Debates of June 12th, 2025

Opposition Motion—GC Strategies Inc.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I have enormous respect for the member for Winnipeg North, particularly for his ability to listen during speeches. However, I do not feel like he listened to my speech, because I mentioned the points that he raised.

That said, I would invite him to look at what the Auditor General actually did with regard to the recommendations. The member for Winnipeg North is usually able to read between the lines.

Here is what the news release says: “There are no recommendations in this report because I don't believe the government needs more procurement rules. Rather, federal organizations need to make sure that the rules that exist are understood and followed.”

In my opinion, this statement reflects a total lack of confidence. The Auditor General is basically saying that the government has been twiddling its thumbs so much lately that she sees no point in making new recommendations until the previous ones have been followed.

That is what it means.

[Branden Leslie, Conservative, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I was wondering if my colleague could expand on some of the consulting costs we have seen rising under the government. He rightfully outlined the fact that we have seen a massive increase in the number of public servants and, simultaneously, under the Liberal government, a massive increase in consultants being used.

If we had a budget, I guess it would be in the budget, but from the main estimates, we know that there are more consultants coming to the aid of our public sector. I am wondering if the member could expand upon those earlier remarks.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question and his interest in accountability.

I want to raise a very important point about government contracting rules. There is a big difference between competitive and non-competitive contracts. The threshold for being on the list was raised to less than $40,000 from less than $25,000 before 2019. Under that threshold, the government can tell a firm that the firm can do whatever it wants and no questions will be asked.

How many contracts have gone undetected and unaccounted for? Some very big questions deserve to be raised, especially since we know that $2.8 billion in government contracts are awarded every year. There must be many firms like GC Strategies. The case of GC Strategies was discovered somewhat by chance, because it was too conspicuous and there had been too much abuse.

We need to add some stringency to the system, but I have very little confidence in this government. Past behaviour is often a good predictor of future behaviour.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, the member's answer supports my statement.

In 2024, the Auditor General came back with eight recommendations. Those recommendations have been followed up on, and seven of the eight have been fulfilled. The last one is well under way. If we take a look at the recent report she just released, we can see that the member is right: We do not need new rules. We just want to see the current rules that are in place being adhered to. Now we have a new Prime Minister who has made that commitment.

I am wondering if he could provide his thoughts on how—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, John Nater]

The hon. member for Abitibi—Témiscamingue.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Mr. Speaker, since I enjoy debating with my colleague from Winnipeg North, I will cite another passage from the Auditor General's report.

In report 4, paragraph 4.34 on page 12 states:

We did not issue recommendations in this audit report. We encourage federal organizations to implement the recommendations from recent procurement audits....

This implies that the government has not done so. It has been twiddling its thumbs. It has not followed the recommendations, including those from the Auditor General of Canada's report that was tabled in Parliament, from the report on professional services contracts with GC Strategies Inc., from the first report of the Office of the Comptroller General on procurement governance—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, John Nater]

I am sorry to interrupt the member, but we have to move on to the next speaker.

The hon. member for Calgary Midnapore.

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Mr. Speaker, it is always a pleasure to be here.

It is such an honour and a pleasure to be here once again on—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, John Nater]

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

[Greg McLean, Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I think you have to give some consideration to all the things that happen in the House. We are still reeling from the comments from the other side, so we are just getting our thoughts together. I hope you will entertain me while we get a little point of order and get some things happening again in the House. I really appreciate your entertaining my interjection here.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, John Nater]

I do thank the member for Calgary Centre for reminding us of the importance of order and maintaining order in this place.

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Calgary Midnapore has the floor.

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I want to take a moment and thank, again, the incredible citizens of Calgary Midnapore, who have returned me here for my fourth term. It is an honour to be here to represent them once again.

When our citizens vote for us, when they bring us to the House, they really bring us here with one thing, and that is their trust. They trust that we, when we come to this place, which they have chosen to put us into, will do the right thing, say the right things and take the right actions. With that comes the responsibility of deciding how we will spend their hard-earned money. This is one of the greatest elements of the trust our citizens put in us when we are here.

It is, of course, very unfortunate that the Auditor General has determined, once again, in reviewing GC Strategies, that this was not the case with the government and that the government has once again disappointed the citizens who had placed their trust in it. In fact, the government went beyond disappointing its people. It betrayed the trust of the people who put it here.

Mr. Speaker, I would also like to inform you that I will be sharing my time with the member for Louis-Saint-Laurent—Akiawenhrahk.

The Liberal government betrayed the trust that was placed in it by its citizens, and not just in one way, but in several ways. This was over 31 departments, nine which had more than 1 million dollars' worth of contracts with GC Strategies.

