Debates of June 12th, 2025

Board of Internal Economy

[The Speaker, Francis Scarpaleggia]

I have the honour to inform the House that the following members have been appointed as members of the Board of Internal Economy for the purposes and under the provisions of the Parliament of Canada Act, subsection 50(2): Steven MacKinnon and Arielle Kayabaga, members of the King's Privy Council; Mark Gerretsen, representative of the government caucus; Andrew Scheer and Chris Warkentin, representatives of the Conservative caucus; and Yves Perron, representative of the Bloc Québécois.

Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner

[The Speaker, Francis Scarpaleggia]

It is my duty to lay upon the table, pursuant to paragraph 90(1)(a) of the Parliament of Canada Act, the annual report of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner in relation to the Conflict of Interest Code for Members of the House of Commons for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2025.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(3)(a), this document is deemed to have been permanently referred to the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs.

Pursuant to paragraph 90(1)(b) of the Parliament of Canada Act, it is my duty to lay upon the table the annual report of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner in relation to the Conflict of Interest Act for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2025.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(3)(h), this document is deemed to have been permanently referred to the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics.

Albanian Heritage Month Act

[Yvan Baker, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-209, An Act to establish Albanian Heritage Month.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to reintroduce a bill entitled the Albanian heritage month act. If passed, it would designate the month of November every year as Albanian heritage month across Canada.

I would like to thank my colleague from Mississauga East—Cooksville for cosponsoring this bill with me. I hope all members of the House will support it.

Canada is home to many Canadians of Albanian heritage and they have made historic contributions to our country. Those contributions touch our economic, cultural and social life. If passed, this bill would give us a special opportunity to celebrate those contributions and also Albanian heritage. Every November, it would give us another opportunity to say, “Gëzuar muajin e trashëgimisë shqiptare.” Every day, it would give Albanian Canadians another reason to say, “Jam krenar që jam shqiptar.”

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)

Veterans Affairs

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I am rising this morning to present a petition of concern to many constituents, and probably Canadians coast to coast, on the treatment of our veterans. The Canadian Forces Members and Veterans Re-establishment and Compensation Act calls on Canada to show just and due appreciation for veterans and members for their service to Canada, yet we still have a law that requires a five-year statutory limit on back pay eligibility, which the petitioners believe unjustly punishes veterans for Veterans Affairs Canada's application processing delays.

The petitioners call on the Minister of Veterans Affairs to remove any statutory limits on back pay eligibility for the disability allowance, to work with individual veterans to achieve just and due compensation for disabilities and to do so in a timely manner.

Questions on the Order Paper

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

Mr. Speaker, I ask that all questions be allowed to stand.

[The Speaker, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Is that agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

Opposition Motion—GC Strategies Inc.

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands—Rideau Lakes, ON]

moved:

That, given that the Auditor General found that ArriveCAN contractor, GCStrategies Inc., was paid $64 million from the Liberal government, and in many cases, there was no proof that any work was completed, the House call on the government to:

(a) get taxpayers their money back, within 100 days of the adoption of this motion; and

(b) impose a lifetime contracting ban on GCStrategies Inc., any of its subsidiaries, its founders Kristian Firth and Darren Anthony, and any other entities with which those individuals are affiliated.

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise and address this important matter for Canadians, following the report by Canada's Auditor General.

Before I get into the substantive portion of my remarks and making a case for the imperative of getting Canadians their money back and having a lifetime ban for the contractors involved and the principals of the contracting firm in question, I want to inform the Chair that I will be splitting my time with the hon. member for Edmonton West.

It is a privilege to split my time with this member. We often talk about His Majesty's loyal opposition being a government in waiting, and interestingly, there was an exchange recently between the right hon. Prime Minister, who is new to this place, and the member for Edmonton West, who is an experienced parliamentarian. The Prime Minister, perhaps in jest but certainly exposing his lack of familiarity with members of the official opposition, said that the member for Edmonton West did not understand how things worked in this place and did not know the difference between a budget and estimates. I want to offer a bit of history to the Prime Minister, because it is really important the Prime Minister understands who is holding him to account.

