Debates of Nov. 20th, 2024

A motion to adjourn the House under Standing Order 38 deemed to have been moved.

Public Services and Procurement

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Madam Speaker, I said a few weeks ago that the Liberals' indigenous procurement scandal was the biggest scandal we have seen yet, and I think Canadians saw why today. A senior Liberal cabinet minister from Alberta with multiple different areas of responsibility, the member for Edmonton Centre, left cabinet because of the Liberals' indigenous procurement scandal. Now members across the way think this is funny. It is not funny.

The Assembly of First Nations has told committee that a majority of the contracts that are supposed to be going to indigenous entrepreneurs, supporting economic development in indigenous communities, are going to shell companies. Indigenous leaders have been repeatedly testifying at committee that there is rampant abuse in a program that is supposed to benefit indigenous entrepreneurs and communities. People are pretending to be indigenous. There are shell companies and there are abuses of joint ventures, where virtually all of the benefit goes to a non-indigenous company. This is the abuse that has been happening, and we have been talking about it for months.

However, it has just recently come out that a company owned by the former minister of employment, who just resigned, was pretending to be indigenous in order to try to get government contracts. Therefore not only is there rampant abuse of the program by people who are not indigenous but are pretending to be indigenous or trying to take advantage of the program in other ways, but also there is a former member of the Liberal caucus who owns a company that pretended to be indigenous-owned when it was owned by a minister of the Crown who is not Indigenous.

The former minister repeatedly misrepresented himself. The Liberal Party, in its public statements, identified him as indigenous and said that he was part of the Liberal's indigenous caucus. Every other member of the caucus still identifies as indigenous, but he acknowledges that he is not, even though he was a member of it. In various situations, he falsely represented himself as being indigenous; this was part of a political story he wanted to tell, but it was also the basis on which the company he owned pretended to be an indigenous-owned company and tried to get contracts on that basis.

The former minister's company is not the only instance of abuse. Again, the AFN is saying that it happens with the majority of companies getting the contracts. There are companies like Dalian Enterprise and a Canadian health care agency, which got over $100 million each and where there were very clearly abuses of joint ventures. These are companies that were taken off the indigenous business list but nonetheless profited significantly while they were on it. This is absolutely disgusting.

Indigenous peoples in this country are experiencing unacceptable levels of poverty. The government came in with high words about reconciliation, yet here we are today. The Liberals came in promising reconciliation, and nine years later a minister of the government is leaving cabinet because he pretended to be indigenous and used that pretense to try to advance the commercial interests of his own private company by getting contracts from the government. The government defended him for far too long. He remains a member of the government caucus, and his company remains eligible for government contracts.

Will the Liberals show some contrition tonight and recognize how badly they failed on reconciliation—

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

The hon. parliamentary secretary to the Minister of Indigenous Services has the floor.

[Jenica Atwin, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Indigenous Services]

Madam Speaker, I would like to acknowledge that we are on the unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe people.

I thank the member for this opportunity to talk about the importance of economic reconciliation through supporting indigenous businesses. I think it is important to take a step back to remind members why the procurement strategy for indigenous businesses was created in the first place. Indigenous people in Canada comprise approximately 5% of the overall population, yet, historically, businesses owned by first nations, Inuit and Métis entrepreneurs were consistently winning a lower percentage of federal contracts.

In the early 1990s, the government saw an opportunity to facilitate indigenous people's access to procurement opportunities. In 1995, the eligibility criteria for the current procurement strategy for indigenous businesses, PSIB, then under a slightly different name, was approved. Based on engagements with indigenous organizations and business leaders, in 2021, Public Services and Procurement Canada, in collaboration with the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat and Indigenous Services Canada, created more opportunities by implementing the mandatory minimum 5% indigenous procurement target.

Today, the procurement strategy for indigenous businesses and the mandatory 5% target continue to be two important ways the Government of Canada supports indigenous businesses, including indigenous entrepreneurs, across the country. We have heard many times from indigenous partners how important this PSIB is for advancing economic reconciliation and supporting indigenous businesses and entrepreneurs.

Since we announced the 5% target, we have seen a surge in indigenous entrepreneurs' interest and investment in the program. In contrast, the proportion of contracts going to indigenous businesses in the Harper years never went above 1%. Now, Conservatives are trying to undermine this critical program by focusing on the extremely rare instances of bad actors that do not represent the overall merit of the procurement strategy.

Investing in indigenous communities and building up indigenous businesses and entrepreneurs benefits all Canadians. According to the 2022 national indigenous economic strategy for Canada, the continued exclusion of indigenous people costs the Canadian economy $27.7 billion every year. The National Indigenous Economic Development Board found that closing the existing employment gap could help lift over 150,000 indigenous people out of poverty. There is a real cost to inaction.