Let us examine some of the ways this happened. In 33% of the contracts, the government could not show that the contract resources had the experience or qualifications necessary to complete the work. Now, anyone knows that, when applying for a job, the first thing to do is to give a resume, a CV. We would never go to a doctor or dentist who was not certified. We also demand that our tradespeople are certified.

By the way, I have many tradespeople in my riding who cannot find work as a result of the uncertain conditions that have been created by the government. We demand that our tradespeople have certifications, yet for anyone, everyone, who worked for GC Strategies, we cannot necessarily ensure that this was the case. We cannot ensure that they were certified to do the work they did. In 33% of the cases, we could not verify it.

In 58% of the cases, time sheets were poorly documented. Not showing our work is the first lesson that children learn in elementary school. What does that say, when people are not even willing to document and show the work that they did? How can we come to any conclusion other than the work that was paid for was not necessarily completed? Really, there is no other conclusion that we can draw other than this. It is really hard to come to another conclusion.

In addition, 82% of federal organizations could not prove that fees did not exceed market rates. Every Canadian in Canada who is shopping right now is doing price comparisons. I have no doubt about that. I was a public servant for 15 years, and when I had to purchase an item, the first thing I had to do was get three quotes. I was obligated, each and every time, to choose the lowest cost item. However, this did not happen with GC Strategies. This reeks of extortion. It reeks of collusion.

I think of a beautiful young mom in Legacy, one of my communities. When I met her at the door, she was crying because she has two sons with a genetic condition that only allows them to have a keto diet. She had fed them hamburger patties, the stacks of hamburger patties that can be bought in packages of 16 or 32 at Superstore, for four consecutive nights. She had nothing else to feed them.

The Liberal government is overcharging the public and taking advantage of this unique situation, and that is not right.

I went to see my banker two weeks ago. He told me that he is seeing two things he had not seen in his 20 years of banking. The first is that seniors are coming into his office, crying, saying, “I did everything right. I did everything by the book. I followed the rules, I invested my money, and yet I can't feed myself and can't stay in my home.” It is heartbreaking. The second thing he is seeing is lifelong Canadians cashing out their assets and moving to other countries to have a better standard of living for a lower cost. It is heartbreaking, but these are the things that are happening. I can assure members that these people are price-comparison shopping.

In addition, in 54% of contracts, it could not be proven that deliverables were received. This one blows my mind. Again, as a former public servant, we were obligated to sign. I had a conversation with the Auditor General when she presented her report, sections 32, 33 and 34. Section 33 says the employee must prove that the deliverables were received before they sign the cheque and pay the organization. How was GC Strategies even paid when we cannot prove that the deliverables were received? How is that even possible? It is mind-blowing. The least someone can expect when they pay for something is that they received something.

The Auditor General said that the rules are clear and there are no further policies that need to be made. The Liberal government need only enforce the rules and follow the rules. Yet, the government seems incapable of doing that time and time again. It is incapable of following the rules and enforcing the rules for one of two reasons: It is incompetent, and we have seen incompetence from the government time and time again; or, the second reason, the real reason, I think, it does not care. It does not care about our money, never mind following the rules.

In addition, there is following the rules, and then there is doing what is right. Buying a $9-million condo in New York City is within the rules, but it is not right. Spending $100,000 on catering, if one is the Governor General, is within the rules, but it is not right. The Prime Minister says he is following the rules with the Ethics Commissioner, but is he really doing what is right in not disclosing all of his assets?

GC Strategies did not follow the rules, and it did not do what was right. Kristian Firth, if he is listening right now, did something wrong. He stole from the Canadian people. He should never be allowed to have another contract again, and he should return the money to the people of Canada. However, the Liberal government let him do it. It did not see our money, the Canadian people's money, as its money. Canadians put their trust in the government, and it betrayed that trust.

Here is an opportunity for the Liberals and the government to rebuild that trust. They have to get our money back. They have to make it right for the hard-working people who send their taxes to Ottawa. The bad thing has happened, they let that bad thing happen, but this is their chance to make it right. Do the right thing and support this motion; never let GC Strategies have another contract, or its affiliates; and get Canadians' money back.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am not sure if the member is even aware of it, but today we have a process in place for when the government or civil servants are able to demonstrate fraud or overbilling. We are already pursuing GC Strategies in court, right now. Is the member aware of that?

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Mr. Speaker, this is what the government does. It provides breadcrumbs of examples of things, trying to indicate to the Canadian people that it is doing right. However, the reality is that GC Strategies is only banned for seven years; it is not banned for a lifetime. It can create another entity to win a contract with the Canadian people. This minuscule piece of good is simply tiny and incomparable to the wrong that was done. So much more has to be done.

The Auditor General says the government is not even following the rules; it is not enforcing the rules. It must begin to do this. Little examples like this are not satisfactory.