The member for Edmonton West has an office complement that is the same size as those of all members in this House. Ministers, of course, get much larger offices. They get politically exempt staff, and they get access to full departments.

The member for Edmonton West has a couple people who work in his office, just as the rest of us do. I do not know how many people work at the Department of Finance, but there are a lot; there are thousands of them. In 2018, a budget was tabled in the House, and the member for Edmonton West, on his own, in doing his due diligence reviewing the budget, found that the minister of finance and the ministry made an error of about $150 million. The hon. member was able to correct the homework of the government, the minister, their staff and the entire ministry when they laid that budget on the table.

When we bring things before this House, it is because we have done our due diligence and because we are going to do what we have always done, which is punch above our weight. As the Liberals have the weight of the entire public service and have all the extra resources that come with serving in government, there are incredible responsibilities to get things right, to make sure they get value for taxpayers and to make sure that when mistakes are made, they are corrected, and that when value is not received, it is corrected.

What we saw in the Auditor General's reports this week confirms what Canada's Conservatives had raised the alarm bell about in the previous Parliament. On a range of issues the Auditor General looked at, she found that there were massive cost overruns and in fact negligence by the Liberal government, specifically in the use of the contractor GC Strategies, which was the preferred contractor in what is now known as the arrive scam scandal. This was the app the government originally pegged at costing $80,000. It ultimately cost many orders of magnitude more than that, in excess of $64 million. Value for money just was not there.

For context and for new members to this place, it is important to note that when the official opposition initially raised concerns about the ArriveCAN app, the Liberals said that the app worked great, that it worked as intended and that they received value for money and had no regrets. They paraded people through committee over and over again with that refrain, but it turns out that simply was not the case.

The then leader of the opposition, Mr. Poilievre, called for an Auditor General investigation, and there was a vote in the House. The Liberals and the cabinet, which is the executive responsible for this project, this massive boondoggle, voted against having the Auditor General take a look at it. Why would they not want the investigation if they were so proud of the project and it had worked as intended? Of course, they knew that it was a corrupt process, and they did not want it to come to light, but we did our work in holding the government to account, checking its homework, and we found the errors. We found the grift that had occurred.

It is not just about the nearly $100 million in contracts that GC Strategies was awarded, as a company owned by Mr. Kristian Firth and Mr. Darren Anthony; it is about the procurement processes that were not followed. Let us take for example the imperative of security clearances. The contracts this company was awarded required security clearances. I use the term “company” loosely as these were a couple of guys working in their basement, getting multi-million dollar IT contracts from the Government of Canada, but they were not IT experts. Some of the departments they worked for included public safety, CBSA and national defence. The Auditor General found that in 50% of contracts requiring security clearances, departments cannot prove that these workers, subcontractors for GC Strategies, had the security clearance, and in over 20% of contracts, workers were actively on the job without a valid security clearance. The Liberal government is not one that takes security seriously if this is what it deems an acceptable procurement practice.

Anyone who has ever had a project done at home, if they get a deck built at their house and they put a deposit down and the work is complete and satisfactory, they pay the contractor and thank them for their hard work. What is going to be shocking for Canadians is what we saw here; in 46% of the contracts, there was no proof of work delivered, but the government paid in 100% of the cases. It is unacceptable, and we know it is because no household would do it, no small business would do it and certainly the Government of Canada should not have done it.

What we are asking for is reasonable, but it is also the minimum expectation that Canadians have of us, as Parliament: Within 100 days of the passage of this motion, the government would get Canadians their money back and not simply let it stand that the company involved in this fraud not be allowed to bid on government contracts for seven years; rather, the company, its principals and subsidiaries would have a lifetime ban from doing work for the Government of Canada on behalf of Canadians. This is what Canadians expect of us.

We will hear the rise of all kinds of partisan hackles over the course of today, but this is a great opportunity. We are going to hear that it is a new Liberal government. If it is, then it is time for the Liberals to let us smell that new-car smell, that new-government smell; rise above the partisanship, the instinct to oppose this for the sake of opposing it; and vote for this common-sense motion.

