I am sorry, I did not see you.
Does the House agree that the member's vote should be recognized?
House of Commons Hansard #366 of the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was documents.
House of Commons Hansard #366 of the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was documents.
The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes
I am sorry, I did not see you.
Does the House agree that the member's vote should be recognized?
Sherry Romanado Liberal Longueuil—Charles-LeMoyne, QC
I am voting against the amendment to the amendment.
The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes
That will be added to the result of the vote.
I wish to inform the House that because of the deferred recorded divisions, the time provided for Government Orders will be extended by 50 minutes.
The House resumed consideration of the motion and of the amendment.
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
Madam Speaker, this is a debate that I was not keen on participating in because it exposes the underbelly of the current government and its corrupt ways. I do not enjoy talking about the failures of our national government, but the reality is that there is so much to say on this. Today, we are discussing the green slush fund and the Prime Minister and his government's efforts to hide the corruption that undergirds this particular scandal.
At issue is, as I said, the green slush fund, and as its name implies, it involves money. It involves a purported green innovation fund that was brought forward by Sustainable Development Technology Canada.
I am having difficulty hearing myself because of discussions happening across the floor.
The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes
I gave members notice to keep it down.
The hon. member for Abbotsford may continue, and hopefully we will have order in the House now.
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
Madam Speaker, as I was saying, this green slush fund is about slush, which is effectively a term that describes insiders within government taking taxpayers' dollars and funnelling them to insiders, corporate interests and friends of the government. It is a Liberal green slush fund. It is a program that was put forward by the Liberal government that effectively allowed taxpayers' money, millions and millions of dollars, to be funnelled to private interests without any significant oversight.
Just to refresh everyone's memory, this fund was supposed to promote green energy technology by incentivizing the private sector to step into the environmental arena and come up with innovative solutions to environmental challenges facing not only Canada but the world. On its surface, this program seemed to be suited to our times, and there was a lot of money, hundreds of millions of dollars. In fact, let us call it a billion-dollar fund intended to promote green energy.
What happened? Instead of this money going to worthy organizations, it went to Liberal insiders and corporations connected to the government in one way or another. Let me explain how that happened. When we establish a fund like this, typically the government will establish a board of directors and draw from the private sector individuals who have expertise in a particular space, in this case the green, environmental space. These directors have a responsibility to review every application for funding on its merits and make sure that no private interests and no conflicts of interest arise that would allow corruption to sent in.
Instead of doing this, what did the board do? The directors of the board made decisions that caused much of this money, huge swaths, to be funnelled to their own companies. That, by definition, is corruption, especially if directors have not declared conflicts of interest, which they did not on 186 occasions. Directors did not recuse themselves or remove themselves from the process to ensure that the integrity of the funding mechanism was maintained, and now we have this slush fund.
When we as MPs in the House became aware of this, we asked the government to deliver to Parliament all relevant documents relating to this scandal and corruption. That is the least Canadians should expect of their members of Parliament. Instead, the government said no and that these documents are confidential, sensitive and really not in the purview of Parliament. It said, “We are the government. We know best and we are not going to let you see those documents.”
Of course, those of us in the opposition benches in the House got very upset. We said the government had no right to withhold documents that are relevant to a police investigation into corruption at the highest levels of government, so we went to the Speaker. We said we believed there was a breach of privilege here, and we asked him to order that these documents be turned over to Parliament for delivery to our police authorities, in this case the RCMP.
The Speaker of the House, the highest authority in Parliament, said yes, and he ordered the government, the Prime Minister, to turn over these documents to Parliament. That was the order of the Speaker of the House of Commons, the highest authority in Parliament. There is no appeal from that order or decision. The Speaker, who is a Liberal, made the decision to make that order, and what did the Prime Minister do? He defied the order. He said he was above Parliament and above the law and would not turn over those documents, except in redacted form.
For Canadians who do not understand what redaction is, it is simply censorship. What happens is that government bureaucrats, at the instruction of their political masters, will black out huge sections of these documents, then say they turned over some documents. Of course, there is nothing of value to be read because all the relevant information has been blacked out. That is what the Prime Minister did. He refused to divulge and disclose information to the House, the people's House, the House that should be accountable to Canadians. He said he was defying the Speaker, defying Parliament and defying MPs. He placed himself above the law and Parliament and did not give us those documents in unredacted form.
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
Madam Speaker, that is right. Shame on the Prime Minister and his government.
This is what happens in tinpot dictatorships. We have a Prime Minister who has established himself as the ultimate supreme authority in this country, above the law and above Parliament. I hope Canadians understand that. I know his government is imploding, but that is the kind of Prime Minister we have in Canada right now. He is willing to defy the rule of law.
This issue will be referred to a parliamentary committee, as it should be. Of course, the government wants this matter to go to committee without having any of the relevant documents available for investigation and review. It wants a parliamentary committee to undertake its work without having the information it would require and that our police authorities would require to get to the bottom of this very ugly and incredibly expensive scandal, the green slush fund.
