Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to rise to table a petition signed by 212 people. Do members know that volunteer firefighters account for 71% of Canada's total firefighting essential first responders? Firefighters and the petitioners are calling on the Government of Canada to support Bill C-310 to increase the amount of tax credits available for volunteer firefighters and search and rescue volunteers from $3,000 to $10,000 per year. I want to take this opportunity to recognize all of the volunteer firefighters who serve the community of Mégantic-L’Érable and the entire country.

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise to present a petition from nearly 10,000 folks from across the country. The petitioners note that it was back in 1949 that the UN Relief and Works Agency, or UNRWA, was established to carry out direct relief and works programs for Palestinian refugees. They note that UNRWA is the primary provider of humanitarian aid in Gaza, providing food, social services, health care, schools and refugee camps, sustaining the lives of millions of civilians, more than half of whom are kids, in the Palestinian territory of Gaza, which has been blockaded by Israel since 2007. The petitioners go on to note that South Africa submitted an application to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in the Gaza Strip and the case of South Africa v. Israel to the International Court of Justice, or the ICJ. After considering both applications and oral arguments, the court concluded that genocide was plausible. In its January 26 order, the ICJ cited UNRWA statements documenting dire conditions in the Gaza Strip before introducing its fourth provisional measure, which is, as the petitioners quote, “Israel must take immediate and effective measures to enable the provision of urgently needed basic services and humanitarian assistance to address the adverse conditions of life faced by Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.” Finally, they note that Israel levelled allegations against a dozen UNRWA employees, after which Canada paused humanitarian funding committed to UNRWA without an investigation. The petitioners, citizens and residents of Canada call upon the Government of Canada to live up to its obligations under the genocide convention to prevent the catastrophic humanitarian situation in the Gaza Strip from deteriorating further before the court renders its final decision. The petitioners call on two specific actions. The first is for Canada to reinstate UNRWA funding, which, in the time since this petition was out in the public, has already been done. Second, the petitioners advocate for other countries to do the same and for Canada to call on other countries to do the same.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to present a petition brought forward by Canadians who see the unjust war Vladimir Putin is waging on Ukraine and want the Government of Canada to act, including by way of providing direct military assistance and further lethal weapons and supplies to the defence of Ukraine. That is why Conservatives have called on the Liberal government to donate all discontinued surplus CRV7 rockets to Ukraine. These rockets were specifically requested by the Government of Ukraine, and Canada has 83,000 of them to set for disposal. The cost of disposal is estimated at $30 million, but the cost for shipment to Ukraine is approximately $5 million. This donation would not only be the right thing to do, but also the most cost-effective thing to do. The Conservatives have and always will support Ukraine. We stand with it in its efforts to rebuild its economy and defend itself from Russia's illegal invasion.

Mr. Speaker, the second petition I rise to present is signed by residents facing rising prices of gas, groceries and home heating. The Liberal carbon tax has made it much harder to make ends meet. On April 1, the Prime Minister's carbon tax went up again, this time by 23%. This inflationary carbon tax means that a family of four will have to pay $700 more for groceries in 2024. Conservatives know that people are hurting. People are being forced to choose between filling up their car, heating their home and feeding their family. I join with these petitioners in calling on the Prime Minister to immediately eliminate the carbon tax from home heating, and better yet, axe the tax altogether.

Mr. Speaker, it is my honour to present a petition signed by Canadians calling upon the Government of Canada to support Bill C-310, which would increase the tax credit for volunteer firefighters and search and rescue volunteers from $3,000 a year to $10,000 a year. Seventy-one per cent of firefighting first responders in this country are volunteers. Those volunteers were our first line of defence in my home province of Nova Scotia last year as we faced the worst wildfire season in our recorded history. Indeed, all across Canada, volunteer firefighters put their lives on the line to protect our communities. Boosting this tax credit would not only ensure that they are properly compensated for their essential roles, but also improve recruitment and retention at a time when our fire departments are struggling to maintain the number of volunteer firefighters. Importantly, the petitioners also note that, in a moment when affordability is a top concern for many Canadians, this tax credit would allow these volunteer firefighters to keep more of their hard-earned income, which often goes back into their communities.

