Debates of Dec. 16th, 2024

Reference to Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

Mr. Speaker, we have seen over and over again , while Conservatives are fighting for Canadians and are trying to make life more affordable in Canada, while we are discussing the housing crisis, while we are trying to bring crime down across this country, while we are concerned about the free drugs that are being handed out in the streets and while Conservatives are focused on the issues that Canadians face, the NDP members continue to support the government for personal gain.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I am wondering if the member could provide his thoughts on the motion we are debating today, the issue of privilege being brought to the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs. That is the actual motion. That is what the Conservatives have moved; it is their motion. The Conservatives have now been debating their own motion, by putting up hundreds of speakers on it, all in the name of preventing anything from being debated inside the chamber.

Does the member believe the Conservatives' behaviour is reflective of parliamentarians who want to work together to get things done for their constituents?

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

Mr. Speaker, no, I do not agree with the member.

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Red Deer—Lacombe, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister launched his leadership to great fanfare as a self-professed feminist. Since the time that he proudly announced his gender parity cabinet, and all of the other things he clings to for whatever reason, for photo ops or whatever the vanity project happens to be, we have seen a trail of women's careers and reputations damaged by this individual.

It started with Jody Wilson-Raybould, Jane Philpott and Celina Caesar-Chavannes, and now we see what has happened with the former finance minister. What is actually shocking to me is that all of this damage to these women's reputations and careers seems to be fine with the leader of the NDP, because he is putting the interest of getting his pension ahead of the careers and reputations of women who have had leadership roles in Canada.

Why does my colleague suppose that is?

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I am not exactly sure why that is, but I do know that it must be harrowing for the members of the NDP who have to continually prop up the Liberal government. I am thinking particularly of the member for Edmonton Strathcona, who has repeatedly voted with the government and voted for the increases to the carbon tax.

We see over and over again that Canadians are struggling under the carbon tax and that Canadians are struggling to make ends meet. They cannot afford to heat their homes or to put food on the table. We see this over and over again. I cannot imagine what it feels like to have to vote to support the Liberal government.

[Shuv Majumdar, Conservative, Calgary Heritage, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to discuss the ruling of the Speaker with regard to the production of documents ordered by the House on the scandal involving Sustainable Development Technology Canada, also known as the Liberal green slush fund.

For those watching at home, here are the facts. The Auditor General found that the Prime Minister turned Sustainable Development Technology Canada into a slush fund for Liberal insiders, with $58 million given to 10 ineligible projects that could not demonstrate an environmental benefit or progress in any green technology, $58 million given to projects without any effort to ensure the terms of the contribution agreements were even met, and $334 million funnelled to 186 cases where board members held a conflict of interest. The very people trusted with safeguarding taxpayer dollars were funnelling money into projects they were connected to. The NDP-Liberal government shovelled the working man's pay into the pockets of elitists who provide no value to the country, in the amount of $400 million.

Canadians who are barely scraping by are watching the Prime Minister waste 400 million of their hard-earned taxpayer dollars. It is a lot of money and it is hard to think about how big the amount actually is. Here is what that $400 million means for Canadians. The $400 million could cover the costs for about 89,000 kids to play hockey. Let us think about that. With rising costs, families are barely able to put food on the table, let alone pay for a season of hockey to keep their kids active. The $400 million could cover a month's worth of groceries for over 300,000 families of four. Right now, one in five kids are facing poverty and two million Canadians are going to food banks. The $400 million could feed hundreds of thousands of them.

For seniors watching their pensions go up in smoke because of the Prime Minister's carbon tax and inflationary spending, $400 million could cover a year's worth of housing for around 10,000 of them. The $400 million could have gone toward our health care system, where one in four Canadians are set to lose primary care within a couple of years. The $400 million could hire 4,700 more nurses or 1,700 doctors to ease stress on the system. What was done with the $400 million?

The SDTC scandal is just one example of the moral and financial corruption of NDP-Liberals. A few hours from now, we were supposed to hear the fall economic statement from the now former finance minister, but she will not be delivering it because she is gone. She, like millions of Canadians, has no confidence in the Prime Minister. In her resignation today, she said the government needs to keep its “fiscal powder dry” and avoid “costly political gimmicks”. Even she admitted the government has abandoned our people, saying Canadians know when government is focused on itself. Finally, she conceded the inevitable truth that the NDP-Liberal government will come to an end.

