Madam Speaker, today's debate is an important one, as it involves Canadians' hard-earned taxpayer dollars. It involves the ruling of the Speaker with respect to the production of documents ordered by the House, on the scandal involving Sustainable Development Technology Canada, something that unfortunately has become known as the Liberal billion-dollar green flush fund. The House had ordered the production of the documents around the scandal to the law clerk, with the intent that the documents could then be provided to the RCMP for investigation.
However, the will of the House has been hijacked by the Prime Minister's Privy Council Office. In its infinite wisdom, the Prime Minister's department, the PCO, decided to execute the order by telling departments to provide documents but heavily redact them. That decision was a breach of members' privilege. The order was not some plaything for the PCO or the Prime Minister. The order did not ask for redaction. That is why we find ourselves here today, discussing an issue that involves the primacy of Parliament over all things.
One would think that is a fairly important element in our Canadian democracy. The matter has also been referred to the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs for further consideration. We nonetheless clearly see some objections from the government. Imagine, the government even rolled in allegations that all of this is some alleged breach of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
It strains credulity and it is a total farce to argue a charter breach. Arguing that Parliament cannot receive documents that could assist the RCMP in its investigation of possible wrongdoing is not acceptable. There is no breach of the charter. There is, however, a clear-cut example of obfuscation and of impeding a criminal investigation. How did we get to all of this?
A beautifully sounding entity was established in 2001, with an ambitious name: Sustainable Development Technology Canada. It had the noble purpose of giving taxpayer financial assistance to green technology companies before they could become commercialized. It was a marvellous mandate with beneficial objectives, but from the time the Liberal government was elected, unfortunately SDTC controlled a billion dollars of taxpayer money that has since become what is now known today as the green slush fund.
Sadly, some probing by parliamentary committees found cause for serious concern. A whopping 82% of funding transactions approved by the SDTC board of directors during a five-year sample period examined by the Auditor General of Canada were deemed to be “conflicted”. For anyone who understands how auditing is done, that was just a random sample. A random sample produced a whopping 82% of transactions that were conflicted. One does not have to be a professional auditor to realize that if a random sample shows 82%, that is just the tip of the iceberg.
According to the Auditor General, the confliction represents $330 million of taxpayer money being given to companies that had a conflict of interest. SDTC board members voted on giving funding to those companies. Moreover, the Auditor General found that the same board thought it was okay to approve another $59 million in projects that they were not authorized to do and that were outside the mandate of the very foundation the government and Parliament set up.
To put it bluntly, the board broke SDTC contribution agreements. In their role as SDTC directors, those directors broke Canadian conflict of interest laws as public office holders, and they broke the SDTC Act itself. That is quite the accomplishment. At the very least, such activities uncovered by the Auditor General would certainly warrant examination by appropriate authorities. Why then is it such an affront to the Liberal government and the PCO to have the allegations delved into further by the RCMP?
If laws were broken and a federal act was ignored, why would the government not want to get to the bottom of it? Instead, the government has done its best to circumvent Parliament and an order from the Speaker to provide the documents. Why would that be the case? Why would the government not provide the documents? They are documents that could divulge the existence of improprieties.
The statutes are clear enough. People who are given Governor in Council appointments by the government to oversee taxpayer money are not to personally profit from their work, nor is their family. However, evidence has come to light that, in a five-year period, there were 405 transactions approved by the board. The Auditor General sampled only 226, about half, and found that 186 of those transactions were conflicted. That is the 82%. That is the $330 million. It is likely that more transactions are conflicted.
Is the reluctance exhibited by the Liberals to provide the requested documents predicated on their not wanting to admit that their selected SDTC board directors presided over transactions and gave millions in taxpayer money to the wrong people, who acted to benefit their own companies? Does the government want to know the truth and what the conflicts in question were? We see such a refusal to get to the bottom of what occurred; why would the government not want to know what these conflicts are? What was the value of the benefits obtained, and who benefited?
What is obscene is that, in some cases investigated by the Auditor General, according to meeting minutes, SDTC directors would stay in the room while the board was voting on their own project. What kind of unacceptable procedures and operations were being conducted?
It is unconscionable that, in one case, a member of the SDTC board received $114 million for green companies that the director had invested in. I guess it is a great game, if one can get it. What is even worse is that, after the SDTC board member's own company received $114 million in taxpayer money, its value tripled. Getting an SDTC grant is a stamp of approval from the Government of Canada that allows these companies to raise other funds. Adding to this case is that the director's lobbyist was the individual's in-house lobbyist for 10 years before he was elected. That lobbyist is none other than the current Minister of Environment.
Given this kind of activity, it is little wonder that the Liberal government does not want any facts or truths to come forward. This is a disgrace. The government has resisted providing the SDTC documents and, by doing so, has stymied the investigation process. It is clear why. With just a limited examination by the Auditor General, it appears that $390 million of taxpayer money has gone to Liberal insiders. This is likely what the government is attempting to conceal. This is why the Liberal government is opposing that order and the production of documents, which would then be turned over to the RCMP. If the Liberal government wanted to hide what went on within SDTC, producing highly redacted documents would now make perfect sense. Why would the Liberals want to have anything to do with the malfeasance and abuse of taxpayer money? What arrogance is this?
It is likely that the 226 of the 400 or so transactions identified by the Auditor General are just the tip of the money-giveaway iceberg, even though they represent $390 million. Strangely, all of this does not seem to worry the Liberals in the slightest. The SDTC board, by all accounts, appears to have caught on to the game well. It used to put out a quarterly report on every company it dealt with and assisted with funding, but it does not do so anymore.
We are here today debating the Speaker's ruling on the privilege motion with respect to the Prime Minister's department, the PCO, redacting documents. This was done against the House order to provide documents regarding the Liberal green slush fund to the law clerk to be transferred to the RCMP for investigation. We are debating, but there really is no need for debate.
There is, however, a great need for upholding the supremacy of Parliament and for our government to support the rule of law rather than trying to subvert it. This issue concerns systemic conflicts of interest and corruption with the green slush fund. At present, we only know that $390 million was disposed of. As of today, a forensic audit has not been done by the Auditor General. The Auditor General did, however, conduct a sampling of things.
This whole affair is also important because Parliament is the highest court in the land, and the Speaker is its servant. An order from the Speaker must be upheld and not doctored to withhold evidence. These are fundamental elements of democracy. They matter and so does the wise, legal and worthy expenditures of taxpayers' money. Taxpayers work hard, and their money must be used responsibly and in a way that maximizes benefit for them, for Canadians, not Liberal insiders.
Instead of focusing on assisting an investigation by the RCMP into what went on with the Liberals' green slush fund, we are here today trying to end the delay and obfuscation to obtain readable evidence and get to the truth. However, the Liberal government is fighting it every step of the way. Why is it that despite the billowing smoke of corruption at such unprecedented levels, the House finds itself having to request that the Liberal government abide by the Speaker's ruling and produce documents that can be read so the information can be transferred to a full investigation by the RCMP? It should be quite straightforward. However, it is far from that.
The House is in a pitched battle right now to access information and determine the truth of the green slush fund. We have to ask, is there more corruption yet to surface from the Liberals' green slush fund? Are there charges that should be laid? Who knows the truth, as Parliament is being shielded from it? That is not acceptable to the House. What do we know? What we do know is that the appropriate use of taxpayers' money must always be the rule, not the exception.
