Democratic Institutions  Speaker, if the minister does not know what a conflict of interest is, let me give him an example. The Trudeau Foundation takes $140,000 from the dictatorship in Beijing. Then, in investigating foreign interference, the Prime Minister, who shares the same name as the foundation that was the target of a foreign influence operation, appoints a member of that very foundation, two members of that foundation, in fact, to investigate foreign interference.

Democratic Institutions  That would mean no inquiry into the threats against elected officials, no inquiry into the Trudeau Foundation, no inquiry into the intimidation of the Chinese diaspora and no inquiry into the 11 candidates who were funded by China. This charade serves only to protect the Prime Minister.

Democratic Institutions  In a blatant conflict of interest, the Prime Minister appointed a family friend and member of the Beijing-financed Trudeau Foundation to investigate Beijing's interference. From the start, the report had no credibility, because by the time the Prime Minister's fake rapporteur decided to meet with the former leader of the Conservative Party, the member for Durham, the report had already been written.

Public Accounts committee  It's important that we get to the bottom of this matter. We all voted in support of this study on the Trudeau Foundation and the witnesses need to agree to come. I would remind you that the list of witnesses was put together with the input of all MPs here. So I don't see why we shouldn't authorize the committee chair to talk to the witnesses and tell them that they could be called.

Public Accounts committee  Next, we have a meeting scheduled for a week from today with individuals who have involvement with the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation. I regret to inform you all that three have declined. They include the Right Honourable David Johnston, Mr. Edward Johnson and Mr. Mel Cappe. I'm looking for your instructions or direction on this, or comments on how we should proceed.

Public Accounts committee  The debate is on the amendment to the motion. Mr. Genuis did open the door with regard to the discussion on the Trudeau Foundation. Mrs. Shanahan addressed that at length. I would ask you to focus on the amendment to the motion, please. That is the discussion at hand here. Thank you.

Public Accounts committee  Your hand is still up, and I assume that was from before, but I want you to keep it up, because that question was directed to you. Just to clarify, we have a study already to look at the Trudeau Foundation, and this motion relates to documents. Mr. Desjarlais, if you do have a suggestion for a study or a subamendment to the amendment, I think members would be curious to hear that.

Public Accounts committee  I see it as being redundant, and I don't know how it gets us any further in terms of this committee's work. We did agree to two meetings to study the issue at hand, the Trudeau Foundation, and the Canada Revenue Agency was brought in. We've done a lot of work on that so far. I thought it was valuable to hear the position and concerns of the CRA. Perhaps opposition colleagues were not satisfied.

Public Accounts committee  Desjarlais, this is just to bring this debate back. When we last debated the motion to request some of the tax filings from the Trudeau Foundation, we had a discussion around it. After some time, members voted to end that debate, but the motion wasn't defeated. This motion is to merely bring it back to discuss it here.

Public Accounts committee  Madame Marie-Hélène Gaudreau moved: That the motion be amended by adding before the words “All documents related to any audit” the following: “And, as requested by the committee in its Report No. 27 asking the Canada Revenue Agency to investigate the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation,”. That would be the amendment, and we are resuming debate on the amendment.

Public Accounts committee  I would remind colleagues and those who are following this that the motion asked the Canada Revenue Agency to investigate the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation. The committee believes it's in the public interest to prioritize this investigation. It was on that basis. At the time, I supported the motion, because it is fitting for this committee, as items of interest come to our attention, that we can ask any agency—normally we deal with the Auditor General's office—to respectfully, in their role as an independent agency....

Public Accounts committee  For the second one, I'm just tabling this motion: That the committee resume consideration of the motion moved and adjourned at meeting number 64 on May 15, 2023, regarding documents from the Trudeau Foundation.

Public Accounts committee  I don't see how it would help to add to the motion that was originally put forward and supported by this side as well with respect to the Trudeau Foundation. If I recall the original motion, we set aside two meetings to look at the issue. I don't have that in front of me, Mr. Chair. If you look at the amount of time we've expended on the subject—I'll be kind and I won't say “wasted”—we are eating up valuable time here that, again, could have been used to look at a range of issues as a committee.

Public Accounts committee  When documents are tabled there, they are not automatically transferred to other committees. Everyone knows that Ms. Fournier, a former employee of the Pierre-Elliott-Trudeau Foundation, did not leave her position under the best of circumstances. We could get into an argument where it’s one person’s word against another’s, but, as my colleague said earlier, it’s really not the role of this committee to intervene in this kind of situation.

Public Accounts committee  At the last meeting, Madame Sinclair-Desgagné gave notice of the following motion: That the Committee request that the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics forward to the Committee all documents and correspondence received from Ms. Pascale Fournier, ex-President and CEO of the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation. Why don't I turn to you, Madame Sinclair-Desgagné? Would you like to address this? We can discuss it to see whether we can come to any consensus. Thank you.