responsibility, elected people would resign or be fired.

However, it would be hard for the ethical offender-in-chief, the Prime Minister, to have the credibility to mete out consequences with his own cabinet caucus and officials because this behaviour always has a role model at the top, but complicit participation is just as wrong. Canadians deserve to know how billions of their dollars have been misused over nine years, who benefits from the cover-ups and how it will be made right.

This pattern is also clear in the Liberals' claims about $120 billion for environmental programs. The intended outcomes often never materialize. For example, Lion Electric received millions from government, later declared bankruptcy and left nothing to show for the government's expenditure of Canadians' money, except failure, loss and broken promises. More than $40 billion of Canadians' money was allocated for EV subsidies, for example, yet infrastructure to make them actually affordable and suitable for Canadians' real lives, in every region of this country, lag far behind.

Everything the Liberals claimed about the Stellantis subsidy has been proven false. It is billions of dollars over budget and years behind schedule, and this is before shovels are even in the ground. The Liberals said that it was supposed to create jobs for Canadians, but at least 1,500 jobs, the majority, will be filled by temporary foreign workers.

While the Liberals claim over and over again that these programs serve Canadians, the funds instead benefit companies or cronies with Liberal connections. The Liberals' fast-and-loose approach to tax dollars, feathering the nests of their fellow elites in either full complicity or through a lack of action on ethical violations, is the Liberal jam. The Liberals used to wax eloquent about the disinfecting nature of sunshine and sunny ways, but, after nine years, what they deliver is costly collusion and cover-up after cover-up.

The Auditor General repeatedly points out that there is a lack of clear goals and oversight. Programs are launched without plans or, for many of their so-called environmental initiatives, without any way to measure impacts or even emissions reductions. By omission or by design, the Liberals make it nearly impossible to assess progress or ensure responsible use and oversight of tax dollars. The Liberals obstruct efforts to hold the government accountable with vague responses, if a response is provided at all, and they withhold documents so Canadians cannot know whether their own public money is being wasted.

Just last year, I submitted an access to information request on the costs the federal government cites related to Canada's environmental targets. Documents show that the government held back information and deliberately strategized to deny the answers to me, and therefore all Canadians, with vague language and redirection to publicly available government and external non-government sources. In both instances, the replies did not include a single specific figure that was explicitly requested. Unfortunately, it is a fact that this reflects a pattern overall, which is the opposite, of course, of openness, transparency and accountability.

While the government claims to spend tax dollars on green projects, there is often actually no way to know if these projects even exist, never mind assessing the outcomes or results that all Canadians would care about. One of the most striking scandals involves government contracts to McKinsey & Company. After nine years, the Liberals gave them $200 million of Canadian money. The Auditor General uncovered “frequent disregard for procurement” rules, including the failure to justify sole-sourced contracts for 18 of the 19 awards to the firm. The Liberals bypassed their own government's required procurement policy to do it.

It is a long, flagrant disregard for ethical and fiscal decision-making and a pattern of noncompliance. No wonder Canadians lose faith in governments, politicians and bureaucracy when the government refuses to show the value for the Canadian money that it spends. Government departments frequently failed to estimate the cost of McKinsey's services beforehand. Out of 33 contracts reviewed, cost estimates were only provided in three cases that had been given to McKinsey that actually included cost estimates to protect Canadians' money.

The truth is that, after nine years, these Liberals are not just the masters of a flawed procurement process. They also actively ignore and choose not to fix it, to the benefit of themselves and their buddies. Of course, the firm's former global director enjoys a close relationship with the Prime Minister and advised senior officials on economic policy, so it is obvious that McKinsey's influence on public policy was part of a broader network of favouritism. The Auditor General noted the rapid growth in McKinsey's contracts with the Liberals after nine years. Canadians can be forgiven for seeing this exactly as it is: elite, political insider favouritism with Canadians' money.