However, let us not forget that this is from the same disgracefully awful former finance minister who blew up the deficit, raised taxes on hard-working Canadians and could not even stay within her own fiscal guardrails. Her legacy is inflationary spending, higher taxes and broken promises. The NDP-Liberal government is a national embarrassment, a dumpster fire, with nine years of inflationary spending, a ruthless carbon tax, broken immigration, housing doubled, crime, chaos, drugs and disorder, and now a fall economic statement without a finance minister to deliver it.

The Prime Minister has lost the confidence of his own cabinet. The sellout NDP and its leader appear to have more confidence in the Liberals than the Liberals have in themselves. It is clear the Prime Minister has a problem with strong women: Jody Wilson-Raybould, Jane Philpott and now another one is out the door. Every Liberal and NDP member in this House knew all of these so-called programs were delivering nothing and they watched every single one fail. They sat idly by as Canadians continued to struggle to put food on the table and pay their bills.

How many across the way agree with the former finance minister? How many are willing to let this chaotic clown show of a government continue? From evidence-based policy to macroeconomic government gimmicks, it is time for the Liberal caucus to put the government out of its misery. It is time for Liberals to force a vote of confidence in the Prime Minister's leadership. Will the NDP-Liberals have the guts to stand up and have a free vote, or will the NDP leader get up on his feet and deliver today's fall economic statement?

To quote Jody Wilson-Raybould, “When the general is losing his most loyal soldiers on the eve of a...war, the country desperately needs a new general”. I agree. For the sake of our country, Canadians need a carbon tax election today. This is not a serious government, and the matter we discussed today, the green slush fund scandal, one of the many scandals of the current government, has led us here to this very moment.

A question I am always asked by my neighbours back home is, how do we get out of this mess? How do we fix all that has been broken and get back to the country we all know and love? How can Canada go from middling power to the major power it could be? For starters, we can scrap these payouts to the Prime Minister's corporate cronies for so-called sustainable development projects. We can axe the carbon tax eating away at our paycheques, our industries and our trade, and shift our focus to the power of our resources sector. It is time for us to put Canada first above all else: our workers, our paycheques and our people. Our resources represent trillions that would fuel, feed and secure the world; bring home paycheques for our people; build energy projects, reducing emissions; build economic reconciliation with first nations; and rebuild our armed forces.

For many, Canada's role in the world is often centred on what we can do with our intellectual and cultural talents. We see ourselves as a country best suited to act as a teacher, a mediator or a good example. We cling to a Canadian diplomacy from an international order of a different age, but this excessive focus on Canada's social capital can distract from the fact that we actually are distinguished on one important front: energy.

Canada is a world leader in its supply and mastery of virtually every energy resource and technology known to man. With this enviable access to the assets that fuel 21st century life increasingly reflecting real political power, Canada has the ability and the opportunity to present itself as a true leader. The sheer size of Canadian energy interests ensures virtually no corner of this planet is beyond our influence or our contribution, and should we choose to seize it, we have a unique opportunity to supply our allies with the energy they need, while also lessening the energy influence of the world's bad actors.

As economies require more and more energy, and rely more and more on supply routes from undesirable sources, the stakes and the upsides for every Canadian are high. China's energy imports have mirrored larger trends in its decisively illiberal foreign policy. Close relationships with Iran, Russia and Venezuela have kept China awash in petroleum, while Beijing plays defence for the atrocities of Putin and Maduro regimes in international forums.

In the Middle East, continued bad actions by the state of Qatar, including housing Hamas terrorists, have resulted in appropriate calls for the country's diplomatic and economic isolation. This provides ample opportunity for any nation willing to offer itself as an alternative to Qatari oil and gas, which is currently exported everywhere, from Morocco to Europe and Japan. Canada already has nuclear co-operation agreements with Jordan and the UAE. These agreements should be animated with long-term Canadian supply.

It is perhaps in Europe, however, where the geopolitics of energy are most fraught and most open to Canadian supply. Vladimir Putin spent years choreographing Germany's dependencies on Russian oil. Having exploited that to shake down Europe, he intervened in Syria and Libya to subvert pipelines that would supply Europe and amplified misinformation against our own Canadian energy, ensuring a steady stream of revenue for Russia's war machine of nearly $1 billion a day, with $250 million a day from Germany alone, to fund his war machine.

When Germany finally realized the costs of this, Chancellor Scholz and, subsequently, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy came knocking on our door for Canadian energy and both times we turned them away. The leadership Canada can demonstrate in offsetting these negative trends for energy, sustainable energy and energy technologies is clear. We should fearlessly pursue our economic interests by making Canadian energy resources and technologies accessible to those who want them, offsiding allied dependence on worse alternatives.