Let us get Canadians their money back, get accountability by banning these contractors. Let us show Canadians that when we tax them a dollar, it is going to go as far as it can, and if someone takes advantage of the Government of Canada and Canadians, we will not let it stand.

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

Mr. Speaker, interestingly enough, Mr. Firth, whom the Conservatives have been after for a number of years now, was actually part of a company known as Coredal. Coredal was started up back in 2010, and, up to 2015, it received many different contracts under Pierre Poilievre and Stephen Harper's government.

I am wondering if the member would apply the very same principles to Mr. Firth in that time, when the Conservatives gave him contracts, that he is applying with the former administration. Yes, Pierre Poilievre was there, front and centre with Stephen Harper, part of that government. Today, we have a new Prime Minister and a new government, even further away from Mr. Firth than the member's own leader.

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands—Rideau Lakes, ON]

Mr. Speaker, if it is the position of the government that it would like to take a look at the contracts that occurred over that period of time, and there is a finding that there was fraud on the government, that work was not delivered, that security clearances were not in place, anyone involved then should be banned for life from doing business with the Government of Canada, and let us get that money back too.

However, today, the question is, is the government going to support this motion? Any government speakers rising today should indicate how far back we want to go to get Canadians their money back. I do not think there should be a limit, because we must get value for Canadians.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate my Conservative colleague on his speech, which gets the day off to a good start on a motion that the Bloc Québécois intends to support, albeit with some reservations. It is a bit unrealistic to think that the money wasted in the GC Strategies scandal will be able to be recovered.

I will go back in history because these scandals are piling up. There was the sponsorship scandal, in which only about $8 million was recovered out of the hundreds of millions of dollars wasted by the Liberal government of the day. Then there was the WE scandal, which was a gross mismanagement of public funds. Now we are faced with another scandal of the same kind, the GC Strategies scandal.

Certainly, we want to call for the money wasted in these scandals to be recovered, but should we not start by reviewing the rules governing public contracts? That is what I find troubling, the lack of accountability. What rules can be put in place to ensure that this does not happen again? History will continue to repeat itself because nothing is being done to fix this problem.

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands—Rideau Lakes, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his good question.

It has been a difficult time for Canadians, when we look at the last 10 years, but of course, as the member indicated, it is not just limited to the last 10 years. We saw that with the Liberal sponsorship scandal as well. We absolutely need to have rigorous processes in place, and it is encouraging to hear the Bloc is going to support the motion, because we have to get that accountability.

When we now see that the opposition has a majority on committees, there is a real opportunity for opposition parties to ensure we hold the government to account at public accounts, at the government operations committee and at all government-chaired committees as well. We look forward to working with my colleague to make sure we get that accountability for Canadians.

[Leslyn Lewis, Conservative, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the parliamentary secretary alluded to the fact that Mr. Firth, in 2010, was also given contracts under Harper. In fact, my understanding is that GC Strategies was incorporated in 2015. The issue at hand could not pertain to any contracts that were awarded in 2010.

I would like my friend to clarify that point of fact.

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands—Rideau Lakes, ON]

Mr. Speaker, unsurprisingly, the member is correct in her discernment of the facts. The issue we are dealing with here is one that was reviewed by the Auditor General. The Auditor General was the one who made the finding we have here today, and that is the basis for this motion to get the funds back. There has not been any evidence presented to independent officers of Parliament about this type of grift or fraud in the period that the parliamentary secretary had indicated, but as I said, if they are supporting us getting more of Canadians' tax dollars back and preventing future frauds, let us do so.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to rise on this issue. It has consumed my life in the operations committee for several years. Before I start, though, I would like to seek the House's permission, as this is my first time speaking in a speech, to comment on the last election.

I want to thank my constituents in Edmonton West for sending me here for the fourth time. I certainly appreciate the support, and I pledge to continue to serve the good people of Edmonton West, or as I call it, “Edmonton West Edmonton Mall”. I want to thank my wife, Sasha, for her continued support. This is the fourth election. She has been through probably 15 elections with me, four for myself. I thank her for her continued support. I realize that she does it so that she can get me out of the house and out of her hair, but I thank her very much.

