Mr. Speaker, I stand here, proud to represent, stand with and stand for the people of Battle River—Crowfoot.
It is unfortunate that, after nine years of the Liberals leading this country, we are once again debating a scandal of unbelievable proportions. I want to talk a little about the circumstances that led us to the SDTC situation, and then I want to dive into why documents matter, what this violation of the privilege of members of this place is, and why that should be so concerning to Canadians.
On Sustainable Development Technology Canada, the Auditor General did a report that found that the Liberals, the Prime Minister and the ministers had turned it into a slush fund for Liberal insiders. A recording of a senior civil servant slammed the “outright incompetence” of the government, which gave more than 390 million dollars' worth of contracts inappropriately.
To put that into context, $390 million is an astounding amount of money, especially at a time when Canadians are hurting. This year, we will see more than two million Canadians forced to visit a food bank. In my own constituency, I speak to many not-for-profits, hosted out of churches or community centres, and local food banks.
The actions of the government, such as the implementation of the carbon tax and the mismanagement of the economy, have led to increased inflation, among so many other things. Canadians, in record numbers, are being forced to visit food banks. I see some of the numbers provided to me by local food banks, often run by volunteers, and they are absolutely heartbreaking.
I have heard from some of the folks who run one of the local food banks, and they were stunned that it is not just folks who have fallen on hard times who are being forced to visit the food bank, and it is not just those who have lost their jobs who are being forced to visit the food bank. In some cases, it is people from around the community who simply have no other options. Their credit cards are maxed out, and they do not have anything left at home to feed their children. They were, in those cases, forced to visit a food bank. That is the legacy of the Liberals.
We have 25% of Canadians, according to reports, facing poverty-like conditions. What is the government's response? It is 390 million dollars' worth of contracts inappropriately given out, many of which went to well-connected Liberal insiders. It was $390 million not going to help Canadians, and not going to grow the economy, but $390 million, more money than most people could ever imagine, going to well-connected insiders.
The Auditor General found that SDTC gave $58 million to 10 ineligible projects. The government talks big about the environment, yet it gave $58 million to projects that were supposedly to help the environment. That was the reason this fund was created. However, it could not demonstrate that there would be an environmental benefit or the development of any green tech.
I know there are many Canadians watching because of the absolute corruption that has been normalized under the Liberal government and the Prime Minister, which has been supported by the NDP.
It is absolutely astounding that, in the midst of a time when the Liberals talk big about the environment, they are giving dollars to projects connected with Liberal insiders that did not even try to explain and did not even try to defend what they were doing as being good for the environment, even though that was why these programs were created. The Auditor General made it clear that the blame for this scandal falls on the government and the industry minister, who did not sufficiently monitor the contracts that were being given to Liberal insiders.
I hear often from members of that side of the House, and I hear from Canadians as well, asking what we would do differently. I am proud to stand as part of a party that takes governing seriously and that would fight corruption and incompetence, especially the sort of incompetence that leads to this type of gross mismanagement scandal to the tune of $390 million being misappropriated.
I want to talk about why the finding of a violation of privilege is such an important issue. I believe that many people outside this place and in fact, certainly from some of the questions I have heard from members of other parties in this place, some in this place also, do not take seriously Parliament's constitutional role. Let me unpack that a little bit for the benefit of those watching and explain why documents matter.
It is less about whether or not there are physical documents we can read from; that is not the whole point here. The point is that there is an institution that is Parliament, which in our Westminster system of governance is the supreme authority of our country. As parliamentarians, we are that which makes up a Parliament. I believe that there are two Liberal vacancies with by-elections forthcoming, and at the rate at which the Liberals are losing seats, it will certainly be interesting to watch what those election results are.
The MPs who make up Parliament have unfettered access to call for documents and for people to come as witnesses. We talk about that a lot in the context of committee, and it is a key element of the constitutional role that this place plays in our country. We cannot dismiss the importance, because that is the cornerstone of the democratic system we have. It is this place, the only place in the country, I would add, that is truly representative of our country. Every square inch of the nation of Canada is represented in this place and only in this place. That is why Parliament is given such significant latitude to be able to do things like call for documents.
The government refused to be transparent and provide the documents in question. Its members gave a whole litany of excuses. In fact I found it very interesting that when the House leader was speaking very negatively about the Speaker's ruling that has led to this debate, quite astonishingly, she pivoted away from saying that she was disputing the ruling but said that she was dismayed at the ruling.
I would suggest that any member of this place who is dismayed at the constitutional authority of what Parliament is meant to be needs to go back and look at the history, the construction, of the constitutional reality and the traditions that make up what this place is. It has to come down to the very idea of where the buck stops. It stops with Parliament.
I want to highlight something in the context of what I have just described, because there has been, under the Liberals, a concerning trend of wanting to distance the executive function of government from Parliament. I understand that it is inconvenient that the Liberals do not have unfettered power to do anything they want; it is an inconvenient thing they are forced up against. I have seen, over the last close to five years that I have had the honour of serving in this place and serving the people of Battle River—Crowfoot, how the Liberals have been able to sign deals, have backroom handshakes and have the whole deal with other opposition parties in order to have a functional majority.
However, Canadians sent a minority Parliament to Ottawa in the last election, and this place has the ability to do things like demand documents; it has the full constitutional right to do so. It is outlined very clearly that this is in fact the case. When members of the government are making excuses and figuring out ways around this place, it is deeply concerning and should cause concern to every Canadian, regardless of what political party they are a part of.
This is not a partisan issue; this is a Canadian issue.