One $33-million government contract to McKinsey for the government-caused, beleaguered and delayed Trans Mountain expansion was issued non-competitively and without a justification being clearly linked to one of the competitive procurement policy exceptions. Another example, of course, is the Canada Infrastructure Bank, which oversees more than $30 billion in public-private infrastructure spending. More than half its board members have ties to the Liberal Party, including former Liberal candidates, donors, staff and board members.

Common-sense Conservatives warned repeatedly about this boondoggle of mismanagement and no accountability, but the Liberals initially gave it 35 billion tax dollars, and after nine years, it has produced very little to show for all that money spent. Despite grand promises of transformational infrastructure projects, it must remain in early planning stages, stalled or not exist at all. It is not just about missed deadlines. It really shows systemic inefficiencies and abysmal project management, with Liberal insiders appointed to high-level positions.

These are choices made over and over. These are staggering numbers for most of us to even begin to comprehend. It is no wonder that Canadians question the impartiality and governance of the Liberals, their banks, their boards and their panels.

The government claims that billions are earmarked for infrastructure, but so much is all tied up with insiders. The Liberal government sent half a billion dollars to the Asian Infrastructure Bank. Its former head of global communications told the parliamentary committee that Canada has not received “a single thing of tangible value” from a quarter of a billion tax dollars. He said that he is unaware of the Liberal's demand for a return of that money. Unfortunately, this is also reflective of most of the government's apparent environmental initiatives.

However, all of this is really about a larger problem. The Liberal government's spending decisions are driven more by ideology and political optics than by the best interests of Canadians or, for many of these examples, the actual environmental impact. By focusing on headline grabbing and ribbon cutting rather than practical solutions and outcomes, the government has wasted billions of dollars of other people's money. The Liberals' own endless tax-and-spend, rat-trap cycle has made all the essentials too expensive for everyone, hollowed out the middle class and particularly harmed low-income and working poor Canadians. Really, it is disgusting. It is a gross Liberal pattern.

The Liberals' WE Charity scandal is one of the most infamous, with a $900-million contract ostensibly for a student grant program. Of course, Liberal family members of the Prime Minister had long been paid to appear at events, and both the relatives of the then finance minister and senior government officials had close connections with WE. All of that benefited the Liberals and the charity. The Ethics Commissioner ruled that the then finance minister acted unethically and breached the Conflict of Interest Act when he failed to recuse himself from the decision. After Conservatives pushed the government relentlessly to release those documents, it ultimately cancelled the contract. However, this was not done before the Liberals hid the details; ultimately, they shut down Parliament to avoid accountability and left Canadians in the dark.

The Liberals tried yet another cover-up on the Winnipeg lab leak in 2021. There were reports that the RCMP had to intervene at that one-of-a-kind, top medical and virus lab. This was because of a security breach and speculation of espionage by China's Communist dictatorship at that Canadian lab. The Prime Minister fought tooth and nail to prevent any of the documents from coming up. As he is doing now, he defied a motion passed by elected MPs. All parties that had seen the documents, including a Liberal MP, said that this was to cover up embarrassment, not to protect national security. Time and time again, the Liberals repeatedly prioritize political interests over genuine public benefit.

Withholding information from MPs, who are here because of and to serve the people, shows without a doubt the Liberals' total disregard for ethical governance. All these scandals do, and there are many more. This undermines public trust. These are ongoing issues of favouritism, lack of transparency and poor governance. Canadians clearly cannot afford or trust the Liberal government and its coalition partners, which is the serious consequence that happens when public money is funnelled by the Liberals to politically connected corporations and insiders. When any accountability and transparency is lacking, this leaves Canadians wondering where all their money has gone.

We can consider the scale and what this actually means. The nearly $400 million blown by the Liberal slush fund alone would require the equivalent of 22,000 Canadian families to work an entire year just to cover the amount through their federal taxes. After nine years of the Liberals, costs are up and taxes are up; therefore, in reality, all those Canadian families are already working their butts off and cannot get ahead.

This conduct is not acceptable at any time. However, the same government's spending and carbon taxes have caused inflation and a historic cost of living crisis by driving up the prices of groceries, fuel, housing and heating. These are essentials, not luxuries, in Canada, especially with winter coming. When such things happen, better accountability and oversight of tax money is the very least that Canadians deserve.