At precisely the moment the world and our people need more Canada, the NDP-Liberals want to shut down our resources. With growing uncertainty about whether this country has the capacity to get its energy to overseas markets, Canada has to do better. It is insufficient to merely repudiate the anti-energy agenda. A comprehensive Canadian energy action plan is needed to advance the essential resources that support the Canadian social safety net and can deliver Canadian leadership to a world that demands it.

We must liberate Alberta's oil sands from their landlocked status to dramatically increase Canadian oil exports and, at the same time, Canadian power on the international stage. We must open liquefied natural gas export terminals on Canada's east coast, allowing it to serve as a gateway point for Canadian natural gas to Europe, and we must limit the damage of foreign interests who have worked to disrupt Canadian energy production.

For too long, woke, leftist policies have demanded that emerging economies extend the poverty of their people and delay economic development rather than accelerate sustainable growth toward lessening environmental damage. Addressing energy poverty boldly, where the young can light their homes to do homework at night, industrial development builds smarter cities faster that pollute less and traditional energy catalyzes transformative growth, should feature centrally in our national policy.

This is not the first time Canada's national interests have encountered obstacles; Canada itself was forged by overcoming divisions with a big vision, uniting a country with ribbons of steel and advancing a shared development. For more than 150 years, our country has endured wars, depressions and hard times. Our experience as one of the oldest democracies on earth affords us the opportunity to apply the lessons of an imperfect past toward shaping a promising future.

In an uncertain world, Canada's essential rise as a power hinges on our ability to reconnect with the determination and resolve that have already overcome so much and to dispense with the corruption we have seen in the House today and over the last years. Now is the age of leaders with the courage of their convictions, with the competence to see us succeed and who will end the corruption awash among the NDP-Liberals. Now is the time for a prime minister with the brains and backbone to stand up for this country and who will rebuild our security, our military and our economy.

Let us have the election Canadians need. Let us restore the promise and put Canada first.

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

Mr. Speaker, putting Canada first is something this government has been doing since day one. We have been building Canada's middle class and those aspiring to be a part of it, and dealing with the many different economic challenges before us. Highlighting when the member talked about putting Canada first, the Prime Minister and government have signed off on more trade agreements than any other prime minister or government before us. I believe foreign investment coming to Canada was number three in the world on a per capita basis and number one in the G7 countries. Comparing Canada's interest and inflation rates with any other G7 country, we are doing exceptionally well.

It still is important that the government continue to look at affordability, as we have, being sympathetic to the needs of Canadians, which is why we come up with solutions such as the tax holiday for Canadians on the GST on a number of selected items. This is something the Conservatives actually campaigned on, yet the member and the Conservative caucus voted against the tax cut.

Can the member explain to his constituents why, on the one hand, Conservatives talked about a tax cut, but on the other hand, when it came time to vote, they voted against the tax cut?

[Shuv Majumdar, Conservative, Calgary Heritage, AB]

Mr. Speaker, as the parliamentary secretary well knows, the so-called promised tax cut of the NDP-Liberal government is falling apart at the seams. It is one of the major issues that the former finance minister resigned her post over. She understood that the gimmicks and the performance politics of the Prime Minister and his government were in no way a responsible decision to make. She cited in her letter exactly why this tax cut comes at an irresponsible time, when we expect to see tariffs imposed on Canadians and on the Canadian economy, and how creating fiscal restrictions and being irresponsible with the budget to the tune of billions would cost the government and the country its position to negotiate with the United States and others.

Nobody believes the parliamentary secretary and the NDP-Liberals when it comes to their performance over the last nine years. The evidence is obvious in the lives of every Canadian who is hurt and broken by what has happened in the irresponsible administration of the government.

In decision after decision, the government has placed partisanship ahead of the country and placed the Prime Minister's personal interests over the people of Canada. Never have we seen the current government make a decision for the interests of the country ahead of its own partisan ambitions. Today, especially, we see the price of that manifest in its finance minister's resignation.

[John Brassard, Conservative, Barrie—Innisfil, ON]

Mr. Speaker, we are really in a unique position today. As parliamentarians, we have a front row seat to what many Canadians are seeing today as a government that is spiralling out of control, that is literally collapsing before us at a very important time in our nation's history. The NDP has an opportunity here to make the right decision for once, and not support the government, not show any confidence in the government.

Later today, the fall economic statement is going to be presented, we think. We are not so sure anymore, but if it is, I am sure there are mechanisms in which the leadership side of the government, the House leader or others, could put it to a vote quickly. We could have a vote tonight or tomorrow. As we know, there are 70% of Canadians or more who do not have confidence in the government. However, I think it would show that this House has no confidence in the government, save the NDP.