I want to thank my son Parker, who was my campaign manager. He did a phenomenal job. It was his first time as campaign manager and his third time helping me in the campaign. He did such a great job that we had our second-best results ever. I thank Parker. I would also like to thank my other son, Jensen, for his continued support. I thank my office staff, Oula, Linda, Margaret and Mick, for their continued support to the constituents, as well as my financial agent, Dennis, who actually, unlike the government, knows how to put together a budget, apparently.

I thank the many volunteers. There are too many to mention, but there are some special ones I want to thank: Barb, Judy, Graham, Daime, Brandon, Donovan, Gilles, Jeff, Yolanda, Cheryl and Isabelita, as well as the kids from Parkland Immanuel Christian School who came out in force and door knocked with us, especially Tristan and Braiden, as well as Cheryl, who helped out, and all the door knockers who helped us hit 48,000 doors last election. We have a lot of new communities in my riding, as 28% of the riding is new, so I want to let those people know that we will look forward to serving them.

On the issue at hand, GC Strategies and the arrive scam, I have been here for 10 years now. I have never seen the country so consumed with a scandal. We have had plenty from the government. Of course, we had the SNC-Lavalin scandal, in which the former prime minister interfered with the justice department. We saw the former prime minister and his cabinet interfere in the WE Charity scandal, trying to funnel $900 million to their friends and family members.

We had the green slush fund, in which the current finance minister oversaw $400 million being grifted by Liberal insiders and, of course, the Edmonton-based “other Randy” scandal.

Of all these bigger scandals, we have to wonder why Canadians were so consumed by ArriveCAN. I think that, even though ArriveCAN was not as large financially, it is because so many Canadians had to deal with the broken ArriveCAN app. Millions had to endure the problems with ArriveCAN at the borders, coming in at the airports, dealing with an app that did not work, dealing with an app that sometimes would not work with certain Wi-Fi networks, enduring missed flights and long waits at the airport, enduring this horrible app. They thought it was a simple app that only cost $80,000, but then they found out that this app, which sent them into long lines and sometimes sent them into quarantine by mistake, actually ended up costing over $60 million.

I mentioned how it actually accidentally sent people into quarantine. An app upgrade came out and actually sent 10,000 people, by mistake, into quarantine. We found out later that the government said that it did not actually test the upgrade before issuing it. Can we imagine? The app cost $60 million and somehow the government forgot. It did not have the resources to check if the update worked, but that is okay. Again, what do we expect from an app that only cost $80 million, we think? I say “we think” because even the Auditor General cannot figure out how much the app cost as the bookkeeping from the government was so poorly done.

Literally, the departments have tens of thousands of people working in their accounting departments. The AG has a very large force, and they could not figure out how much this cost. Of course, we know the root cause of the problem. The root cause is Liberal incompetence. The cause, of course, is the Liberals' almost stalker-like affection for handing out Canadian taxpayers' money to high-priced management consultants, much like McKinsey.

McKinsey, if anyone has not realized, is probably one of the worst corporations in the world. It helped supercharge the opioid crisis. It represents some of the most despotic regimes in the world. If McKinsey were a human being, it would be a Bond villain, yet the government violated procurement rules to shove money into McKinsey's pockets. Even when government bureaucrats came forward and said, “We have the bodies available to do this work”, the government broke rules to give money to McKinsey.

It was the same with ArriveCAN and GC Strategies. GC Strategies received close to $100 million from the Liberal government since it formed in 2015. The company had two employees working in someone's basement, doing no IT work, doing no other work except for getting government business and then contracting it out to someone else. The two employees had no programming skills; the only skill they seemed to have was how to work with the Liberal government to fleece money from Canadians. They basically won contracts and then subcontracted them out to others, taking a 15% to 30% cut along the way.

In what world does a company with just two people get so much money and do no work? It is a Liberal world, apparently. GC Strategies even managed to win contracts and then subcontract them out to Microsoft. Microsoft is a pretty large company, yet Microsoft was not able to win the contracts from the government, but GC Strategies did and subcontracted them out.