We are talking about a billion-dollar slush fund from which $330 million has been diverted to insiders and where 186 conflicts of interest by board members were never declared. A decision was made 186 times to act unethically on that board. It is unbelievable that this could happen in Canada today.
This matter is supposed to be referred to a committee, but we as a House, acting collectively, have decided that until the Speaker's ruling is complied with, we will not allow it to go to committee. It is that important. I believe Canadians who are watching today would agree with me and most of the members of the House that this scandal is of such proportion and significance that it goes to the very heart of the government. Canadians want this properly investigated and want the investigative authorities to have the information required to truly get to the bottom of it.
It has been said that a fish rots from its head. That is truly an apt description of the government and what is happening with the Prime Minister, in his office and within his cabinet. Certain ministers are doing their darndest to try to hide from Canadians the gravity of this scandal. It is disgraceful. They should not be surprised that this scandal has now bubbled to the surface and that Parliament is investigating this. It has been described as being of the same nature as the sponsorship scandal, which brought down the Chrétien government. Do members remember, “I am entitled to my entitlements”? This is akin to that.
I expect when all of this information comes out, as the government cannot hide this forever, that people are going to go to jail. I believe that hundreds of millions of dollars will have to be recovered from people who scammed taxpayers. I believe that the government is going to be held accountable in the next carbon tax election, which I hope takes place very soon, when Canadians can cast judgment on the corrupt, unethical and incompetent Liberal government.
We talked about accountability and transparency. The least I would expect of the government, when it gets caught red-handed with its hand in the cookie jar, is that it issues a mea culpa, says that it screwed up, there is a real problem here, it is going to get to the bottom of it, it wants to start afresh, it believes Canadians deserve to know how corrupt their government is and it moves forward accordingly.
Does the House remember, back in 2015, when the current Prime Minister was first elected, “sunny ways”? He sent a letter to each one of his cabinet ministers. It was headed, “Open and Accountable Government”. I am going to read to members a portion of that letter that will demonstrate to them not only the lengths to which our Prime Minister went to pretend he was an ethical Prime Minister, but how badly he has failed Canadians in delivering accountable government.
It reads, under, “A Message to Ministers”, “At its heart is a simple idea: open government is good government.” I think we can all agree on that.
It continues: “For Canadians to trust our government we must trust Canadians, and we will only be successful in implementing our agenda to the extent that we earn and keep this trust.”
Have the Prime Minister and the government earned the trust of Canadians? I ask the Canadians who are watching this today to ask themselves this question. After 10 long years of the failed Liberal government, has it earned their trust?
It continues, “To be worthy of Canadians’ trust, we must always act with integrity.”
It also states, “The trust of Canadians will also rest on the accountability of our government.”
Members should listen to this. It continues, “In our system, the highest manifestation of democratic accountability is the forum of Parliament.”
Our Prime Minister, in his letter to his cabinet ministers claiming to be the bastion of integrity, wrote that.
Now the very same Prime Minister has not only contradicted his letter from 2015 but defied this Parliament. He has defied the Speaker of the House of Commons, our highest authority within Parliament, from whom there is no appeal. That is the Prime Minister today, an unworthy Prime Minister, unworthy of Canadians' trust.
I am very upset by what I have experienced in this House in the last 10 years. I have been a member of this chamber for almost 20 years. I have seen the cut and thrust of debate and the ups and downs of governments. None of us is perfect. I am not expecting perfection from anyone in this House. I do not expect perfection from our government, but I do expect excellence, integrity, honesty and transparency. Sadly, that is lacking from the government. That is why Canadians should no longer have any trust or confidence in the government.
I know my Liberal colleagues listening to me speak today know I am telling the truth. They are still propping up the Prime Minister, even though many of them privately are saying he has to go, they do not trust him anymore and he is not their guy. However, publicly, they are chugging along and clapping like trained seals. The reality is he has even lost the confidence of his own MPs. They just do not have the courage to stand up and be counted today. We deserve better than that.
It gets worse. If I were only speaking about the green slush fund, that would be enough, but the government has a long history of corruption, graft, incompetence and recklessness. We will remember the SNC-Lavalin affair back in 2019 when the Prime Minister who stepped in to pervert the rule of law in Canada by interfering in a criminal prosecution of one of Canada's flagship companies, SNC-Lavalin. In the process, what did the Prime Minister do? He fired his justice minister, Canada's first indigenous female justice minister, a thoroughly capable woman. He fired another minister, Jane Philpott. It goes on. There was the WE Charity scandal and the vacation at the Aga Khan's island, whom he claimed was his friend. He was investigated for ethics violations. Time and time again, the government violates the trust of Canadians.
Therefore, I have a—
The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes
The hon. member's time is up. I gave him many signals and quite a bit of time to wrap up. We will go to questions and comments and the member can add further during that time.
Questions and comments, the hon. member for Saint John—Rothesay.
Wayne Long Liberal Saint John—Rothesay, NB
Madam Speaker, I have a lot of respect for the member opposite and 20 years' service is absolutely incredible in this House. I take him at his word that he did not want to waste his time and ours this afternoon with that speech, but we did hear it.
