House of Commons Hansard #376 of the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was cbc.

Topics

Reference to Standing Committee on Procedure and House AffairsPrivilegeOrders of the Day

5:15 p.m.

Conservative

Pierre Paul-Hus Conservative Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC

Madam Speaker, obviously, we are still talking about $400 million because that is the known quantity. However, the Auditor General said that she found this amount of $400 million by checking 40% to 60% of the data, which means that we could actually be talking about an amount of up to $1 billion. That is even more scandalous. This $400 million is already a huge amount.

Today, we are talking about billions of dollars. The government gives out billions of dollars like it is candy. However, $400 million is a lot of money. It is 10 times more than the sponsorship scandal. Let us not forget that. This may be just the first step. Millions of dollars more could be added to this. That is why we need all of the information.

Reference to Standing Committee on Procedure and House AffairsPrivilegeOrders of the Day

5:15 p.m.

Conservative

James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB

Madam Speaker, I am rising today to speak about the green slush fund scandal, which we have been debating here for some time. Particularly, I am speaking to the subamendment, which would change the amendment by adding “except that the order for the committee to report back to the House within 30 sitting days shall be discharged if the Speaker has sooner laid upon the table a notice from the Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel confirming that all government institutions have fully complied with the order adopted on June 10, 2024, by depositing all of their responsive records in an unredacted form”. I stress “unredacted”, because we have to stop this cover-up.

This order was originally given by the Speaker back on June 10, and here we are discussing the question of privilege on the green slush fund that the Liberals had set up to allow Liberal insiders to enrich themselves and to spend almost $400 million from taxpayers on themselves and on other Liberal friends, and they violated rules that were identified by the Auditor General. There was $58 million that the Liberal-appointed board on the green slush fund shovelled out on projects that could not demonstrate any environmental development benefit or green technology.

As a former chair of the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development, I know that the Sustainable Development Technology Canada organization had been, up until the Liberals under the industry minister and going back to Navdeep Bains when he was industry minister, functioning perfectly in helping small green-tech funds get angel investments and direct government support to bring new products into the market to reduce our carbon footprint and to ensure that we were having clean land, clean air and clean water. However, trust this Liberal government with its history of always enriching Liberal insiders and friends, and the corruption, which goes back to when I first got elected, when we were still dealing with the ad scam, then the SNC-Lavalin scandal and the WE Foundation, which all look pretty minuscule compared to this $400 million.

There was $58 million given to projects that did not even qualify under the rules of SDTC, and another $334 million. Over 186 times, projects were awarded to board members themselves, who were in a conflict of interest. They were sitting on the board, appointed by the then Liberal minister of industry, Navdeep Bains, who originally appointed most of these people, and they were failing to observe the rules laid out. When the Auditor General looked at how dollars were being spent by SDTC, she found that 186 times these Liberal insiders, these board members, failed to recuse themselves when they were giving money to themselves, to each other and to others who were connected to the board members.

Finally, there was another $58 million that was handed out without even putting in place proper contribution agreements, which were meant to ensure that dollars were being spent properly. There was no follow-up, no follow-through; it was money taken and stuffed in their pockets. Luckily, the Auditor General found out because of some brave whistle-blowers.

We have been talking about how the current industry minister was blamed by the Auditor General for failing to do sufficient monitoring of SDTC and failing to look at all the alerts and red flags that were going up. He decided to turn a blind eye. We know that Cycle Capital, one of the companies that received dollars, went to the direct benefit of the Minister of Environment, who had shares in Cycle Capital, and we have seen those shares now increase exponentially because of the supposed benefit of these government dollars, these hard-earned dollars from taxpayers, that funded SDTC, which they then turned into a green slush fund to allow them to continue to benefit.

We have seen the Liberals get up in this place over the past few weeks to argue that we should not be debating this here, even though it is our right and responsibility as parliamentarians to stand up against any questions of contempt of Parliament and violations of privilege, which the Speaker found there was. The Speaker is asking for Parliament to pronounce itself, and we believe that these records, since it clearly looks like there was criminality involved, need to be investigated not just by the public accounts committee and Parliament, but by the RCMP and other police agencies.

