SoVote

Context: House Hansard - 286 - Feb/27/24

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

Feb/27/24 12:30:33 p.m.
Watch

Although members may not agree on the facts, it is a point of debate, as I had ruled initially before I was challenged. I would ask members to please wait until it is time for questions and comments. I do not know if the hon. parliamentary secretary wants to finish his question. I know the hon. member for Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek is able to answer. There were a lot of individuals trying to speak while the hon. parliamentary secretary was asking his question. I know members making speeches are very capable of answering questions, and that is when the interjections should happen. There is another point of order by the hon. member for Provencher.

116 words

Mr. Ted Falk

Feb/27/24 12:31:19 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, on the same point of order, the member just admitted that it was a company that is similar to but not the same.

25 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

Feb/27/24 12:31:28 p.m.
Watch

Again, this is a point of debate. I would ask members to please quote the section on points of order they are referencing in order for us to ensure they are actual points of order. The hon. member for Calgary Centre is again rising on a point of order.

49 words

Mr. Greg McLean

Feb/27/24 12:31:45 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the point is that the member is misleading the House. If the company did not exist before—

20 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

Feb/27/24 12:31:54 p.m.
Watch

Again, it is a disagreement about the facts. It is not a point of order; it is a point of debate. The hon. parliamentary secretary can finish his question.

29 words

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux

Feb/27/24 12:32:10 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I would ask the member if she would agree to give me leave to table the document that shows the individuals involved here are the same individuals that were involved in numerous contracts that were issued under Stephen Harper. Will she agree to give me unanimous consent to table the document?

53 words

Mrs. Kelly Block

Feb/27/24 12:32:36 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the member well knows that requires the unanimous consent of everyone in this place. The fact that he is misleading the House is simply to cover up the fact that under the Liberal government outsourcing has absolutely skyrocketed, even though, in 2015, it campaigned on the promise of reducing the use of consultants. Spending on outsourcing has increased by almost 50% under the Liberal government.

67 words

Mr. Luc Thériault (Montcalm, BQ)

Feb/27/24 12:33:18 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the motion before us today, which was championed by the last Conservative member who spoke, states that the government should produce all the documents, all the reports, so that we can get to the bottom of this. We think it needs to go a step further. Would she not agree, given all the allegations of misconduct at the CBSA, that it should immediately be put under administrative supervision and that we should turn to an independent external investigation?

80 words

Mrs. Kelly Block

Feb/27/24 12:33:59 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is important to remember that the Auditor General stated in her report that this was the worst she had ever seen when it came to glaring mismanagement, the lack of documentation and, ultimately, undermining value for money for Canadians. I sat in on all the meetings on the study on ArriveCAN. It has been extremely difficult to get access to documents. This is something the Conservatives are committed to doing, which is why we have put forward this opposition day motion.

84 words

Mr. Randall Garrison (Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, NDP)

Feb/27/24 12:34:56 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I always enjoy when the Liberals and the Conservatives have a contest over who the worst managers in government are. It is quite ironic that the Conservatives are so focused on this one instance of misspending, when they were the government that brought in the Phoenix pay system. They estimated that would cost $310 million, and it has now cost more than $2.6 billion. My question to the member refers to something she said in her speech about how our confidence and supply agreement with the Liberals does not benefit working people. Does she not support the dental care plan that we started? Is she opposed to the pharmacare plan we just received agreement on? Does she oppose the anti-replacement worker legislation? Does she not think those programs benefit working people in this country?

138 words

Mrs. Kelly Block

Feb/27/24 12:35:42 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I have to believe that it smarts a little to know that one's value in this place has been bargained away simply to prop up the failed Liberal government. We want to talk about standing up for Canadians, rather than their hunger for power. They should be standing up for Canadians and supporting us in bringing accountability to this place when it comes to wasteful spending, which they continue to claim they oppose.