A recurring theme is the government's absolute failure to deliver on promises of job creation and economic growth. It frequently promotes its green programs and infrastructure projects as job creators, but many of the jobs that are created are temporary or disappear once construction phases end. This has been especially problematic in growing sectors such as renewable energy, where employment opportunities are promised during government announcements at project launches but never materialize.

In addition, who can forget the Liberals' tree planting failure? In 2019, the Liberals promised to plant two billion trees, but as of last year there were deals to plant only 374 million trees by 2031, which is less than 19% of their stated goal. NRCan reports that only 56 million trees have been planted to date; that is not even 3% of the Liberals' promise.

Meanwhile, traditional sectors like oil and gas, where hundreds of thousands of Canadians work and that remain vital to Canada's economy, have been subjected to uncertainty, extra-heavy regulation, prohibitions, unfair treatment and carbon taxes. Canada has lost hundreds of thousands of jobs because the costly coalition wages an ideological war on energy workers.

The Liberals' scandals and mismanagement are not isolated incidents. It is their long-established grift. From the mishandling of programs to insider deals, it is clear that public resources are being misused and Canadians are being shortchanged. After nine years of the NDP-Liberals' anti-energy, anti-private-sector policies, more than $5.6 trillion of investments in jobs, businesses, projects, talent and technology have gone from Canada to the U.S., a unique reversal since the Liberals were elected in 2015. It has gotten worse every year.

There is no doubt that the Liberal government, backed by the coalition, are the most ethically compromised government in Canadian history. The PM has been convicted of two ethics violations, and so have four senior Liberal MPs, the most of any government in Canadian history. At the same time, the Liberals have made it so that two-thirds of lower-income families struggle to eat, to heat their home and to house themselves, due to the government-caused cost of living crisis. It is just unacceptable that tax dollars are wasted, period. Especially now, Canadians deserve a government that puts their interests first, manages their tax dollars responsibly and delivers real results.

The Liberals' actions, their being their willingness to stop everything to cover up, are obviously a deliberate attempt to shield their own corruption from public scrutiny. The Auditor General already uncovered instances where slush fund officials directed tax money to their own companies. The Ethics Commissioner ruled that the fund's chair, personally appointed by the Prime Minister, broke the law. It is not just common-sense Conservatives saying that; it is common sense.

Elected leadership must prioritize ethics, transparency, accountability and effective governance. Environmental policy should be about stewardship, conservation, mitigation and adaptation, and it should benefit all Canadians, not just the well-connected few in certain regions. Enough is enough. Parliament must do its job, since the Prime Minister and the Liberals will not.

The Liberals must comply with Parliament's demand and release the green slush fund documents because the demand comes from the representatives of the majority of Canadians. That is whom we are here to represent, whom we work for and whom we are to serve. When the majority of members of Parliament in the House of Commons make a demand, those are the people for whom they are making that request.

However, after nine years of the NDP-Liberals, taxes are up, costs are up and crime is up, and I think Canadians think that time is up for the Liberal government. If the Liberals have nothing to hide, they should call a carbon tax election to let Canadians decide to end wasteful spending, restore accountability and bring home transparency so common-sense Conservatives can axe the tax, build the homes, fix the budget and stop the crime. It is time.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, one of the Conservatives said yesterday that it is about behaviour from the past. I heard the member talk about a list of issues that many other Conservatives have actually raised time and time again.

Having said that, I was looking at a publication that talks about 70 abuses of power and corruption and uses a lot of negative words about Stephen Harper. In fact he is the only former prime minister in the history of Canada who was deemed to be in contempt of Parliament. Who was his great defender? It was the current leader of the Conservative Party. In fact, he was the parliamentary secretary to the then prime minister when the latter was in contempt. Now the leader of the Conservative Party is refusing to get a security clearance so he can see the 11 names.

When will the Conservative Party stop with the games and start dealing with the issues that Canadians want us to be dealing with? When will they allow their motion to pass, by stopping all the talk about it and actually having a vote on it?