[Martin Champoux, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate my colleague on her speech.

What does my colleague think are the chances that we will ever see that money again?

The other point that I would like to go back to is the penalty imposed on GC Strategies. It has been banned from all public contracts for seven years. This seems like a slap on the wrist. They are being told not to do it again because what they did was not nice. Does my colleague not think that Mr. Firth and Mr. Anthony should have been banned for life, so that they will never again be able to work using public funds? Does she not think that this punishment would have fitted the crime?

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I completely agree that seven years is not enough. We need to ban these two men and, of course, GC Strategies from ever receiving Government of Canada contracts through other companies. I completely agree with my colleague.

[Chris Lewis, Conservative, Essex, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my esteemed colleague for her very impassioned speech. I really loved the end of her speech, because she talked about doing what is right. I am a big believer in asking, "When nobody was looking, did you do the right thing?" We certainly know the right thing was not done. I know that folks back in Essex, in the Windsor region, have almost become accustomed to the government having not done the right thing.

My question for my colleague is this: Would the member agree with me that GC Strategies should not only pay back the money but also pay back the interest on that money?

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague as he makes his return to the House.

Yes, GC Strategies should pay the interest as well, as Canadians are required to do on their taxes, for example.

The member touches on something far more important, which is doing the right thing. How can the government, or even Canadians, have faith in a Prime Minister who is not committed to doing the right thing, when he has indicated that he will not go beyond the requirements of the Ethics Commissioner? Doing the right thing starts at the top. Right now, Canadians do not have that leadership from the Prime Minister.

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

Mr. Speaker, does my colleague agree that the money must be recovered, regardless of whether the government in power is Liberal, Conservative or another party, and regardless of who is the leader of the party in power? This money does not belong to us; it belongs to all Quebeckers and all Canadians.

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I think that this is a unique issue and very different from the other motions that we have seen in the House over the last few days. Yes, of course, if Quebeckers paid, then they deserve some of the money that went to GC Strategies.

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent—Akiawenhrahk, QC]

Mr. Speaker, it is now my turn to thank the voters in my riding, the people of Louis-Saint-Laurent—Akiawenhrahk, who did me the honour of putting their trust in me almost two months ago. I had the opportunity to rise in the House and now I have the time to thank them directly for their confidence. I hope I live up to their expectations.

The people in Louis-Saint-Laurent—Akiawenhrahk and across Canada want the money they pay in taxes to be managed responsibly, carefully and efficiently. Unfortunately, to say the least, today's debate shows the ugly side of how this government that has been here for nearly 10 years has managed public funds irresponsibly.

Let us not forget the sad memory of the ArriveCAN scandal. That much-talked-about scandal that we nicknamed "arrive scam", proved to be an absolute ridiculous mismanagement of public funds. It was supposed to cost $80,000 and ended up costing $60 million. It was demonstrated that it could have been done for far less money, much more efficiently and with much better results. Who was behind such irresponsible management of public funds? It was GC Strategies. That sad company, run by incompetent people using a completely irresponsible approach, is at the heart of another dreadful scandal. The Auditor General specifically investigated what GC Strategies has done with the Canadian government over the past 10 years, and it just happens to coincide with the Liberal government's first election up until a few months ago. The Auditor General found that this company was awarded 106 contracts directly related to 31 federal government organizations managed by the then Liberal government. As I said, this occurred from 2015 to 2024, for a total of $65 million.

That is a lot of money. I would invite those who are watching at home to think about the income tax return they filed recently, the taxes they paid to the federal government and the GST they pay out of pocket every time they buy something. A total of $65 million of that money was given to GC Strategies for zero results. For all 106 contracts and 31 organizations, the Auditor General examined virtually every aspect of the sound management of public funds and found that there was very little evidence to justify spending this money. There was very little evidence of any work being done for the $65 million that Canadians gave to this company. Very little was done to check the credentials of those who were awarded the contracts. Proper security measures were not taken. Doing work for the federal government of a G7 country requires security measures, and yet, everywhere we look, we see that security protocols were not followed, particularly in some specific organizations. Time sheets, which are used to record the hours worked and calculate the pay of a person who is supposed to be doing a job, were not managed responsibly. I am not the one saying it, the Auditor General is. Furthermore, it is impossible to clearly demonstrate that the calls for tenders for these GC Strategies contracts were conducted according to the rules. In addition, 80% of the fees paid were above the market average for similar work. Obviously, there were also absenteeism issues that were poorly managed. Remember that the government hired 100,000 new public servants over a 10-year period. Despite this, the government was unable to properly track absenteeism.

This is a scathing report from the Auditor General, which proves beyond any reasonable doubt that third-party companies must follow the rules when it comes to the sound management of public funds, and that, in this case, the rules were not followed when it came to the work that was done, qualifications, security clearances, time sheets, the tendering process, generous fees and worker absenteeism. Everything was wrong. Everything was poorly done.