A whistle-blower clearly stated:

The true failure of the situation stands at the feet of our current government, whose decision to protect wrongdoers and cover up their findings over the last 12 months is a serious indictment of how our democratic systems and institutions are being corrupted by political interference.

He thinks:

...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 sphere.

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 stress the “criminal activities” of this organization and those who were participating.

Liberals have said we would be violating charter rights, but the reality is that the Charter of Rights and Freedoms was set up to protect individuals from the government, not protect the government from Parliament. The Liberals can no longer hide behind this veil, falsely using the charter as the reason these documents should not be turned over to Parliament and the RCMP. We need to get to the bottom of this.

The Liberals can put an end to this once and for all. As the subamendment says, the order to report back to the House is not required if the government hands over the documents. That way, first, we can fulfill our fiduciary duty to ensure that taxpayer dollars are being used legally in this case, never mind wisely. Second, the RCMP can take these documents and start an in-depth investigation of the scandal at hand.

Over the years, we have witnessed Liberals continually violating the basis of our democratic institutions and abusing taxpayer dollars. All we need to look at is how they misspent money during the pandemic and how dollars were handed out during the arrive scam. It turns out that we had to call one of the creators of the arrive scam app to the bar because he refused to testify. We know that hundreds of millions of dollars were never accounted for. We were told that the arrive scam app could have been easily produced for under half a million dollars, but instead it cost hundreds of millions of dollars. The lack of proper governance and the lack of putting in the proper checks and balances allowed the arrive scam to happen.

That is what has happened with the green slush fund. The Liberals did not carry out their responsibility as a government to ensure taxpayers' dollars were being used for what they were meant for in the various programs and operations of the government. The Liberals allowed SDTC to take those monies to benefit themselves, benefit a minister and benefit close friends and allies of the Liberal Party. We have to continue to raise this issue and ask questions. We will continue to push for it until the Liberals turn over the money.

However, are we surprised? We know the Prime Minister put pressure on the first indigenous justice minister and attorney general of the country, Jody Wilson-Raybould, to provide a “get out of jail free” card for SNC-Lavalin. Instead of taking the advice of his then attorney general, who was fulfilling her responsibilities, he first demoted her to Veterans Affairs and then fired her. That shows the lengths the Prime Minister will go to ensure that his friends in large elite corporations, the Laurentian elites, are always taken care of before ethics, rules and the law are followed by the Liberal government.

All too often, we see the Liberals abuse our democracy, and it is starting to play out among Canadians in the issues being polled. Not only have they lost confidence in the Prime Minister, who now has the lowest level of support and lowest approval ratings of any prime minister in the past 30 years, but they have lost confidence in the democratic process of Parliament and government. It is because of the erosion caused by the ongoing mismanagement and corruption of the Liberals and the way they have divided Canadians every step of the way.

The Prime Minister of Canada has three primary responsibilities. One is to keep Canada safe. However, we have seen how the government has turned its back on police officers. A police officer was stabbed in the neck in Winnipeg over the weekend in a confrontation. It is the Liberals' soft-on-crime policies that have made our streets less safe. The Liberals have also hollowed out our military. We are short over 15,000 troops because of the woke policies the Prime Minister has brought forward. People are leaving in droves and we are having trouble getting enough back to replace them. Our ships are rusting out, our fighter jets are worn out, our army has been hollowed out and everybody who works in the Canadian Armed Forces is burnt out. He has failed to protect Canadians.

The Prime Minister's second responsibility is to manage the relationship with the United States. We are seeing how that is going right now because of the Prime Minister's mass immigration and the problems that has created at our southern border, the U.S.'s northern border, with people going across the border illegally. In some cases, as reported, people who have crossed into the U.S. from Canada have been charged for wanting to commit terrorism in the United States. That is because of uncontrolled immigration, and it does not bode well with the Americans. We also have the out-of-control fentanyl crisis, which the Liberals have failed to address. As we continue to see these types of issues, how do we protect Canada when we are not properly managing our relationship with the United States?

The third responsibility of the Prime Minister of Canada is to keep Canada united. However, the Liberal government has consistently and always divided Canadians by race, religion, ethnicity, east against west, and urban against rural. With every policy the Liberals bring forward, they calculate that those divisions play well into their political future.