76 words

Mr. John Williamson (New Brunswick Southwest, CPC)

Feb/27/24 12:36:30 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, as chairman of the public accounts committee, I have the responsibility for coordinating the oversight of how federal programs and departments are managed by the Liberal government. Every day brings more evidence that the NDP-Liberal Prime Minister is just not up to the job. Since my appointment as chair two years ago, I have to admit that not a month has gone by without the committee examining evidence from Canada's Auditor General that demonstrates ongoing mismanagement of taxpayer dollars and the abdication of any responsibility by Liberal ministers to improve performance or outcomes. I can report that even the Auditor General is becoming exasperated with a government that promises to do better, while little changes in report after report. It is outrageous that taxpayers are being forced to bankroll the Liberal government's incompetence. The waste we discover is not an accident. It is the best the Liberals can do. On this side of the House, we believe that Canadians deserve better. Never has a federal government spent so much to achieve so little. After eight years, Canadians know that the Prime Minister is not worth the cost, the crime or the corruption, and he needs to be replaced. In contrast, Conservatives would axe the tax, build the homes, fix the budgets and stop the crime. Liberals call this a meaningless slogan, but it is our mission statement for a principled and accountable common-sense Conservative government. Each point speaks to a promise that would reverse the decline the Liberal government has brought to Canada, which has left millions of Canadians worried and worse off, sometimes desperately so. Today, the House of Commons is considering three important points, raised by the member for Carleton, concerning government spending and oversight. The leader of the official opposition, along with other Conservative members on this side of the House, wants to know how much the Liberal government spent on the ArriveCAN boondoggle, whether the responsible ministers will be held accountable for the budget failures, and whether the millions of wasted and unearned tax dollars will be returned to the Treasury. The Auditor General reported that ArriveCAN was originally projected to cost $80,000, but it ballooned to at least $60 million. That is 750 times the original price. The key words from the Auditor here are “at least” because, as our Auditor General, Ms. Hogan, said in her value for money audit, it is “impossible to determine the actual cost of the application.” For every MP and taxpayer to understand the severity of the mismanagement and waste, the Auditor General added, “This is probably some of the worst financial record-keeping that I’ve seen”. She also said, “Overall, this audit shows a glaring disregard for basic management and contracting practices throughout ArriveCAN’s development and implementation.” It was lacking basic management and proper record-keeping, and there was no ministerial or departmental oversight. In other words, it is a bloody financial train wreck. That is the result of investigation number one from the federal government's own Auditor General. The second investigation, done by the procurement ombudsman, revealed that, in a staggering 76% of ArriveCAN contracts, the contractor did not perform any work. I will note that that ombudsman will be at the public accounts committee this afternoon. We look forward to hearing about those findings and how taxpayers did not receive value for money. Apparently some contractors received money for no work. The investigation also revealed that a two-person company, GC Strategies, which did no IT work, was the only supplier in North America that could win some big government contracts because of bid rigging. This is from the ombudsman. We will go back to the Auditor General, who reported, “We found that GC Strategies was involved in the development of the requirements that the Canada Border Services Agency ultimately included in the request for proposal.” This finding has not been addressed enough. The Auditor General is saying that GC Strategies was at the table when departmental officials were setting up the contract terms, meaning that it not only had the inside advantage, but also wrote the rules. GC Strategies is a two-person consulting firm that does no IT work. It bids on federal government contracting schemes and then outsources the work to others. When GC successfully wins a bid, all it does is subcontract out that work to other contractors. There is little to no value in these arrangements, except for the owners, because the bidder charges and pockets a fat commission, of up to 30%. Since 2015, this two-person consulting firm has collected over $250 million from taxpayers, according to reports by La Presse newspaper. In 2022, consultants such as GC Strategies were awarded $17.7 billion in contracts while ordinary Canadians struggled to pay for groceries and heat their homes. Now, a third investigation has begun by the Information Commissioner into ArriveCAN. This one focuses on allegations of deleted emails by federal officials responsible for overseeing the ArriveCAN program. This is a concern the Auditor General has not dismissed and one that needs to be investigated. Then to wrap all of this up, this taxpayer-funded mess, the RCMP is investigating it all. I believe evidence was heard at the public accounts committee indicating that the police should expand its scope after testimony from officials that reinforced that contracts were fraudulently submitted by contractors, work was not done at the value the taxpayer expected and that this needed to be looked at for fraud. How did the ArriveCAN waste happen? Well, public servants did not follow the rules. A Liberal government that is not able to manage the bureaucracy or protect tax dollars was in place. Consultants swindled the system and, in some cases, broke the law. If we listen to testimony from public servants who appeared before the public accounts committee, there is a trend of excuses: “I wasn't there” and “I don't know what happened.” We heard that public servants did not sign off on these contracts and that their predecessors had either been moved to another department or are now retired. We also heard that they just did not know. No deputy minister has been fired, and no minister has been held accountable, yet bonuses were paid, which are bonuses for outsourcing work that the public service was responsible for doing in-house. Three years ago, Conservatives called on the Prime Minister to end ArriveCAN. Instead of listening to common sense, these Liberals went ahead and wasted tens of millions of dollars. In the Auditor General's report, it clearly shows that the majority of spending on the ArriveCAN happened after the 2021 election. The truth is, this is a scandal that could only happen under the Liberal government. For those who have been around this place long enough, and in many cases even longer, ArriveCAN combines the worst of two previous Liberal scandals: the ad scam and the long-gun registry. In the ad scam, tax money was paid to Liberal consultants without records for little or no work. Does that sound familiar? Nearly $1.2 billion in sponsorship and advertising contracts were received by government outsiders through sole-source contracts. Taxpayers would remember when former auditor general Sheila Fraser was unable to calculate the long-gun registry price tag because expenditures were not saved by the government. The filing cabinet was empty. At the time, she estimated the total cost at over $1 billion. Members will remember that, under a previous Liberal government, that program was supposed to cost $2 million, yet it was up, up and away, just like the arrive scam. In conclusion, I will go back to ArriveCan and the Auditor General's report, which reads, “In our view, flaws in the competitive processes to award further ArriveCAN contracts raised significant concerns that the process did not result in the best value for money.” That is the Auditor General saying that it was a financial train wreck, and it is another failure of this tired, wasteful Liberal government. Who on that side of the House is accountable for this waste? Who will be accountable to Canadians?