Let us also remember that this government promised to cap new spending at 2%. A few hours after the King's statement and the Speech from the Throne, in the first budget item that the government tabled, we learned that the Liberals were increasing spending on consultants from $19 billion to $26 billion. That is a 36% increase. This is exactly what we are talking about.

Over the past 10 years, 31 agencies were directly targeted. However, government agencies are not just left to their own devices. Somebody somewhere is responsible for them. They are called ministers. We are talking about ministerial responsibility and accountability. Four ministers were directly involved in this mismanagement: the current Minister of Foreign Affairs, the current Minister responsible for Canada-U.S. Trade, the current Minister of Indigenous Services and Marco Mendicino, who is currently serving as the Prime Minister's chief of staff. That is no small matter. Four major players in the current government were ministers responsible for the mismanagement of $65 million in 31 Government of Canada agencies while the Liberals were in office.

The government did not take them to task for that. The Prime Minister actually promoted them. These are not small departments they are in charge of: foreign affairs, U.S. trade, indigenous services and the Prime Minister's chief of staff. One would be hard pressed to find something bigger than that. I will get to the Department of Finance later, if I have time. That is another story.

That is why we are asking for the money to be paid back. The Auditor General of Canada was extraordinarily critical in her report. I went over the issues she raised. This is how she put it in her report and in her answers to questions from the media. She said, "We found problems with almost every contract we looked at, which tells me there is no reason to believe it is limited to these two." That is a big deal. Everything she found was highly problematic. She said that, if everything she looked at was all wrong, she had no proof that the same thing was not happening elsewhere. The $65‑million problem we are dealing with right now might be indicative of even bigger problems elsewhere. That is what the Auditor General of Canada said.

Now, that is really incredible. She says that we need to go back to basics, that the policy should simply be properly applied and followed. That is incredible.

A while ago, I heard my colleague from Winnipeg North, who never misses an opportunity to defend the indefensible, say that it was incredible and asked whether members were aware that the Liberals had taken action and had managed to do it without spending any money. That is precisely the problem. All Canadians ask of their government is that it take proper care of taxpayer money and follow the rules. That is not too much to ask. They are just asking that the rules be read and followed. The government receives taxpayer money and has to manage it properly.

For 10 years, however, the government has behaved in a totally irresponsible manner. Now they want us to believe that everything is okay because this is a new government. Yes, it is a new government, but the four ministers responsible are playing key roles in this government. It bears repeating, because there are serious consequences to that. The Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Minister responsible for Canada-U.S. Trade, the Minister of Indigenous Services and the Prime Minister's current chief of staff are four major players in this government. They call that a new government.

Canadians will not be fooled by this government's mismanagement. Canadians deserve to be reimbursed because the work that was done was botched. The rules were not followed. We are not the ones saying so. This is according to the Auditor General of Canada. If by chance those folks over there have any sense of honour after winning the popular vote, they should reimburse Canadians.

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

Mr. Speaker, as I indicated earlier, when it comes to recovering the funds, it is important to recognize that where we have been able to demonstrate fraud and overbilling, we are, in fact, currently pursuing GC Strategies in court. That is actually taking place.

I am wondering if the member would also provide his thoughts on this. In the last report, which we just received, there are no new recommendations. In the report prior, there were eight recommendations. Seven are implemented and one is well under way. Could the member provide his thoughts on both?

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent—Akiawenhrahk, QC]

Mr. Speaker, this is a simple rule that we want to address: just apply the rules. That was the main recommendation of the Auditor General, which is something she should not have to say, because it is a part of the job that we have when we are a government, to apply the rules.

The Liberals did not apply the rules, during not one month, not one year, not five years, but 10 years. All the time they were in office, they did not apply the rule on that. Those who are responsible are the cabinet ministers, and the cabinet ministers who were there during this mess are still around. The chief of staff of the Prime Minister, the external affairs minister, the minister responsible for international commerce with the United States, and the first nations services minister, three cabinet ministers and the chief of staff of the Prime Minister are still there. Shame on you.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, John Nater]

Please address comments through the Chair.

The hon. member for Longueuil—Saint-Hubert.

[Natilien Joseph, Liberal, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Mr. Speaker, with all due respect to my colleague, whom I used to watch on TV but am now seeing in person right in front of me, the Conservatives' lack of genuine willingness to act is blatant and obvious.

Do the Conservatives really want to help our seniors? They raised the age of eligibility for OAS from 65 to 67. The Liberal government reversed that. My colleague talks about respect and dignity for our seniors, but his party will not commit to anything.

Will the Conservatives finally support our government's concrete measures to help our seniors?