When we look at why the Liberals do what they do and why they always have corruption scandals, like the one we are dealing with here, it is all due to the reality that the Prime Minister and his cabinet have not stepped up to the plate for the right reasons. Instead of protecting Canada, the Liberals have decided to hollow out our military and disrespect the police officers across this country. They have constantly underfunded what is needed to properly keep us safe. They are taking those dollars to invest in themselves, and the green slush fund is a prime example of that.

When we finally have a carbon tax election and Canadians have a chance to vote for change, we will be able to see how the hard-earned dollars Canadians pay in taxes every year were misappropriated, having gone to helping out friends like those who work at Sustainable Development Technology Canada. We remain concerned about the overall state of the country that the Liberals, under the Prime Minister, are leaving us with. It is going to be a lot of work, and we know that, but we are prepared to do that work as Conservatives with our great leader. We have a fantastic leader in the official opposition.

As members know, the green slush fund, SDTC, was a federally funded non-profit that received roughly $100 million a year. Over the last four years, the $400 million we are talking about has been used to the benefit of Liberal insiders and friends and has even been used to the financial benefit of the Minister of Environment. We know all those people were put in place by former industry minister Navdeep Bains, who fired the previous board because its members would not do what he wanted.

The Auditor General has done her work and found wrongdoing. She found that board directors refused to recuse themselves from conflicts of interest and awarded themselves 186 different times in the amount of $334 million, which was to their own personal benefit. We know these problems persisted and that the Minister of Industry turned a blind eye. We know this through the Auditor General's investigation and audit, and the whistle-blower believes there was criminality.

We are confident, as the official opposition, that the RCMP will be able to conduct its investigation if it receives unredacted documents. That is why the motion, amendment and subamendment press the government to do the right thing and provide the documents. It can put an end to this debate on the privilege motion.

It is parliamentarians who are at the biggest risk of losing the support of Canadians when we fail to act upon things that are not just unethical but criminal in nature. We need to drill down on things that rebuild the confidence and trust between us members, who have been elected, and the people who put us here.

Canadians expect more and they expect better. Every time we stand up in this place, we will talk about corruption and the misuse and misappropriation of the taxpayer dollars that Canadians work so hard for in these difficult times. When the cost of living is out of control because of the carbon tax, housing is getting more and more difficult for so many people, huge deficits and the printing of money are running up inflation and making life more difficult, and crime on our streets is out of control, it is time for change, and the Conservatives are prepared to make that change.

Reference to Standing Committee on Procedure and House AffairsPrivilegeOrders of the Day

5:35 p.m.

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Madam Speaker, it was very refreshing to hear a Conservative speak off the cuff and not read out an AI-generated speech. I appreciate that.

I notice that the member spoke, very importantly, and I would agree with him, about supporting our military. I am wondering whether he can reflect on the fact that the only time in modern history when our military spending dropped below 1% of our GDP was while he was the parliamentary secretary to the minister of defence. It is very rich for him to come in here and say that we have to spend more on our military, when he was directly responsible for allowing spending to get below 1%.

However, let us not talk about the past; I am willing to focus on the future. The current government has shown how we are going to get to approximately 1.8% and how we will go beyond that to achieve our NATO target of 2%. While the member and I were on the defence committee together, we both agreed it should be at 2%. Can he stand up today and say that if elected to form government, the Conservatives will actually commit to increasing to 2% of GDP, yes or no?

Reference to Standing Committee on Procedure and House AffairsPrivilegeOrders of the Day

5:40 p.m.

Conservative

James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB

Madam Speaker, first I would like to set the record straight. We know from the Parliamentary Budget Officer, who just did some recalculations, that the Liberals' projections of increasing spending up to even 1.7% is a falsehood because they did not base it on the same GDP numbers the Department of Finance uses.

I would also like to point out that the Library of Parliament discovered that when we actually compare apples to apples, when we were looking at actual national defence numbers, when we were in a time of peace in 2014 and there was no invasion in Ukraine happening yet—

Reference to Standing Committee on Procedure and House AffairsPrivilegeOrders of the Day

5:40 p.m.

An hon. member

No, there was not.

Reference to Standing Committee on Procedure and House AffairsPrivilegeOrders of the Day

5:40 p.m.