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to present a petition on behalf of constituents. I rise for the 34th time on behalf of the people of Swan River, Manitoba, to present a petition on the rising rate of crime. The community of Swan River is struggling with extreme levels of crime because of the Liberal government's soft-on-crime laws, such as Bill C-75. The people of Swan River are upset that jail is a revolving door for repeat offenders as Bill C-75 allows violent offenders to be in jail in the morning and back on the street the same day. Manitoba West district RCMP has reported that just 15 individuals were responsible for 1,184 calls for service. The people of Swan River are calling for jail, not bail, for violent repeat offenders. The people of Swan River demand that the Liberal government repeal its soft-on-crime policies, which directly threaten their livelihoods and their community. I support the good people of Swan River.

Mr. Speaker, it is a real pleasure to stand up today to present a petition. The petition I am presenting today comes from Canadians from across the country who are concerned about the consent and age verification of those depicted in pornographic material. The petitioners are asking the government to follow recommendation 2 of the 2021 Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics report on MindGeek, which would require all content hosting platforms to verify age prior to uploading content. Bill C-270, the stopping Internet sexual exploitation act, would add two offences to the Criminal Code. The first requires age verification and consent prior to distribution. The second requires removal of that material if the consent withdrawn. The petitioners are calling on the House of Commons to pass Bill C-270.

Madam Speaker, the following questions will be answered today: Nos. 2280, 2282, 2283, 2289, 2291, 2293, 2294, 2297, 2300, 2304, 2306 to 2308, 2310, 2311, 2313, 2317, 2318, 2322, 2323, 2325, 2326, 2328 to 2330, 2332, 2336, 2337, 2339, 2340, 2344 and 2354.