Would the hon. member agree with me that we could, if we wanted to, put the fall economic statement to a vote immediately, to show whether this House has confidence in the government? I suspect that not to be the case, which would then force an election where we can return to some normalcy, some decency and some morality in this country led by a common-sense Conservative government.

[Shuv Majumdar, Conservative, Calgary Heritage, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Barrie—Innisfil is a source of great wisdom. We need an election today. If any of these NDP-Liberal colleagues go back to their ridings and actually listen to their people, they will hear exactly what we are hearing from not only our friends and neighbours in our ridings, but in their own ridings across the country. Every single member of Parliament here is hearing how badly Canadians want a carbon tax election today and this fall economic statement does provide that opportunity.

I reflect on what the hon. member just said about our NDP colleagues. They must be tormented over there in that caucus. On one side, they have a leader who is so determined to focus on their own pension that they are forfeiting the entire party and its principles for the sake of power, power that not even the former finance minister, the former deputy prime minister of Canada, not the fake deputy prime minister who the NDP leader is, but the deputy prime minister of Canada resigned her cabinet post over. However, the fake deputy prime minister, the NDP leader, is determined to hold onto power. They talk about democracy and freedom in the NDP and Liberal ranks. Here is an opportunity for them to accomplish that. Here is an opportunity for them to have a free vote on the fall economic update and call a carbon tax election that Canadians want today.

[Louise Chabot, Bloc, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

Mr. Speaker, what we are seeing today is unprecedented, if I can use that term.

I hear members on the other side of the House asking questions about the infamous GST measure, a measure that was ill-conceived and one of the reasons why the minister decided she had enough and resigned her position. I find the whole thing rather odd.

I would like the Conservatives to reassure Canadians. I heard them say twice during their speeches that Canadians want a carbon tax election. However, I do not think that the Conservatives are reading the room correctly.

I think that Canadians want an election that will establish a much more consistent and sustainable agenda, rather than one suggesting that the carbon tax is the answer to everything. Do the Conservatives think that getting rid of the carbon tax will fix everything?

[Shuv Majumdar, Conservative, Calgary Heritage, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate our hon. colleague for her thoughtfulness. I agree 1,000% with her. It is a bungled sales tax. It is a bungled tax on everything. It is a bungled program. The whole government's program for nine long years has been an absolute mess, so I agree with my hon. colleague on the assumption of her question.

With respect to a carbon tax election, the carbon tax is literally a tax on everything: on gas, on home heating, and on what it takes to grow the food, ship the food and sell the food. It is a tax that immorally punishes the lowest income Canadians disproportionately. The carbon tax is a tax that has had a deleterious effect on our economy and our national life. It has made us less competitive. The carbon tax is the source of much inflationary pressure on our goods and services in the marketplaces across the country today. It is a tax that is breaking people every single winter, especially with the one coming up ahead, with the promise of it quadrupling to 61¢ a litre.

When I hear, as the hon. member mentioned, our friends and neighbours around the country complaining about the costs of everything, the staggering debt that they have to pull themselves through just to be able to get through the next quarter, when I hear the anxiety and the desperation in the voices of our neighbours about how expensive everything is, it is the carbon tax that would lower that price and alleviate pressure on the lowest-income Canadians and unleash our country's economic potential.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, there was a great deal of misinformation in what the member just indicated.

Let me put it to him in a different way. I have put this challenge out before. On this issue, on the price of pollution, the carbon rebate versus the carbon tax, I would love, and I would welcome, any Conservative caucus member to come to Winnipeg North, or even have something at a local university here in Ottawa, where we could have a debate on that issue.

Is the member that confident in the Conservative notes he has been provided to be able to take me up on the challenge? Will he have a public debate, in the forum of post-secondary facility, that would allow for him to express his thoughts on the price on pollution, the carbon tax versus the carbon rebate? Does he have the courage to take me up on that challenge?

[Shuv Majumdar, Conservative, Calgary Heritage, AB]

Mr. Speaker, as the parliamentary secretary may know, I spent nine long years leading a non-partisan think tank practice in the public debate, before arriving in this chamber.

I have never had a problem debating the facts of things that hurt our country's economic potential, here in the chamber or anywhere in the country.

I appreciate his challenge, but there is an opportunity for the parliamentary secretary. He has the chance to be a minister of the Liberal Party of Canada. He has a chance to be a minister for this Prime Minister. Here is an opportunity for him to perform as best as he can in this chamber and win the good graces of the Prime Minister in his dying days of the government and speak on behalf of the government as a member of the Cabinet.

