Mr. Speaker, it is always a pleasure to rise on behalf of the people from Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, and this instance is no different, although I wish it were a different circumstance. I wish we were not speaking about Liberal corruption.
Before I begin, I do want to recognize a couple of things. This is my first time, outside of an emergency debate, to rise substantially in this chamber. I would like to recognize a marriage. One of my esteemed staff members was married this summer. Jesus and Jenna Bondo are now one. It was a beautiful ceremony. It was such an honour to attend and I wish them all the best in their marriage.
I also want to give a shout-out to an Olympic gold medallist from Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo. He was born in Nanaimo but we will forget about that for the moment. He was trained in Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo and currently resides there. He was coached by Beijing Olympic medallist Dylan Armstrong, whom I went to high school with. He was double my size when we were in high school, despite being younger than me. We are very proud of Dylan and his contribution to Canadian athletics. Dylan coached Ethan Katzberg to an Olympic gold medal in the hammer throw. Ethan was also one of the two flag bearers for Canada at the closing ceremonies. We are incredibly proud of him. On the floor of this chamber I want to give him congratulations.
We hear the New Democrats talk a lot. I have often said that if this were a radio station, it would be all talk, no rock because that is really what we are dealing with. If I could actually pose a question and, who knows, the New Democrats may answer this, it would be to ask whether they will eventually support a closure motion from the government. If this were the old NDP, the pre-coalition NDP, I would say no. That was a party that historically fought for the underdog, that historically fought for Parliament, that recognized Parliamentary supremacy with its limits, though not many, but all of its effective exercises of discretion. That was the NDP, often known as the conscience of Parliament, a party that would challenge other parties to think about the ramifications of their decisions. That is what opposition parties are supposed to do. Opposition parties have a constitutional obligation to provide that conscientious and thoughtful opposition, but opposition nonetheless, when things are not going right. However, here we stand on the floor of the House of Commons looking at a scandal in which insiders got rich.
As a kid from North Kamloops whose parents immigrated to Canada without two pennies to rub together, when I see the enrichment that took place on the backs of taxpayers, I am disgusted. There are people out there who are lining up at food banks as we speak, and Liberal insiders got rich. If that is not repugnant enough, the Liberals here will not provide the documents to tell us exactly who got what, when and why. The New Democrats have said that they will vote in favour of this motion. Will they vote in favour of a closure motion from the government?
I have heard before, and I am still trying to wrap my head around this, about charter rights. Now, it is no secret I was a lawyer. Perhaps the government members can enlighten me and I am certainly open to hearing it, as maybe there is something I am missing about the charter. The charter is meant to protect people from government action. It is always interesting because the Liberals like to use it as a sword. The charter was always meant to be a shield, to shield the people from the government. This is basically what is taught to us in undergrad courses or first-year law; and yet, the Liberals are talking about protecting themselves from the release of these documents. The government is protecting itself, coming in here and saying that it does not want to release this because of the charter. Perhaps the government can connect the dots; I am certainly open to hearing that.
Even if there is an ongoing investigation and there are questions about that, and I understand the integrity of the investigation, Parliament has a job to do, notwithstanding an investigation. That is just a fact. Investigations of this magnitude typically take years to complete. Then we have to go through what is called a charge approval process, where somebody has to look at this and they have to get all the disclosure. We have the Jordan decision, which we know well in this chamber. With all the disclosure it could be years before we actually see any charges if they are merited, which is for someone else to determine. Far be it from me to say whether somebody must be charged. That is for an independent prosecutor to determine.
Where does that leave us? It leaves us with a scandal where insiders, presumably people who are fairly well off, in positions to further their own interests as they own companies, can further that interest. People got richer on the backs of taxpayers. This is so disgusting. As I say it, I feel myself getting more and more angry that we are standing here asking why the documents are not just tabled.
Is there anything more repugnant than stealing from the state? When I say from the state, it is actually stealing from Canadians and from me. Whether somebody is like the 104-year-old veteran whom I awarded a King Charles III's Coronation Medal to, who fought for freedoms, they are stealing from him and his taxes, and stealing from a newborn.
These are the allegations that are before us, and frankly, a lot of them are substantiated. Whether it is criminal is another question, but what we know here is that there was a complete and utter misappropriation of funds, so much so that, if I understand the Speaker's ruling, we are dealing with nothing until we deal with this.
The Liberals do not like that. There is a pretty easy solution. They can put forward the documents. When we get into politics, obviously we think about pros and cons of any course of action. I ask myself, what is going through the Liberal machine right now? What is going through their heads? They can put forward the documents and bring an end to this, or they cannot.
What are the pros of doing that? This is openness by default. I will get to that in just a minute. Why will they not do this? I am thinking out loud here. There has to be something so damning in those documents that they refuse to put them forward and that grinding Parliament to a halt is worth it. They are prepared to put aside their legislative agenda because there is something in those documents that somebody in a Liberal back room or front room has said they do not want to be revealed. What could possibly be that bad?
I always make reference to my parents, and I apologize for those who watch my speeches, although I think it is just my mother. I always think about the common person, and I often will reference my father. He started loading wood in boxcars by hand at a sawmill when he was 17 or 18. He did that until he could no longer medically do it, for about 40 years. What does this say to him?