I would like to be clear: we are working closely with indigenous partners to improve the indigenous procurement process and address these concerns. Together with indigenous partners, we are gathering information and building the foundation for a co-developed, transformative, indigenous procurement strategy that supports economic reconciliation. One of the components of this co-developed strategy is the transfer of the indigenous business directory to indigenous partners. We know that first nations, Inuit and Métis are best positioned to define and verify indigenous businesses.

We will continue to work with indigenous partners to co-develop a path forward that strengthens economic relationships with indigenous entrepreneurs and businesses. These increased economic opportunities for first nations, Inuit and Métis people are vital to ensuring continued growth and prosperity for all of Canada. We will continue to improve and support the program as it is vital for supporting indigenous businesses and communities. I hope that our Conservative colleagues will support us in doing that.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Madam Speaker, it is really unbelievable that the government persists in its arrogant pretense that everything is totally fine. The member did not at all mention the fact that today, a minister of the Crown left cabinet because his company was trying to abuse this program. She said, “extremely rare instances of bad actors”. That is completely the opposite of what we were told by the Assembly of First Nations and by many other indigenous leaders.

The government is not listening. Indigenous leaders are telling us that abuses are rampant in this program, that there are companies that have received hundreds of millions of dollars through abuses. They are not indigenous but they are benefiting from this. We have a member of the Liberal caucus who is a bad actor in this whole process.

Again, will the government show some humility and stop pretending everything is fine, listen to indigenous leaders and actually recognize that there is a big problem?

[Jenica Atwin, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

Madam Speaker, I would be happy to go into more detail about what happens in those rare occurrences where concerns with supplier integrity are suspected. If a department or agency has concerns about supplier integrity or misconduct at any point in a procurement process, they can refer the matter to Public Services and Procurement Canada's office of supplier integrity and compliance.

The office administers the strengthened ineligibility and suspension policy, which came into effect earlier this year. This policy sets out the circumstances and processes that enable the registrar of ineligibility and suspension to suspend and de-buy our suppliers. This includes suppliers who have been charged with or convicted of a specific offence or have been found to lack business integrity or business honesty in a manner that directly affects their present responsibility.

On this side of the House, we will continue to improve and support the indigenous procurement process in true partnership.

Democratic Institutions

[Kevin Vuong, Independent, Spadina—Fort York, ON]

Madam Speaker, we are back this evening to debate a question that I asked the Prime Minister, a question that arose from constant media coverage and from a parliamentary intelligence committee report that provided insight on the infamous 11 parliamentarians who were in the pocket of the Chinese Communist Party.

I asked the Prime Minister if he had trouble sitting at the cabinet table, as he must have wittingly known that at least one of his ministers may not have been working in the service of Canada. The Prime Minister knew he could not defend the indefensible, so instead of answering the question, he attacked my question by theatrically stating that I was displaying “irreverence and unseriousness in a place that deserves a serious contemplation of issues of national security”. What is disgraceful, very serious and irresponsible is the continuous refusal of the Prime Minister to name those individuals and provide information that he sat on for several months to the appropriate authorities so that a badly needed investigation can be launched, charges can be laid and our courts can determine the guilt or innocence of those who remain kept in seclusion.

It is obvious that the Prime Minister is in denial or completely unaware that he is not above the law. Moreover, he is equally clued out in understanding that nowhere is it written that a prime minister has the power to obstruct justice and override the Criminal Code of Canada. It is unconscionable that the Prime Minister has ignored all efforts for these 11 individuals to be identified and for the laws of Canada to be applied.

The Criminal Code is clear on the issue of treason, and unlike the Prime Minister, most Canadians believe that the Criminal Code is the law of the land and that laws are there to protect Canadians, not to protect Liberals or anyone else who sells out their country for political or financial gain. The code is not some plaything of a prime minister. It is incumbent on a prime minister to act to protect Canadians and our democracy from those who are out to subvert our institutions. That is the duty of a prime minister.

I find it passing strange that the Prime Minister is concerned about the opposition leader's security clearance when the Prime Minister is shielding the investigation and prosecution of those who are in league with agents of foreign interference, including at least one cabinet minister. As long as those 11 traitors remain unnamed and uninvestigated, the Prime Minister is in fact abetting foreign interference and protecting those in the pocket of Beijing. Why?

There is no defending the indefensible. No matter what is in the parliamentary secretary's talking points, for the leader of the Liberal Party to cover for 11 traitors who are in the pocket of the Chinese Communist Party and who are escaping justice is an affront to Parliament and to all Canadians. Those 11 individuals remain in the protected custody of the Prime Minister, who, by his own actions, is in contempt of our laws and of the administration of justice. What is the Prime Minister so afraid of? Is the Prime Minister afraid to release the 11 names because of who they are or the roles they hold in the government, in his own caucus or in the Liberal Party?

I will ask once again a very simple question of the government: Will it release the names, yes or no?