Conservative

James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB

Madam Speaker, no, there was not. We wrapped up our war efforts in Afghanistan and were downsizing our military efforts in Iraq and Syria. Sure, we rolled down those operations, so defence spending dropped. When the Library of Parliament looked at the numbers, actual national defence expenditures in the department right now by the Liberals is 0.95%.

Reference to Standing Committee on Procedure and House AffairsPrivilegeOrders of the Day

5:40 p.m.

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

No.

Reference to Standing Committee on Procedure and House AffairsPrivilegeOrders of the Day

5:40 p.m.

Conservative

James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB

Madam Speaker, for the member for Winnipeg North, who does not know the numbers, I will explain that the only way the Liberals got their numbers up is that in 2017 they asked permission from NATO to add in, and there is an order paper question that just proved it, $6.5 billion from veterans' pensions, defence employees' pensions, and Coast Guard, which is not a paramilitary organization.

Reference to Standing Committee on Procedure and House AffairsPrivilegeOrders of the Day

5:40 p.m.

NDP

Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC

Madam Speaker, I would like to say, as we go into six weeks of filibuster, that we believe that the motion should come to a vote. We support the motion and want to get to the bottom of the SDTC scandal. When it came to the SNC-Lavalin scandal and the WE Charity scandal, it was NDP MPs who actually got to the bottom of them, because we believe Canadians need to get answers.

I always appreciate my colleague; he has a long history in the House and I have a lot of respect for him. I do not have any respect at all for the record of the Harper regime, because it was the most corrupt and dishonest government in Canadian history. I want to cite some of the scandals. The ATS scandal was $400 million. The G8 scandal, remember the gazebos, was a billion dollars. The Phoenix pay scandal was $2.2 billion. There was $3.1 billion lost in the anti-terrorism funding. There were the Senate scandals. I could go on and on.

No Conservatives would permit us to get answers to any of those scandals. Does my colleague regret the Harper government's shutdown and refusal to give answers and transparency in every single one of them? Does he regret what the Harper regime did to Canadians?

Reference to Standing Committee on Procedure and House AffairsPrivilegeOrders of the Day

5:40 p.m.

Conservative

James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB

Madam Speaker, the member for New Westminster—Burnaby gives a very interesting revisionist history. The NDP has been the party that has kept the Liberals in power; the Liberals are here because of the ongoing support of the NDP. Going into the by-elections this fall, the leader of the NDP said that he had torn up the agreement, which was so they could win their seat back in Elmwood—Transcona. There was a very thin margin in that by-election, and they were losing up until that point. When I was knocking on doors in Elmwood—Transcona, every constituent was sick and tired of the NDP's supporting the Prime Minister and the Liberals.

The NDP's coalition with the Liberals has allowed us to get to this point. It was the NDP that helped shut down the debate and turn over the documents we needed in the past, and they are now allowing the debate to go on. However, if they at all support a closure motion brought forward by the Liberal government, it again will prove that the NDP “have their six”, have the Liberals' back, and that the coalition is alive and well.

Reference to Standing Committee on Procedure and House AffairsPrivilegeOrders of the Day

5:45 p.m.

Conservative

Tako Van Popta Conservative Langley—Aldergrove, BC

Madam Speaker, the speech by my friend and colleague, the member for Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, was a thoughtful one on the Liberals' latest scandal, the green slush fund. I was happy to hear him make reference to the specious arguments based on the charter that the Liberals are now advancing late in the day to justify their non-compliance with a perfectly legitimate order of Parliament.

The member left us with no doubt about what he thinks of the arguments, but my question is more about timing and procedure. The time to have raised the arguments would have been in advance of the order's having been made in June, as referenced by the Speaker in his ruling.

What can my colleague say about the timing of the procedures and about how the Liberals are now using a specious argument to hide behind?

Reference to Standing Committee on Procedure and House AffairsPrivilegeOrders of the Day

5:45 p.m.

Conservative

James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his hard work in making sure we always stand up against corruption, we stand up for democracy and we stand up for the proper governance of the House of Commons and of cabinet.

Meanwhile, we are witnessing the Liberals' refusing to co-operate with the Speaker. They are refusing to hand over the documents so the RCMP can do its work. We have been waiting for the documents for over five months, coming up on six months next week. The Auditor General found that there was a violation of the rules. The board members refused to recuse themselves; they were enriching themselves instead of leaving the room.