What does it say to the person who is newly immigrated to Canada, and is looking at their pay stub? They are working any job they can, often because the Liberal government has been so slow to allow people who have immigrated to this country, who are trained in fields that we need people in, like doctors, nurses and other fields, to work in their field. They are forced to work any job that they can take and see their paycheque evaporate into rising taxes, and then what is left evaporates into inflation.
What does it say to them when the government, which is talking about the middle class and those hoping to join it, will not even tell those people who got rich off their backs? This is utterly shameful. It is disgusting. The Liberals will stand up, invoke the ghost of Stephen Harper and talk about how terrible things are right now because of him. Stephen Harper has not been here for nine years. We can talk about a lack of accountability. The government is not taking any sort of accountability. I am sure the member from Winnipeg will stand up and ask a question for the 1,624th time in this place. At the end of the day, where are we? They should just release the darn documents.
I will pause here because it is an appropriate time to recognize two people in Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo who were recently engaged. One of them is a young man whom I have spoken with regularly; I know his father. My mom actually worked with his father when she was beginning as a legal assistant, and my sister went to school with his aunt. His name is Spencer Paul; he is a terrific young man who is beginning his teaching career. I want to salute him and wish him and his fiancée, Yulia Voloshenko, all the best on their engagement and a life of prosperity together.
Let us talk about a website founded by Professor Matt Malone, Open by Default, which looks at various government Order Paper questions, things like that, and compiles them. Professor Malone has done great work. However, for a government that said it would be open by default, it has been anything but. We are standing here today because this is the height of a lack of transparency. This is a government that promised sunny ways, openness and transparency. We have been here four or five days because the government is choosing to obfuscate. This is not just the deflection that a lot of politicians do on all sides; more than obfuscation, this is deliberate stymying. The Liberal government has chosen to ignore the will of the House because there is something bad in those documents. I question why the Liberals will not just put them forward.
The Liberals will stand up and say, “Oh, but this person really isn't a Liberal; they were Conservative once. Did members know that?” I do not care who they are. They could have been my campaign manager, but if they got rich off the backs of taxpayers, they should be held accountable in the House and through whatever independent mechanisms there are. The buck stops here when it comes to Parliament. We should see those documents, and they should be tabled. It is the same when it comes to the 11 who have either wittingly or unwittingly helped hostile states. I do not care if it is the person sitting next to me; they should be named. If they cannot be named here, then where can they be named?
This is a Liberal government that has much to hide, but it is getting tired. The expectation is that people will run defence for it and do different things. However, people who stand here and who sit in the balcony at question period ask this: “Why aren't the questions ever answered? Why do we have to ask the same question over and over again?” I would say, rhetorically, to the Liberal members who are here that I wonder what their response would be if this were a Conservative scandal.
For those at home, Sustainable Development Technology Canada, or SDTC, is supposed to be an arm's-length, not-for-profit organization; it is meant to support projects that develop and demonstrate technology. Here is the problem: SDTC executives awarded projects in which they held conflicts, equalling over $330 million of taxpayer funds. Let us go back to the middle class: How many middle-class families does it take for their federal tax burden to equal $330 million? We all know that the Prime Minister has lavish tastes, and he has no problem pontificating about carbon taxes while he jet-sets all around the country and tells people about how they have never had it so good with their carbon rebates, which really do not make up the complete picture. They really do not tell people how much they are actually paying, especially when we think about tax upon tax and how it is levied at each and every single step.
How did this happen? In 2019, the Liberal industry minister, Navdeep Bains, began appointing people who would have conflicts of interest to SDTC. These are Liberal appointees. To those people who talk about Stephen Harper and say that “this person served under Stephen Harper”, as I heard earlier today, they were appointed by the Liberal government five years ago. If we know one thing about Liberals, it is that they help Liberals, appoint Liberals and want to fund Liberals. What did they start doing? They started giving themselves contracts: “You scratch my back, I scratch yours.”
We are here in Parliament. I talked about my roots as a kid from North Kamloops, the child of immigrants, thinking I would probably never be in a place like this; however, if I ever had envisioned it 20 or 30 years ago, the last thing I would be thinking is that a government would be stymying the production of documents over people who got rich. I will make this clear: If anybody who works for me used their position to get rich, or to steal $20, I would have no problem terminating them on the spot. That is what is expected, period.
In contrast, when it comes to the Liberals, when it comes to them having to deal with this scandal, they put up roadblock after roadblock. Why is this? Why are they hiding something? The reason is that there must be something substantial, something explosive. I invite people to watch question period and watch the answers. Watch how little of substance is said. We have these vague references to charter rights. We have, “Well, the RCMP are investigating, so we have nothing more to do.” Last time I checked, we are not the RCMP; we are Parliament. Parliament should have the right to figure out its own processes, and we do. The people and the Liberals, they do not understand that there are actually separations. They say that, as Conservatives, we want to meddle. They do not realize that Parliament controls its own destiny, while the RCMP controls its own destiny. These are the documents that need to come.
In my view, our whistle-blower legislation should be enhanced. There were whistle-blowers who came forward and said, “This is wrong. This is so wrong that I am prepared to put my career on the line for it.” What do they get? The people who bravely came forward got stymied. I am sure the member for Winnipeg North is just going to stand up and tell us the reason. This should not happen when whistle-blowers put their necks on the line so that Canadians can know the truth. The Liberals should release the documents and give us the truth; it will set us free, especially the Liberals.