[Tony Baldinelli, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

Mr. Speaker, we are nine days away from Christmas, and the debate about the $400-million green slush fund scandal continues on in this place, despite the crisis in confidence we are witnessing in this Liberal caucus today and in this failed Prime Minister. Yet, this NDP-Liberal government continues to ignore your order, Mr. Speaker, and this self-imposed deadline and the mess that they have created. Why is it that they are not giving up? This kind of steadfast resistance clearly tells us they are hiding something.

It is the official opposition's job to hold this corrupt Liberal-NDP government to account, and that is exactly what we are doing. Common-sense Conservatives are determined to get to the bottom of this massive scandal one way or another, and we will continue to insist on getting those ordered and unredacted documents from this government so that they can be presented to the RCMP.

At a time when Canadians are struggling to put food on their tables, when the dream of home ownership in Canada is just that, a dream for many young Canadians, and when our country is plagued by so many other serious challenges brought upon us by the failed policies of this incompetent and reckless NDP government, including potentially devastating 25% U.S. tariffs on all Canadian products beginning next month, here we are yet again this afternoon, debating this government's failure to live up to its responsibilities and your order, Mr. Speaker, to produce important documents pertaining to the Sustainable Development Technology Canada green slush fund scandal.

For those watching at home, this issue goes back 189 days, to June 10, when the House adopted the following motion proposed by common-sense Conservatives on this important matter. The motion reads:

That the House order the government, Sustainable Development Technology Canada (SDTC) and the Auditor General of Canada each to deposit with the Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel, within 30 days of the adoption of this order, the following documents, created or dated since January 1, 2017, which are in its or her possession, custody or control:

The motion then details what documents were to be supplied, and then directed that:

(h) the Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel shall promptly thereafter notify the Speaker whether each entity produced documents as ordered, and the Speaker, in turn, shall forthwith inform the House of the notice of the Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel but, if the House stands adjourned, the Speaker shall lay the notice upon the table pursuant to Standing Order 32(1); and

(i) the Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel shall provide forthwith any documents received by him, pursuant to this order, to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.

Yet, the government refused to comply, forcing you, as the Speaker, to then rule, in September, that our privileges had been breached. So, From that date on, we have been debating our amendments on the next steps required to get all these unredacted documents so that we can get back to addressing the issues impacting Canadians in all of our ridings.

As we approach the Christmas season, here is a generous gift from the common-sense Conservatives for all the other parties in the House. Our latest subamendment put forward by my colleague and seatmate, the member for Calgary Rocky Ridge, will discharge the 30-day reporting period of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs if the Speaker tables a notice from the Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel confirming that all government institutions have fully complied with the order adopted on June 10 by depositing all of their responsive records in an unredacted form. Therefore, if the government simply hands over all the ordered SDTC documents, unredacted, we can finally move on from this scandal and begin addressing the many serious issues plaguing our country.

It dismays me and leaves me in utter disbelief that the House of Commons remains seized by this issue, and has been for an entire fall session. Despite ample opportunity, the Liberal government has still not done what is right and handed over the ordered unredacted SDTC documents to the RCMP.

For those watching at home, SDTC was established by the Government of Canada in 2001. As a federally funded foundation, it was responsible for the approval and disbursement of over $100 million annually in taxpayer funds to help Canadian companies develop and deploy sustainable technologies.

For many years, SDTC operated responsibly and earned a generally good reputation for its work. However, that all changed in 2019, when former Liberal industry minister Navdeep Bains appointed Annette Verschuren as chair of SDTC. The issue at hand was a matter of conflict of interest. Verschuren was an entrepreneur who was already receiving SDTC funding through one of her own companies, and now she has been appointed by the NDP-Liberal government to hold responsibilities for overseeing those very SDTC funds, the same funds her company was receiving.

That fact alone should have resulted in alarm bells and red flashing lights to alert everyone in the government about this obvious conflict of interest. In fact, it was no secret. The then minister, the Prime Minister's Office and the Privy Council Office all knew. They were warned of the risks associated with appointing a conflicted chair, yet those warnings fell on deaf ears and were taken with indifference; Verschuren was appointed by the Liberal minister anyway.

We can tell a government has lost its moral compass when it makes poor decisions, such as this one, without concern for doing the right thing and without fear of consequence. Only two years later, in January 2021, former minister Bains announced that he had decided to step away from politics and not run again in the upcoming federal election. That same year, SDTC entered into a five-year, $1-billion agreement with the Department of Innovation, Science and Economic Development, or ISED.