What happened when the outrageous conduct came to light? The Liberals, instead of fixing it or saying that there was an error and that they would look after it, were gaslighting Canadians. They insisted that the ArriveCAN app saved thousands of lives. Eight different ministers, including the former prime minister and the parliamentary secretary, stood in the House and said that ArriveCAN saved up to 10,000 lives. Then they accused the opposition of being anti-vax and anti-science if they did not believe in the ArriveCAN app. I guess the Auditor General must be anti-science as well, because she came out with two damning reports on the government and its conduct in dealing with GC strategies.

Procurement has gotten so bad with the government that it actually forced bureaucrats and officials to attest in writing to following government procurement rules before they award a contract. I would have thought it would be inferred, as a condition of employment, that someone is not going to break the law or break rules when awarding contracts, but not with the Liberals. They actually forced them to put it in writing.

Let us talk about GC Strategies and the issues we are trying to get money back for. Here are some of the issues. The company created and used fraudulent documents to ensure subcontractors' resumes met criteria for contracts. That is fraud. There were subcontracted individuals, but their work and payments were funded through other companies using the same general contract. That is fraud. Without knowledge or consent of individuals, GC Strategies used their identities to bill the government. The company used contractors with no security clearance, despite attesting they actually had security clearance.

It cost $60 million for ArriveCAN. We know that the government has the ability to get the money back. We know the issue is serious enough that the RCMP actually raided the home of one of the owners to seize documents. The government needs to stop coddling its friends, high-priced management consultants. It needs to start getting value for money. It can start by clawing back the fraudulently stolen money from GC Strategies that was taken from Canadian taxpayers. It is time to put our taxpayers, not Liberal insiders, first.

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

Mr. Speaker, I will get an opportunity a bit later to add a lot more detail to what the member is stating, but I want to go back to something. The member's colleague posed a question to one of her colleagues from the Conservative Party, saying that GC Strategies came into being in 2015. Mr. Firth had a company, with a partner, that actually amalgamated into GC Strategies. Mr. Firth was involved in that company and received literally millions of dollars in contracts from Stephen Harper and Pierre Poilievre when Pierre Poilievre was part of the Stephen Harper government. I posed a legitimate question to the member's colleague, and his colleague even acknowledged that fact.

Would the member still apply the same principles? If he agrees he would apply the same principles, does he believe that the House does have an obligation to look into Coredal, the same company that Mr. Firth was involved in?

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague from Winnipeg North's intervention was nonsensical, as usual.

The Auditor General looked at the contracting and did not find issues from the Harper era. The issues seemed to start in 2015, when the Liberal government took over. The Auditor General did two different reports on contracting around the issue, and not once was an issue brought up of poor procurement or fraudulent activity during the Harper era. It was all done during the Liberal era.

I think the gentleman needs to reflect on himself and his comments, and look inward to see where the corruption is.

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the discussions we have heard this morning are almost unbelievable. No one seems to dispute the fact that Quebeckers and Canadians were taken in by a company called GC Strategies, and that we are owed several million dollars.

This morning's motion proposes that the government take steps to recover that money. What, then, are the member from Winnipeg North, who is a member of the governing party, and the Conservative members debating? They are wondering whether we would be demanding the same thing if the Conservatives were in power.

Of course we would, because we have been robbed. We want our money back. With all due respect, we are not interested in who stole it. We want it back.

What does my colleague think? Can we agree that a Conservative, Liberal or even Bloc Québécois government would agree that we want our money back?

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague's question is a valid one about whether we would ask for the money back. Of course we would. The Liberal government, instead of admitting fault, tries to place the blame elsewhere.

I want to quote the ADM of PSPC on the issue: “we have the ability to recover the funds from the suppliers...it's...our regular practice to do so.” This is the ADM's stating that it is a regular practice to claw back from contractors money that was taken illegally, or fraudulently obtained money.

Why is the government fighting us on this?