What would have been even better is if the Liberal appointees had never even made an application or taken the dollars in the first place. They were there to make sure that the green-tech companies across this country were getting the money they need, and instead they enriched themselves, which is all wrong.

Reference to Standing Committee on Procedure and House AffairsPrivilegeOrders of the Day

5:45 p.m.

Liberal

Ken McDonald Liberal Avalon, NL

Madam Speaker, thank you for the opportunity to try to correct the history that the member spoke about. I know he said that history would repeat itself, or whatever, but I want to talk about when Stephen Harper was prime minister.

The first statement Stephen Harper made about Atlantic Canadians was that they had a defeatist attitude. They wanted to survive on EI and not get out and find jobs. We can talk about protecting people, but Stephen Harper shut down the search and rescue facility of Coast Guard in St. John's. It was opened again by the current government when we came to power.

Of course the Conservatives did not care about Newfoundland. Premier Williams, at the time, felt so dismayed by the Stephen Harper government that he flew the Canadian flag upside down at the Confederation building. It is disgusting.

Can the member comment on these things from a previous government?

Reference to Standing Committee on Procedure and House AffairsPrivilegeOrders of the Day

5:45 p.m.

Conservative

James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB

Madam Speaker, the member actually talked publicly about signing the letter to remove the Prime Minister as leader of the Liberal Party. The bigger question is why has he not continued that fight to do the right thing for Canada and remove the one individual here who continues to make us less safe, continues to squander the dollars and continues to ensure that we can make investments in things like the Coast Guard, the Canadian Armed Forces and the RCMP?

The Liberals would rather take the dollars for building back our Canadian Armed Forces and have the money misappropriated by the Liberal insiders who were sitting on the green slush fund board. This is the question we need answered: Why not get rid of the Prime Minister?

Reference to Standing Committee on Procedure and House AffairsPrivilegeOrders of the Day

5:45 p.m.

Conservative

Tracy Gray Conservative Kelowna—Lake Country, BC

Madam Speaker, it is always an honour to rise on behalf of the residents of Kelowna—Lake Country. It is disappointing that I have to rise to speak to the motion before us again because of the government's failure to fulfill the wish of the House. We are now at a subamendment stage, and this means that the Liberals are still ignoring the will of Parliament—

Reference to Standing Committee on Procedure and House AffairsPrivilegeOrders of the Day

5:50 p.m.

Liberal

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

There is a point of order from the hon. government House leader.

Business of the HouseOrders of the Day

5:50 p.m.

Burlington Ontario

Liberal

Karina Gould LiberalLeader of the Government in the House of Commons

Madam Speaker, I would request that the ordinary hour of daily adjournment of the next sitting be 12 midnight, pursuant to order made Wednesday, February 28.

Business of the HouseOrders of the Day

5:50 p.m.

Liberal

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

Pursuant to order made Wednesday, February 28, the minister's request to extend the said sitting is deemed adopted.

The House resumed consideration of the motion, of the amendment as amended and of the amendment to the amendment.

Reference to Standing Committee on Procedure and House AffairsPrivilegeOrders of the Day

5:50 p.m.

Conservative

Tracy Gray Conservative Kelowna—Lake Country, BC

Madam Speaker, Canadians want us debating issues that are important to them in this place, like rising taxes, rising homelessness, rising crime and rising debt. They want us to talk about the growing lineups at food banks that are increasingly including the working class, seniors and children, or about how retirees are having to go back to work either because they cannot afford to pay for basic necessities or because they need to help their adult children. However, because of the Liberal government—

Reference to Standing Committee on Procedure and House AffairsPrivilegeOrders of the Day

5:50 p.m.

Liberal

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

I apologize. I have to interrupt the hon. member.

The hon. member for Calgary Rocky Ridge is rising on a point of order.

Reference to Standing Committee on Procedure and House AffairsPrivilegeOrders of the Day

5:50 p.m.

Conservative

Pat Kelly Conservative Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB

Madam Speaker, I apologize to my colleague from Kelowna Lake—Country for interrupting her speech, but the Standing Orders of the House of Commons insist that more than one party House leader sign an order to extend a House sitting. I am certain that the Conservative House leader has signed no such order, and I just wanted to confirm that the request for an extension is in order.