1383 words

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.)

Feb/27/24 12:46:33 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I want to go back to the question I asked the member's colleague. Many of my constituents want a better understanding of how the two same people were able to get themselves into a position where they could ultimately do what they did, with very questionable behaviour. It goes all the way back to when they were directors for Coredal; they actually received numerous contracts under the Conservatives. Would the member agree that, for this particular company, we should actually be looking at its origins and how it ultimately developed? To support that, would he agree that we should be tabling the document that clearly demonstrates the grants received by the company at that time?

118 words

Mr. John Williamson

Feb/27/24 12:47:33 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, next the member is going to be blaming youth crime on individuals who were born during the Harper era. This is a Liberal scandal. Liberals have had eight years to reform and manage the public service as they saw fit. Those questions need to be directed to the government. How was a company able to fleece taxpayers, under its watch, of nearly a quarter of a billion dollars? That is a question for you. If you cannot ask it, voters will get you out of the way.

89 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

Feb/27/24 12:48:12 p.m.
Watch

I assume the hon. member was not addressing that directly to me; he should ask his questions through me. Questions and comments, the hon. member for Montcalm.

27 words

Mr. Luc Thériault (Montcalm, BQ)

Feb/27/24 12:48:24 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the leader of the Bloc Québécois has called for an independent public inquiry. He called for the money to be returned and for the CBSA to be placed under administrative supervision. He has said that right from the start. My colleague, quite rightly, tells us that this is an outrageous scandal. We are going to vote in favour of the motion. On the other hand, if, even before the Auditor General's report came out, the Conservatives knew that there was a problematic sum of $12 million in the supplementary estimates (C), 2021-22, which were voted on in March 2022, why did they not ask for a separate vote? Why did they not object to us voting on the whole thing as a group? Why did they not voice their concern right away?

140 words

Mr. John Williamson

Feb/27/24 12:49:22 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, again, a few days ago, the Conservative leader mentioned that the Bloc and the NDP voted with the federal government to support ArriveCAN. Mr. Luc Thériault: Why did you not denounce it? Mr. John Williamson: For three years now, we have been saying—

48 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

Feb/27/24 12:49:45 p.m.
Watch

I would ask the people who asked the question to wait for the appropriate time if they want to ask another question, to give the hon. member the chance to answer the question without having a debate directly between members of the House. The hon. member.

46 words

Mr. John Williamson

Feb/27/24 12:50:10 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I said myself three years ago that we needed to put an end to ArriveCAN and that it did not make sense. Now we are seeing that it was very costly. It is not up to me to explain how the Bloc Québécois, the NPD or the Liberal Party votes. We are going to ask why they voted to support this program.

68 words

Mr. Randall Garrison (Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, NDP)

Feb/27/24 12:50:40 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the member is the chair of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts. Does the committee have any plans to investigate accountability for the Phoenix pay system? It was planned by the Conservatives to cost $310 million and now has cost more than $2.6 billion, with more than 200,000 public servants still facing problems with their pay. Is the committee going to investigate that Conservative boondoggle?

69 words