[Jenica Atwin, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Indigenous Services]

Madam Speaker, it is my pleasure to rise today to speak to the paramount issue of combatting foreign interference in our democratic institutions. I certainly take this matter very seriously. I have respect for the House, and I wish the member would demonstrate the same. The allegations referenced here are misleading and defamatory, and he is simply peddling misinformation.

On this side of the House, the Prime Minister and ministers of the Crown have security clearances and have been vetted by national security. That is more than I can say for the Leader of the Opposition, who the member opposite is sitting closer and closer to. That is why I would like to turn my attention to what matters, which is what the government is doing on foreign interference.

In September 2023, the government announced the establishment of the public inquiry into foreign interference in federal processes and democratic processes following extensive consultations with all recognized parties in the House of Commons. All parties agreed to the terms of reference and the appointment of the commissioner, Justice Marie-Josée Hogue, a judge of the Court of Appeal of Quebec. The commissioner is mandated to examine and assess interference from China, Russia and other foreign state or non-state actors, including any potential impacts, to confirm the integrity of and any impacts on the 2019 and 2021 federal general elections at the national and electoral district levels.

As members of the House know, the commissioner's interim report was delivered on May 3, 2024. Some of the key findings from this initial report were that foreign interference did not affect the overall outcomes of the 2019 and 2021 elections, and the administration of these elections were sound. Foreign interference did not undermine the integrity of Canada's electoral system.

The commission's initial report did not make any recommendations for the government or other stakeholders. These will be included in the commission's final report. The government looks forward to reviewing the final report and any recommendations the commissioner may have for better protecting federal democratic processes from foreign interference. These will help inform future measures. In the meantime, the government continues its work to counter the evolving threat of foreign interference in Canada's democratic institutions.

Since the commissioner was appointed, the government has taken a number of steps. In September 2023, the Prime Minister made a statement in the House of Commons that there were credible allegations of a potential link between agents of the Government of India and the killing of a Canadian citizen in British Columbia. In October 2023, the government issued a second public statement on a probable Chinese government's “spamouflage” disinformation campaign targeting dozens of Canadian parliamentarians and issued letters to those parliamentarians who were targeted.

In December 2023, Canada joined the United Kingdom's attribution of malicious cyber activity in Russia that targeted U.K. politics and democratic processes. In January 2024, early preparations for the critical election incident public protocol panel began with individual briefings to panel members. Also in January 2024, the government published and shared a tool kit to resist disinformation and foreign interference and “Countering Disinformation: A Guidebook for Public Servants”.

In March 2024, the government introduced Bill C-65 which proposes amendments to the Canada Elections Act, including measures to further strengthen federal electoral processes against foreign interference. This bill has passed second reading in the House and is currently being studied in committee. In June 2024, unclassified briefings on foreign interference were provided to members of Parliament. On June 20, 2024, Bill C-70, the Countering Foreign Interference Act, received royal assent.

The Government of Canada has taken a range of measures to address the evolving threat of foreign interference in Canada's democratic processes. We look forward to reviewing any recommendations that Commissioner Hogue may have in her final report. In the meantime, the government continues to take steps to protect Canada's democracy.

[Kevin Vuong, Independent, Spadina—Fort York, ON]

Madam Speaker, the parliamentary secretary has been instructed not to answer the question regarding the release of names. That is fine.

Instead, I would like to ask the government about the New Oriental International College Academy in Markham. If she followed the Hogue inquiry, she would be familiar with the school, as the inquiry was told that this private high school bused in students from Markham to vote for the member for Don Valley North in his nomination campaign.

This school is endorsed by the Chinese consulate, and last year, this high-powered school's CEO partied it up with the Prime Minister on Parliament Hill. Not only that, but this same Chinese consulate approved school students who were offered a summer leadership program to work in the Prime Minister's Office. This must be investigated. If this were the United States, a special prosecutor would have already been appointed. No matter what the party is or who the person of interest is, no one is above the law, not even the Prime Minister.

Will the government appoint a special justice to look into the Prime Minister's actions for working with a school flagged by CSIS?

[Jenica Atwin, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

Madam Speaker, the government is committed to protecting and strengthening Canada's democracy, and I will reiterate that time and time again. I can tell the member is very passionate about this, and it is important that all members of the House take this very seriously. We look forward to the ongoing work of the public inquiry into foreign interference in federal electoral processes and democratic institutions, as I mentioned, including the commissioner's final report in December. The government will review the report in due course, including any recommendations the commissioner may have.

In the meantime, the government has taken many steps to counter the threat of foreign interference in our democratic institutions since the commission began its work. Democracies around the world are grappling with the threat posed by foreign interference. Canadians can have confidence that robust safeguards are in place to protect our democracy. The Government of Canada continuously adjusts these measures to meet this long-standing and evolving threat.

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

The motion to adjourn the House is now deemed to have been adopted. Accordingly, the House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 10 a.m. pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 8:10 p.m.)