I have a quote from the commissioner of the RCMP that I would like to read to the member opposite. He said:
...the RCMP's ability to receive and use information obtained through this production order and under the compulsory powers afforded by the Auditor General Act in the course of a criminal investigation could give rise to concerns under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It is therefore highly unlikely that any information obtained by the RCMP under the Motion where privacy interests [exist] could be used to support a criminal prosecution or further a criminal investigation.
There is significant risk that the motion could be interpreted as a circumvention of normal investigative processes and Charter protections.
Again, I have a lot of respect for the member opposite, but I would like him to comment on the commissioner of the RCMP's words.
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
Madam Speaker, I would be glad to. This gives me an opportunity to move, seconded by the member for Brandon—Souris—
The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes
The member can only move a motion during his speech; he cannot do so during questions and comments.
The hon. member for Abbotsford.
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
Madam Speaker, I would be glad to respond to the question.
I noticed that the member for Saint John—Rothesay qualified the letter by including “where privacy interests exists”. Of course, privacy interests are sacrosanct in Canada. There is a reason why we have privacy interests in Canada, and we protect them at all costs. There is nothing that prevents this Parliament from receiving the documentation that we have asked for and protecting the privacy interests of those who may be implicated. Therefore, there is no reason for the Prime Minister to defy the Speaker.
Imagine if the Speaker ordered documents, knowing full well that privacy interests are impaired. However, they are not. This is not an issue of charter rights being impaired. This is an issue of the integrity of this House and the transparency of the government.
Niki Ashton NDP Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB
Madam Speaker, we have heard, over many days, many Conservative members point to a Liberal scandal. However, this member also pointed to how long he has been here. Some of those years overlap with years that I have been here, under the Harper government, where we also saw a number of scandals of the Conservatives' own making.
More important, when it comes to defending Canadians' concerns, such as the rising cost of living, where is the member and where are Conservatives? When it comes to standing with us in the NDP in calling for tax fairness and calling for concrete action to take on corporate greed from grocery stores and other corporations that are gouging Canadians, where are the Conservatives? Why do the Conservatives refuse to stand up to the rich and powerful when they have the chance, as they have the chance in this House? Why do they vote against Canadians' interests?
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
Madam Speaker, over the last 20 years, I do not think we have experienced the kind of affordability crisis that Canada sees today, and I thank the member for mentioning the affordability crisis. However, the best thing she and her NDP colleagues could do is force a carbon tax election so that Canadians can judge the failed Liberal government and install a Conservative government that would axe the tax and would build the homes and would stop the crime and would fix the budget.
Mike Morrice Green Kitchener Centre, ON
Madam Speaker, as I have shared many times over the last month and a half of the speeches regarding this issue, Greens are concerned with the mismanagement of SDTC. It is why we supported the motion back in June. It is why we support this being actually investigated.
My question to the member for Abbotsford is one of clarification. In his speech, I believe he shared that Parliament is investigating this. Maybe I misheard. It has been a month and a half and having Conservative speeches one after the other is not really an investigation. It is a monologue, but it is not an investigation. Can the member clarify what an actual parliamentary investigation could look like, and how we could look to have one done? Potentially, voting on this motion could get us there.
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
Madam Speaker, any investigation starts with the proper information and that proper information has not been provided by the government. This Parliament and this Speaker have determined that there are documents within the possession of the current government that are salient and relevant to an investigation of the green slush fund scandal. Until we receive that documentation, Parliament's hands are bound and our police authorities' hands are bound.
We are looking for documents to be delivered, as instructed by the Speaker. I have confidence that he has made the right decision and it is the majority of the members of this House who have supported him in that decision. We will not rest until we get those documents, unredacted.
The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes
I hope that the hon. member is not using his phone in the House.
Questions and comments, the hon. member for Cypress Hills—Grasslands.
Jeremy Patzer Conservative Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK
Madam Speaker, my colleague is a man of great experience but also of great integrity. Over the course of his career, he has demonstrated that. Over the course of the current government, it has demonstrated the exact opposite. In fact, over one-third of all scandals in the history of Canadian governance have been committed by the current government alone.
I wonder if my colleague has any thoughts about that and about how the Liberals have led without integrity. With his experience, maybe he could enlighten the government as to what it actually means to lead with integrity—
The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes
Order. If the hon. parliamentary secretary has anything to add, he should wait until questions and comments and then until he is recognized.
The hon. member for Abbotsford has the floor.
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
Madam Speaker, let me just say something about integrity. I am a great believer in something called servant leadership. It is about serving others, putting the interests of others ahead of our own. That requires character.
That is the one thing I have found missing in the government, the character to lead this country with distinction and honour and to admit when it is wrong, to admit when it has screwed up. That is at the heart of what it means to be a servant leader, acknowledging, in complete humility, that we do not always get it right. I do not always get it right. Nobody in the House gets it right all the time. We should be open enough and humble enough to admit that. That is one thing I have found missing, and it is so desperately needed in government nowadays, to restore the integrity Canadians expect of their elected leaders here in Ottawa.