Reference to Standing Committee on Procedure and House AffairsPrivilegeOrders of the Day

5:50 p.m.

Liberal

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

I thank the hon. member for raising the point. The motion adopted on February 28 simply states that a minister must have the agreement of another House leader. It does not require that the parties to the agreement communicate to the House. In making the request, the minister implicitly acknowledges that there is an agreement. There is a long-standing principle that we take a member at their word. There is therefore no reason to doubt the existence of an agreement at this time.

The hon. member for Kelowna—Lake Country has the floor.

Reference to Standing Committee on Procedure and House AffairsPrivilegeOrders of the Day

5:50 p.m.

Conservative

Tracy Gray Conservative Kelowna—Lake Country, BC

Madam Speaker, we are here because of the Liberal government's refusal to release documents, which is the will of this Parliament.

It really makes us question what the Liberals are trying so desperately to hide. The government should have obeyed the request of the House of Commons. The House of Commons is the voice of Canadians, and the government cannot ignore this request. It is not just a request; this is an order of the House. This is exactly what the Liberal government has done.

Our motion could not have been clearer. It demanded that all documents related to Sustainable Development Technology Canada, now widely known as the Liberal billion-dollar green slush fund, be tabled with the law clerk of the House of Commons and transferred to the RCMP for investigation. The government had 30 days to comply, but it did not do so.

As a result, the opposition House leader raised a question of privilege with the Speaker. The Speaker agreed that the members' privileges of the House had been breached and that the government had ignored an order of the House. However, the Liberal government continues to ignore it. I know Liberal colleagues across the aisle will say they have tabled 29,000 pages of documents. What they do not say is that many of those documents were heavily redacted, against the instructions of this Parliament. It does not matter whether they table two pages or two million pages; if the documents are redacted and blacked out, we cannot see the information on those pages.

If the Liberals chose to hide the relevant information that the House requested to protect Liberal insiders, then those documents are not worth the paper or the ink that was used. Ultimately, the Liberal government is hiding the information from the RCMP. We have to question why this has gone on for weeks and weeks. What are the Liberals trying to hide?

Just to go back and give a little history for anyone listening who is not familiar with this ethical scandal at Sustainable Development Technology Canada, before the current Liberal government, this program was not controversial. Through past governments of other parties and all parties, SDTC provided funding to Canadian innovators seeking to develop clean new technologies. However, under the current Liberal government, SDTC became widely known as the green slush fund because it was known as a hotbed of corruption for use by Liberal insiders.

We know this because the Auditor General of Canada, the Ethics Commissioner and whistle-blowers uncovered clear and widespread corruption in favour of Liberal insiders. The issues began in 2018 when the Liberal industry minister at the time, Navdeep Bains, chose to appoint a new chair to the SDTC, an entrepreneur who was already receiving funding through one of her companies. The Liberals were warned internally of the risks associated with appointing a conflicted chair.

We had heard this and this has come to light. The Liberals were told that up to that point, the fund had never had a chair with interests in companies receiving funding, yet they chose to appoint her anyway. The new chair went on to create an environment where conflicts of interest were tolerated or managed by board members, as described by the Auditor General. Board members went on, through SDTC, to grant funding to companies that they held stock or positions in. It was a direct conflict of interest.

Bains, the Liberal minister at the time, went on to appoint two other controversial board members who engaged in unethical behaviour, in obvious conflicts of interest, acting by approving funding to companies in which they held ownership stakes. Department officials from the government sat in on board meetings. They were witness to 186 conflicts of interest at the board, but they did not intervene.

Then, in November 2022, whistle-blowers raised internal concerns with the Auditor General about unethical practices at SDTC. In September 2023, the whistle-blowers took the allegations public, forcing the Liberal industry minister to suspend SDTC funding.

In November 2023, the Auditor General started to conduct an audit. This audit found many approved projects that were ineligible for funding, a conflict of interest or both. There was $58 million that went to 10 ineligible projects that, on all occasions, could not demonstrate an environmental benefit or development of green technology, the actual purpose of the fund. The Liberal-appointed SDTC board approved $334 million, over 186 cases, for projects in which the board members held a conflict of interest. These numbers are absolutely staggering. The Auditor General found that the Liberal minister “did not sufficiently monitor” the contracts that were given to the Liberal insiders.