If we fast-forward to this fall, it is clear the Liberals are trying desperately to run away and wash their hands of this mess, which they laid the foundation for through their own actions. This has especially been the case since the Auditor General released a scathing report about SDTC in June. The AG found massive issues, which resulted in the current Minister of Industry, the hon. member for Saint-Maurice—Champlain, abolishing SDTC and immediately transferring its funds over to National Research Council Canada instead. These are truly astonishing developments in just three years for something the Liberal government does not want to talk about anymore.

What did the Auditor General find that was so bad and caused all this carnage? In June, the AG found that SDTC demonstrated “Significant lapses in governance and stewardship of public funds”. In fact, nearly 20% of the SDTC projects examined by the AG were ineligible based on the government's own rules for funding, with a total price tag of $59 million. There were also 90 instances in which SDTC ignored conflict of interest provisions, awarding $76 million to various projects. Indeed, the AG found 63 cases in which SDTC agency directors voted in favour of payments to companies in which they had declared interest.

Further, there were serious matters of governance, including the fact that the board did not even have the minimum number of members required by law. The report concluded, “Not managing conflicts of interest—whether real, perceived, or potential—increases the risk that an individual’s duty to act in the best interests of the foundation is affected, particularly when making decisions to award funding.” It also blamed the government's Minister of Industry, whose ministry did not sufficiently monitor the contribution agreements with SDTC.

Members can believe it or not, but it gets far worse. In June, the Auditor General found that directors had “awarded funding to projects that were ineligible” and that “conflicts of interest existed”. The Auditor General found that over $330 million in taxpayer money was paid out in over 180 cases in which there was a potential conflict of interest, with Liberal-appointed directors funnelling money to companies they owned. Time after time, the Liberal government and its Prime Minister have shown total contempt for Canada's ethics laws. In fact, the Prime Minister himself has been the subject of three ethics investigations; twice, he was found guilty of breaking ethics laws. The Liberal government allows the culture of law-breaking to persist, and six Liberals have been found guilty of breaking ethics laws.

Liberals have gone through these ethical scandals before. That is why they are withholding these documents, breaching parliamentary privilege and trying desperately to sweep this mess under the rug and move on to the next thing. Common-sense Conservatives are not going to let them get away with it. We are holding the corrupt NDP-Liberal government to account. It will be held responsible for its carelessness, recklessness and, indeed, corruption.

That is why, on June 10, the House of Commons adopted our motion, which has led to this ongoing debate in the House. Let us not forget that the common-sense Conservative motion passed in this place with the support of the New Democrats, the Green Party and the Bloc Québécois. Only the Liberals opposed it. To be clear, nothing in that motion ordered the RCMP to conduct an investigation. The House simply asked that documents be turned over to the RCMP.

Again, it has been 189 days since this motion passed. This is a horrible look for the Liberal government. Further, nothing in that House order contemplated redactions to documents being made by the government. That is because the House of Commons enjoys the absolute and unfettered power to order the production of documents, which is not limited by statute. These powers are rooted in the Constitution Act of 1867 and in the Parliament of Canada Act.

In response to the Liberal government's failure to produce the documents, the Conservative House leader rightly raised a question of privilege, arguing that the House privileges had been breached due to the failure to comply with the House order. In September, the Speaker agreed; now, nearly three months later, we continue our important debate on this matter. The Speaker ruled that the government has violated a House order to turn over evidence regarding the latest Liberal $400-million green slush fund scandal to the RCMP. The Liberal government's refusal to respect the Speaker's ruling has paralyzed Parliament, pushing aside all other work to address issues such as the cruel and crippling carbon tax, the cost of living crisis that Canadians face and the increasing crime, disorder and chaos on our streets and in our communities and cities. On top of all of this hardship, the incoming president of Canada's biggest trading partner is now threatening our country with 25% tariffs on all Canadian products exported to the U.S.

If the government fails to improve Canada's border security and to stop the flow of illegal immigrants and illegal drugs, such as fentanyl, from crossing into Canada's borders, what will the president-elect do?

Since the Prime Minister took office in 2015, 47,000 Canadians have died from drug overdoses. That is more Canadians than we lost in the Second World War. It represents a 200% annual increase in drug overdose deaths after the Prime Minister's radical liberalization of drugs. After nine years of the NDP-Liberal government, it should not take U.S. tariff threats for our federal government to take action on this hugely important issue; however, as we have seen, issues only become important to the Liberals when their political fortunes are at stake. Canadian workers, Canadian families and Canadian businesses should not have to suffer the brunt of the pain and hardship caused by the NDP-Liberal government. They deserve so much better.