[Costas Menegakis, Conservative, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the member for Winnipeg North has stood up in the House and vociferously defended the Liberal WE scandal, the Liberal SNC-Lavalin scandal, the Liberal green slush fund scandal and Justin Trudeau's many ethics violations, yet he stands up in the House today and refers to a time when we had good governance in this country.

I ask the member opposite this: Why is it that the Liberal government opposite is refusing to get our money back? Canadians want their money back. It was stolen from us. We would like to have it back, and it is actually nonsensical that the government would not be asking for the money back as well.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Mr. Speaker, it is not just that the government is refusing to get our money back. The scandal was first exposed in 2022 in the operations committee, and one would think that the government would have actually stopped granting contracts to GC Strategies then. However, it continued to give it contracts until March 2024, two years after the scandal came to light. Not only is the government refusing to get taxpayer money back; it also fuelled the problem by continuing to give contracts to a company it knew was defrauding Canadians. It is disgusting.

[Jacques Ramsay, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety]

Mr. Speaker, we agree that the observations contained in the report on the contract for professional services awarded to GC Strategies are unacceptable. I would like to thank the Auditor General of Canada and her team for their hard work.

Based on audits and verifications conducted between 2023 and 2025, Public Services and Procurement Canada is changing and modernizing how it awards contracts for professional services where required. The objective is to adopt measures aimed at reducing market risks, set goals and define the tasks needed to make an informed decision with regard to a tailored solution when we call on private companies and, lastly, improve management practices when it comes to contracts already under way.

We totally agree with the Auditor General of Canada when she says that we do not need more rules; rather, we need to make sure that our public servants properly apply the ones already in place. That is why the monitoring framework surrounding contracting practices has been enhanced.

We also need to make sure that we are working with suppliers with unimpeachable integrity. In 2024, the Auditor General of Canada made recommendations in the report on ArriveCAN. Since then, the government has done its homework. I am pleased to inform the House that seven out of the eight recommendations have been implemented: require more accurate financial records in order to correctly allocate expenses to projects; fully document interactions with suppliers and prohibit them from participating both in the drafting of the call for tenders and in the bidding process; require that all contracts and task authorizations comply with all applicable policies and guidelines; ensure that the required experience and qualifications are clearly defined from the outset; clarify requirements and work activities and ensure that deliverables are clearly defined.

Our new government is determined to provide a better framework for federal procurement practices. From now on, public servants will have to justify their needs and follow the strictest standards when they are seeking professional services to support the implementation of their programs.

The Auditor General of Canada made no new recommendations this year. In other words, she thinks we are doing our job.

I would also like to point out to members that the Government of Canada updated the ineligibility and suspension policy last year. To better respond to wrongdoing, the government recently created an office of supplier integrity and compliance, affirming its desire to do business only with companies that have the highest standards.

With respect to GC Strategies specifically, Public Services and Procurement Canada suspended the company's security status in March 2024. That would have already prevented the company from participating in all federal government contracts with security requirements.

We have done even more. GC Strategies has been suspended; it can no longer be awarded any contracts for professional services or other types of contracts by Public Services and Procurement Canada. What is more, last week, the office of supplier integrity and compliance declared GC Strategies ineligible for Government of Canada contracts for the next seven years, from June 6, 2025, to June 6, 2032. This is a severe sanction, reflecting the fact the the government is not taking this lightly and that it is acting decisively. I can also say that, even at the end of its suspension, the company is in no way assured of being able to bid on contracts issued by the Government of Canada.

Our friends across the aisle had an opportunity to adopt these measures, since the same individuals received contracts between 2010 and 2015, but they did nothing. It is the Liberal Party of Canada that is implementing these measures.

Moreover, as part of the procedures under way, the company could lose its ability to receive contracts from the Crown indefinitely if it is convicted by the courts of fraud against the Crown. In short GC Strategies will not get another penny of taxpayers money.

When it comes to reimbursement, we will first have to get a court order. If our attorneys can provide that there was indeed fraud or overbilling, we will not hesitate to demand exemplary damages.

As for ArriveCAN, specific allegations of misconduct have been filed, and the Canada Border Services Agency has launched an investigation that is still under way. As my hon. colleague from Edmonton West mentioned, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police was made aware of these allegations. However, the CBSA did not wait to complete its investigation before taking action. It has already taken measures to improve the management and control of its procurement processes.