This is a culture of corruption that was Liberal-made. We know this because the Auditor General gave SDTC a clean bill of health back in 2017. It was only after the hand-picked Liberal board members were appointed that this fund began voting itself really absurd amounts of taxpayer dollars.

The Liberals will say this agency was at arm's length, but there were government officials sitting in on board meetings, so it was not at arm's length. The Liberal minister recommended board appointments, and Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada had senior department officials sitting in on every board meeting, monitoring the activities of the board. It is unbelievable that senior department officials said nothing during this time.

As well, we know the Auditor General did not analyze all of the projects and contracts. In fact, it was only approximately half that the Auditor General analyzed. Therefore, these 186 instances could potentially be considerably higher, maybe even double that. This is shocking. It is why this Parliament has been seized with this.

It really bodes the question: Why are the Liberals fighting so hard to not bring the documents forth and to not shine a light on what has occurred? If there were all of these conflicts of interest, why would they not want to shine sunlight on the situation and bring all of this to light so it can be analyzed, and if there is criminal activity, that could potentially be pursued? It is unbelievable that this is all being pushed under the rug because the government does not want it to come to light.

It is disappointing we are here discussing this matter of privilege rather than discussing issues that are important to residents in my community of Kelowna—Lake Country and, in fact, all Canadians. After nine years of the NDP-Liberal government, there is really no shortage of issues to be discussing.

One issue I would like to talk about, and hear more on, is crime and how members of my community are worried over the rise in violent crime that has happened under the watch of the NDP-Liberals. The statistics are shocking compared to 2015. Homicides are up 28%, sexual assaults are up 75%, gang murders have nearly doubled, auto thefts are up 46% and extortion is up 357%. These are serious, violent crimes. British Columbia has seen the total number of violent Criminal Code violations increase by over 50% since 2015.

The situation of crime really is out of control. Instead of debating how to better keep our communities safe, we are debating this matter of privilege regarding this apparent Liberal cover-up. The legislative changes made by the Liberal government, supported by the NDP, serve to put the welfare of perpetrators, often violent ones, over the welfare of victims.

Law enforcement and policy experts are calling for reform. Liberal Bill C-75 directed judges to act with restraint when imposing bail conditions, even with violent repeat offenders. It has been a driving force behind the catch-and-release nature of Canada's bail system. Liberal Bill C-5 removed mandatory minimum sentences for 14 Criminal Code sections, including serious crimes related to firearms and drugs. It is unbelievable.

Liberal Bill C-83 changed the correctional system in part to ensure those convicted and sentenced to penitentiaries are provided with the least restrictive environment for that person. Many believe it is this legislation that allowed serial killers like Paul Bernardo to move to a medium-security prison environment despite committing heinous crimes.

Across Canada, law enforcement experts and associations have made it clear they are fed up with the Liberal government's legislative agenda that increased crime and chaos in many of our neighbourhoods. For example, recently, the Police Association of Ontario, the Ontario Provincial Police Association and the Toronto Police Association issued a joint statement following an intense shootout in Toronto that led to 23 arrests and 16 firearms being seized. It states, “Our members are increasingly frustrated and angered as they continue risking their lives to apprehend repeat violent offenders.” It went on to say the incident “should serve as a call to action for the federal government to fix our bail system so repeat and violent offenders can’t continue to harm our communities while out on bail.”

The Vancouver Police Union, close to where I am in British Columbia, stated how Liberal justice reforms are “doing little to address actual crime and violence.” It also said the Prime Minister is “not aware of the ongoing gang war here in B.C. which is putting both our members and public at risk on a daily basis.” The Surrey Police Union, also in British Columbia, described its pressing current issue as “the surge of illegal firearms coming across our borders and ending up in the hands of violent criminals”.

Conservatives will stop the crime by first scrapping Liberal Bill C-75, Bill C-5 and Bill C-83. Conservatives have also put forth many common-sense bills to address public safety. My own private member's bill, the end the revolving door act, Bill C-283, would have expanded justice system sentencing to people suffering from addiction through treatment and recovery in federal penitentiaries. Unfortunately, this was voted down by most NDP and Liberal MPs.