One of the drivers of this hardship is the cruel NDP-Liberal carbon tax. In fact, the carbon tax will cost the average Ontario family $903 this year. This is completely unacceptable to the constituents in my communities of Niagara Falls, Niagara-on-the-Lake and Fort Erie, who work hard for their money, save carefully for their future and dream of a better tomorrow. Instead of doing anything about climate change, the NDP-Liberal carbon tax is impoverishing Canadians.

Recently, the PBO confirmed that Canadians will suffer a net cost, paying more in the carbon tax than they will get back in rebates. Unfortunately, the NDP-Liberal government does not care. Instead of giving Canadians the tax relief they deserve, they hiked the carbon tax by 23% last spring as part of their plan to quadruple the carbon tax by 2030. That is not all. They plan to hike the carbon tax again this April.

It turns out that the NDP-Liberal carbon tax is not an environmental plan at all. It is simply another tax grab, put in place so the government can continue its reckless spending frenzy, which we will hear more about. We were hoping to hear about it today, when we would have had the fall economic statement, but we simply do not know where that stands.

The SDTC scandal is also happening at a time when costs are up on essentials, such as food. In fact, families will be spending $700 more this year on food than they did in 2023. When we tax the farmer who grows the food, the trucker who ships the food and the store that stocks, stores and sells the food, we end up taxing the families who buy the food. As Sylvain Charlebois, director of Dalhousie University's Agri-Food Analytics Lab, has said, the costly NDP-Liberal carbon tax “likely adds a significant cost burden to the Canadian food industry.”

Because of the NDP-Liberal government's inflationary spending and punishing carbon tax, food bank usage has increased every year it has been in office. This was confirmed recently by Feed Ontario, which revealed that a record one million people visited a food bank in Ontario in 2024. This is a dramatic increase of 25% from the previous year. In fact, Feed Ontario's CEO told media that day, “I never thought I would see this day.” Food Banks Canada reported earlier this year that it had seen a 50% increase in visits across Canada since 2021, with food banks handling a record two million visits in a single month.

In my community alone, Project Share, for example, saw a 20% increase in people served this year compared with the previous year; 4,740 people accessed its services for the first time and 120 families, on average, accessed its essential support services per day. Let us think of the 13,995 people who were served last year at Project Share, which equates to one in seven residents of Niagara Falls having accessed its essential support services. We should be debating these issues, and we could do so if the government would simply abide by the Speaker's ruling and provide the documents the House has requested.

Why are the Liberals hesitant to do what is right? Is it that they do not want to speak to the situation facing young Canadians and first-time homebuyers, which is so bad that the Canadian dream of home ownership is dying? Two-thirds of young people believe they will never be able to afford a home. There are almost 1,800 homeless camps in Ontario alone. Crime is also getting worse under the watch of the Liberal-NDP government. The issues I noted and so many more like them, such as the skyrocketing crime rate, are all pressing issues. Parliamentarians should be debating them instead of the SDTC crisis and scandal, but the House of Commons has been seized because the government refuses to comply with the House order to hand over these documents to the RCMP.

It is time for us to get to the bottom of this and, more importantly, for the government to respond to the House order to provide the unredacted documents to the law clerk and the RCMP. It is time for the Liberal government to end its cover-up and provide the ordered documents to the police so that Parliament can get back to work and Canadians can have the accountability they rightfully deserve.

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

Mr. Speaker, the motion we are debating is a Conservative motion that says we take the issue outside the House of Commons and have the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs deal with the matter. The member knows it. It is a Conservative motion that the Conservatives have been filibustering for week upon week to prevent us talking about the issues Canadians would like us to be talking about.

The member is saying we should just do what the Conservatives want us to do, which is to hand the documents over to the RCMP. The RCMP has said not to do that, the Auditor General of Canada has said no and other legal experts are saying no. However, the Conservatives believe that we should listen to them as opposed to those institutions.

Why does the Conservative Party, at the direction of its leader, continue to play this self-serving multi-million dollar game at great expense to Canadians? When is the game going to end?

[Tony Baldinelli, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

Mr. Speaker, we go back to June 10 on the issue, when the original motion was put forward. We are still waiting for documents to be produced. Why is that? The situation could end tomorrow. We could be speaking about issues, such as, for example, border control. We could purchase a lot of border control with $400 million.

We are building a new infrastructure, a $400-million waste treatment facility in Niagara Falls that is needed for the burgeoning growth anticipated there. The figure would cover those costs. We are building a brand new hospital in Niagara that will cost at least $400 million.