It implemented a procurement improvement plan to enhance its practices and make sure that all of its purchases comply with the Government of Canada's procurement rules, support the CBSA's mandate and bring value to Canadians. The improvement plan includes several important elements. From now on, agency employees with financial authority at the national level will be required to follow four compulsory courses on procurement contracts. Employees are also required to disclose all of their interactions with prospective suppliers. In addition, the agency has established a centre of expertise to help employees fully understand their powers and their obligations. The agency now has a purchasing and contracting branch with the power to centralize all procurement activities. Thus, as part of the annual planning, budget and approval process, the agency now requires all divisions and regions to prepare detailed multi-year budget plans for their procurement and contracting activities. These plans will be meticulously studied and approved by the agency's governance committee. The agency also recently established a new recourse, standards and program integrity branch, which will control management activities and implement a culture of excellence when it comes to program and service delivery, including in areas related to procurement activities. The idea is to enhance procurement procedures at the agency and enable it to proceed with confidence and diligence in the awarding of future contracts.

Our government is intent on ensuring compliance with procurement procedures for goods and services. Offenders will be held appropriately accountable. The CBSA shares this conviction, and is in agreement with our actions. The agency's directors have already publicly indicated several times in committee and before the members of the House that they are taking the problem seriously and that they have implemented the necessary measures.

In addition to the agency's efforts to improve their procurement practices and enhance monitoring, Public Services and Procurement Canada is also taking steps to enhance every aspect of the federal procurement system. We assure the House that we will use the results of the latest Auditor General's report to further improve how the Government of Canada does business with its suppliers.

To carry out its mandate, the agency is always looking to innovate and improve its tools so that legitimate travellers, goods and services can circulate freely at our country's borders, while ensuring the safety and security of Canadians and respecting their rights and freedoms.

I will conclude my remarks on the subject by highlighting the work that Canada Border Services Agency employees do every day from coast to coast to coast. The agency has an important mandate, and its employees are well aware of it. Today more than ever, border security is a priority concern for Canadians, as it is for this government. This work is essential for protecting Canadians and contributing to our country's prosperity.

I think that all this illustrates the government's commitment to establishing and improving sound practices when it comes to contracts and learning. Our new government believes that all of the negligence and excess associated with GC Strategies and other suppliers are unacceptable. In the last Parliament, MPs and the Auditor General worked extensively to ensure that the contracts awarded to suppliers by the government are scrutinized, and that they continue to be scrutinized in the future. The government will demand accountability for any wrongdoing. It now has the means of doing so effectively, while ensuring that its public servants exercise the appropriate control measures. Canadians have the right to know that their hard-earned money is well managed. Given the new guarantees and rigorous measures implemented to hold GC Strategies accountable and to prevent any further violations on the part of other suppliers, we can now look to the future and focus on the work ahead.

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

Mr. Speaker, the member continues to claim that he represents a new government, but it is a new government made up of the same people.

My question is simple. If this is truly a new government, will it immediately demand reimbursement of the funds that were spent?

Will the Liberals support our motion? Will they try to correct the situation? Will they demand a reimbursement? I want a yes or no answer.

[Jacques Ramsay, Liberal, La Prairie—Atateken, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the government did more than that. It created the office of supplier integrity and compliance, a body independent of politicians. It will do the job because we gave it the tools to do so, the tools our Minister of Government Transformation intends to give it. These digital tools will allow it to monitor contracts with suppliers.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Mr. Speaker, there is something sweet about the candour shown by the new Liberal member, who is convinced that this new government will better manage public funds.

The creation of the agency my colleague was talking about is a bit like if Don Vito Corleone launched an investigation into the mafia. It is a bit surreal.

There is also something important in my colleague's remarks, and I will ask him a pretty simple question. He says that GC Strategies was suspended from all public contracting for seven years. Personally, I think they should have been banned for life.

Who is banned from receiving public contracts? Is it GC Strategies, or Mr. Firth and Mr. Anthony?