Again, instead of discussing these common-sense solutions to stop the crime in our communities, we are discussing this matter of privilege. Many of our Conservative colleagues, too many to mention in the time I have here today, have also put forth really great private members' bills that would address the issue of crime, everything from looking at crime that is happening in hospitals to extortion, car thefts and many more. I could do a whole speech just on that. We are putting forth common-sense solutions.

There is another issue that I would like to be discussing more, instead of a matter of privilege. Although that is important, we are only discussing it because the Liberals are holding us in this place, because the Liberals are not abiding by the will of the House. Another issue that I would like to be discussing is fixing the budget and restoring affordability.

Inflationary spending and the lack of good economic policies have seen the Canadian economy deteriorate, and Canadians are worse off because of it. We know why. The Prime Minister has said that he does not think about monetary policy and that budgets balance themselves. His latest comment was, “I'll let the bankers worry about the economy.” How completely out of touch is this with what the role of government is and what his role is? The Parliamentary Budget Officer has reported that “rising inflation and tighter monetary policy have eroded purchasing power, particularly among lower-income households.” Most Canadians spend the bulk of their income on basic necessities like food, shelter and transportation. When their purchasing power suffers, it makes just getting by that much harder.

This reality has been realized when it comes to food bank use in Canada. The cost of food has increased by over 22% since 2020 alone, forcing many to go to a food bank. The committee that I am on, the human resources committee, has had a lot of testimony on this from food banks and from not-for-profits, who have talked about the fact that they had volunteers before who have now become clients, that seniors who would maybe volunteer now have to go back to work, that people are not volunteering because they literally cannot afford the transportation to come and volunteer, that donations are down. This is what is happening in Canada. This is the Canada that we are in right now, and this is after nine years of the NDP-Liberal government. We know, for example, that over two million Canadians have visited a food bank in one month alone.

Something that is especially upsetting is the rise of child poverty. According to the 2024 report card on child and family poverty in Canada, 1.4 million children live in poverty in Canada now. We need to discuss how economic policies and inflationary spending have really gotten us to this point. Instead, we are discussing this matter of privilege. There are really serious and broad economic concerns that are happening in Canada. It just really illustrates the results of the disastrous Liberal government and how it has affected people's lives and Canadians' prosperity.

I will say as well that the Liberals have not given a fiscal update so that we would know where the debt is this year. They continue to have spending. We have no idea what the status of our debt is. Canada's federal debt will rise to $1.2 trillion this year. That is based on previous numbers. The interest we will pay in servicing the debt will increase to $54 billion. Again, this is based on previous numbers. Just to put that into perspective, that is more than the revenue that has been raised in the past from GST. It is unbelievable how much we will be spending on servicing our debt and how much our children and grandchildren will be spending.

As well, Canada's GDP per capita continues to decline, meaning that there is less money to go around for more people. This is really troubling, given that while Canada's GDP per capita fell by 3% in the last four years, the GDP per capita of the United States increased by 7% in that same time period. It is total economic mismanagement on the account of the NDP-Liberal government.

The government is continuing to not comply with the will of Parliament and refusing to bring forth the documents that are the will of Parliament. There are a lot of important issues that we need to be discussing here. I will just end with the carbon tax.

We have all of these tax increases that will be coming down the line early next year. We have the carbon tax, which will be increasing on April 1. We have the excise tax, which will be increasing on April 1. Especially with the carbon tax, this just makes the price of everything go up, everything that is grown, produced and transported, yet the government is bent on increasing these taxes. It is putting us really at an economic disadvantage. We are hearing testimony at a lot of committees about how tax increases are forcing people to leave Canada and forcing businesses to leave. These are the things we need to be talking about.

Reference to Standing Committee on Procedure and House AffairsPrivilegeOrders of the Day

6:10 p.m.

Bloc

Monique Pauzé Bloc Repentigny, QC

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order.

Just before my colleague's intervention, a point of order was raised. Indeed, extending the hours requires the support of another party, an opposition party.

I simply want to inform the House that it was not the Bloc Québécois that supported the government.