Instead of talking about such issues, we are talking about why the government is so concerned with not presenting documents that could get to the bottom of the issue. What is it trying to hide? Why is it trying to protect the individuals in question? The government knew that the person it appointed to the board was in a position of conflict of interest, yet it still appointed her. What does that say about its credibility, and what does that talk about in terms of its judgment with regard to accountability and transparency?

[Luc Desilets, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Mr. Speaker, this has been a rather peculiar Monday, a day full of surprises, twists and emotions.

I would like to ask my colleague a quick question. Does he realize that this systematic filibuster goes against the Conservatives' own motion to refer this matter to a parliamentary committee?

[Tony Baldinelli, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

Mr. Speaker, what we are trying to do is just get the documents. I cannot understand why we are continuing the debate. It has been 189 days now. What is the government trying to hide? The documents would go to the law clerk and then they would be presented to the RCMP. We are not telling the RCMP what to do with them; we are asking that they be presented to it. What is the government trying to hide?

There are issues we should be debating. One in seven residents in my community goes to a food bank. That is insane and it needs to be addressed. We have to get the economy going again and get people working; the government is failing to talk about that. Today in fact there is a crisis of confidence in the Liberal government, and it is Liberals who have a crisis of confidence in themselves. We need to be debating those types of issues and get the economy going again, yet the Liberals refuse to allow us to do it.

[Robert Gordon Kitchen, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I want to quickly wish the great constituents of Souris—Moose Mountain a very merry Christmas and a happy Hanukkah as we go forward, and I wish the same to you as well, Mr. Speaker.

My hon. colleague from Niagara Falls gave an excellent speech, and I appreciate that. He did hit the nail on the head on the issue of the reality of $400 million. When we reflect on what has transpired today and what the former finance minister said were “costly political gimmicks”, I am wondering whether the member might comment on whether he sees any correlation between the costly political gimmicks and what has happened with the $400 million that has all of a sudden disappeared?

[Tony Baldinelli, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the member is absolutely right. The former finance minister said exactly that. I would like to take this opportunity to read from her resignation letter. She says, “Our country today faces a grave challenge.” She goes on to say, “That means eschewing costly political gimmicks, which we can ill afford and which make Canadians doubt that we recognize the gravity of the moment.”

Here we are, talking about $400 million that the government refuses to provide accountability for. There is another sentence in the former finance minister's resignation letter that says, “But how we deal with the threat our country currently faces will define us for a generation, and perhaps longer. Canada will win if we are strong, smart, and united.” That is something we have to be. She continues, “Inevitably, our time in government will come to an end.” This is a great one line and I agree with it; surely it needs to come to an end as soon as possible.

[John Brassard, Conservative, Barrie—Innisfil, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I know that the hon. member is a big Buffalo Bills fan, and yesterday there was a big win against Detroit, so I say, “Go Bills.”

[An hon. member]

Oh, oh!

[John Brassard, Conservative, Barrie—Innisfil, ON]

Mr. Speaker, where did that huff and puff come from? Oh, it was obviously from a New England fan.

I know that the hon. member represents a border community, and the border has become an issue since President-elect Trump's election. There are issues surrounding drugs and immigration. It is an important part of the member's riding because of the safety and security of the border, but tourism is also a big part.

I wonder whether the hon. member can comment on the fact that the government is literally collapsing before our eyes and on how important it is that we call on the NDP to forget about the NDP leader's pension and to call no confidence in the government so we can have a government that can deal with the many crises facing our nation and show some strong leadership in a Canada first approach.

[Tony Baldinelli, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

Mr. Speaker, go Bills.

My colleague is absolutely right. In my community, for example, there are four international border crossings. Two of the four bridges in my community alone are two of the four busiest commercial bridge crossings into the United States for commerce and for tourism, for example. In our community, there was $2.4 billion in tourism receipts alone in 2019, prior to COVID.

The majority of our visitor base is domestic, but the primary international visitor base is American, which accounts for over 50% of our spend. Therefore what we need to be doing is taking actions to ensure that we continue to facilitate American visitation into our country, rather than taking steps that would damage in any way American visitation to our country.

The relationship in our border communities is also so close, including the success of our auto sector, for example. In our community there is a General Motors engine plant facility, but there is also one in Buffalo. The 25% tariff discussions going on currently worry me because of the hundreds of workers at the General Motors facility in St. Catharines. If the tariffs are put in place, it may be economically impossible to keep the facility open. The company could simply move the jobs to Buffalo instead, and it would be sad to see that happen.