With regard to the mandate and responsibilities of the Grocery Task Force, broken down by month since its inception: (a) what is the total number of investigations initiated by the Grocery Task Force into practices that hurt consumers; (b) of the investigations in (a), how many investigations concluded that consumers were being harmed; and (c) what are the details of all investigations into practices that hurt consumers that have been initiated by the Task Force in (a), including, the (i) name of the grocer being investigated, (ii) conduct being investigated, (iii) date that the investigation began, (iv) date that the investigation concluded? With regard to the March 31, 2023 announcement by the Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry that the government secured legally binding commitments from Rogers and Vidéotron: (a) what is the current status of each commitment; (b) for each commitment that has been completed, on what date was the government notified of its completion; (c) for each commitment that has not yet been completed, by what date does the government expect it to be completed; and (d) for each of the job creation commitments included in the announcement, how many jobs have been created to date? With regard to evictions data collected by the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, since January 1, 2006: how many evictions occurred in Canada, broken down by province or territory and by year? With regard to the government's COVID-19 vaccine mandates: since August 13, 2021, how many people were denied Employment Insurance benefits for the sole reason of their COVID-19 vaccine status? With regard to the Housing Accelerator Fund and the decision to not fund the city of Windsor, Ontario (Ontario’s application), due to the decision to not change their zoning bylaws to include four units on any residential property as-of-right: (a) did the Government of Canada refuse all applications from municipalities that presented alternative plans which included allowing a minimum of four units on other properties not currently listed as-of-right; (b) how many, and which municipalities were denied funding due to not changing their current zoning requirements to permit four units on any residential property as-of-right; (c) what consultations, and with whom, took place to create a different density planning formula than the one established in Ontario which permits threeplexes; (d) what studies or evaluations were done to determine that the city of Windsor required a density increase to fourplexes to use these funds; (e) without the change to fourplexes, would the city of Windsor have been able to use the funds if approved in terms of places available to build; and (f) was consideration given to municipalities based on statistics of poverty, gender-led households, race, ethnicity, first nations and children per household? With regard to access to abortion care funded under the Canada Health Act, broken down by province or territory from 2015 to present: (a) how many hospitals provide safe abortion care services funded by the federal government; (b) how many clinics provide safe abortion care services funded by the federal government; (c) which municipalities with a population of 50,000 or more (i) did not have access to a hospital or clinic offering safe abortion care services funded by the federal government within 100 kilometers driving distance, (ii) did not have a hospital or clinic offering safe abortion care services funded by the federal government accessible by public transportation; and (d) which municipalities with a population under 50,000 (i) did not have access to a hospital or clinic offering safe abortion care services funded by the federal government within 100 kilometers driving distance, (ii) did not have a hospital or clinic offering safe abortion care services funded by the federal government accessible by public transportation? With regard to funding included in the National Action Plan to End Gender-Based Violence, broken down by province or territory since the program was initiated: (a) how much of the allocated $539.3 million in funding has been committed to date; (b) how much of the allocated $539.3 million in funding has been spent to date; (c) which organizations have received funding from this program; (d) how much funding has each program recipient received; and (e) how many women or girls have been recipients of programs, services or actions associated with this National Action Plan, broken down by those (i) who identify as Indigenous, (ii) who identify as Black or racialized, (iii) who are immigrants or refugees, (iv) who are Two-Spirit, Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, Intersex, plus people (2SLGBTQI+), (v) with disabilities, (vi) living in northern, rural, and remote communities? With regard to inmates in facilities operated by the Correctional Service of Canada: (a) how many inmates are currently on an opiates reduction program such as suboxone or methadone; and (b) of the inmates in (a), how many are also concurrently accessing the needle exchange program? With regard to the government's approval of COVID-19 vaccines: what are the details of all research, studies, and data that the government used as a basis for its claim that the vaccines were safe and effective? With regard to statistics held by the government: what was the number of persons employed as child care workers in (i) 2022, (ii) 2023? With regard to government information about the two Canadian Hells Angels named in an indictment in the United States: did the U.S. government notify the Canadian government of these two Canadians before the indictment was unsealed? With regard to Global Affairs Canada's (GAC) reaction to two Canadian Hells Angels named in an indictment in the United States related to a plot to kill an Iranian defector: (a) did GAC request of Italy, which is Canada's protecting power in Iran, to make representations to Iran regarding this matter; (b) if the answer to (a) is affirmative, what specific message was delivered and on what date; and (c) if the answer to (a) is negative, why was no request made of Italy? With regard to the Department of National Defence issuing a posting for two journalists to engage in "role playing services" to prepare its spokespeople for challenging media questions: (a) what is the pay associated with such postings; (b) who authorized the decision to spend money on role playing services; and (c) why was the money in (a) not spent on investments in the Canadian Armed Forces? With regard to Parks Canada and the eradication of deer on Sidney Island: (a) were other lower-cost options to hunt and kill the invasive deer studied or considered prior to the implementation of phase one, including, but not limited to, allowing local hunters to hunt the deer for free; (b) for each option in (a), what is the reason that it was rejected; (c) what options did Parks Canada study or consider for the implementation of phase two of the deer eradication; (d) for each option in (c), what was the estimated cost and why was each option accepted or rejected; and (e) once all phases of the eradication are fully implemented, what does Parks Canada estimate to be the cost per invasive deer killed? With regard to the government's Medical Expense Tax Credit, broken down by year since 2016: (a) how many individuals filed medical expenses for gluten-free products; (b) what was the total value of tax credits claimed for gluten-free food products; (c) what is the breakdown of the individuals who claimed medical expenses for gluten-free products by income level; (d) how many audits were conducted on individuals claiming gluten-free products as a medical expense; (e) what is the administrative cost to administer this tax credit; and (f) how many employees or full-time equivalents are assigned to administer this tax credit? With regard to the $256 million committed over five years in budget 2022 to the Fighting and Managing Wildfires in a Changing Climate program: how much of this commitment has been spent to date, in total, and broken down by specific investment? With regard to the processing of requests made under the Access to Information Act and the Privacy Act (ATIP) by Parks Canada since January 2015: (a) how many requests have been received each year; (b) what is the average response time each year; (c) what was the shortest processing time each year; (d) what is the longest processing time each year; (e) how many hours of work were allocated to process ATIP requests broken down by year; (f) how many contracts for services have been issued to process ATIP requests, broken down by year; (g) what are the details of each contract in (f), including, for each, the (i) date, (ii) vendor, (iii) value, (iv) number of ATIP requests processed related to the contract; (h) how many complaints has Parks Canada received via the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada and the Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada regarding ATIP requests each year; (i) what tool does Parks Canada currently use for records management; (j) what is the amount of records held by Parks Canada that remain undigitized, including the quantity of records in total, broken down by year of record; and (k) what are the details of any specific investments, if any, that Parks Canada has undertaken to increase compliance with the Access to Information Act and Privacy Act regarding requests, including, the date, financial value, and description of each investment? With regard to information on project applications subject to Inefficient Fossil Fuels Subsidies Guidelines held by the government: (a) how many applications have been submitted; (b) how many applications are being reviewed; (c) how many applications have been (i) approved, (ii) rejected, (iii) delayed; and (d) for each application in (a), (i) when was the application received, (ii) what are the details of each project, (iii) what is the estimated completion date? With regard to Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC): (a) has IRCC outsourced the processing or review of any case files to the private industry in the past five years; (b) if the answer to (a) is affirmative, (i) what is the total amount spent on such outsourcing, broken down by year, (ii) how many case files were outsourced, broken down by year; (c) what are the details of all contracts related to such outsourcing since 2019, including, for each, the (i) date, (ii) vendor, (iii) value or amount, (iv) number of files outsourced to the vendor, (v) manner in which the contract was awarded (i.e. sole-sourced or competitive bid); (d) what is the rationale for outsourcing such files; and (e) what specific security measures, if any, are in place to ensure that applicants whose files are outsourced have their information protected? With regard to the Canada Housing Benefit, broken down by federal electoral district since the program's inception: (a) what is the total number of applications (i) received, (ii) approved; (b) what is the total dollar value of payments delivered to eligible applicants; (c) how many children, in total, have been helped by the program; and (d) how many seniors, in total, have been helped by the program? With regard to the data security breach at Global Affairs Canada (GAC) which was reported around the end of January 2024: (a) how many users' information was impacted, in total and broken down by (i) GAC employees, (ii) government employees outside of GAC, (iii) the general public, (iv) diplomats from other countries; (b) on what date did GAC become aware of the data breach; (c) on what date were the impacted users informed of the breach; (d) if impacted users were not informed, why were they not informed; (e) for impacted users, what types of information were breached; (f) did the data breach only impact users who accessed the GAC-operated Secure Integrated Global Network (SIGNET) between December 30, 2023, and January 24, 2024, and, if not, what other users, time periods or networks were impacted; (g) what action, if any, did GAC take to prevent data security breaches in response to the December 2022 announcement by the United States Secret Service that entities working on behalf of the government of the People's Republic of China, including APT41, were hacking and conducting espionage; (h) is the actor(s) responsible for the data breach a state or non-state actor(s); and (i) what is the name of the actor(s) responsible for the data breach? With regard to Employment and Social Development Canada’s Skills for Success Program: Training and Tools stream for 2023: (a) with regard to the unallocated funds, how have they been used or how will they be used; (b) why have no Quebec organizations received any funds; (c) do the grants awarded allow for translation of the tools into French to ensure their accessibility; (d) why was the treatment of submitted proposals repeatedly postponed in the fall-winter 2022-2023 and spring-summer 2023 before being rejected last July; and (e) why is the CREMA proposal on a "waiting list" while $209 million have not yet been spent? With regard to Health Canada’s approval of mRNA vaccine products: (a) can Health Canada definitively exclude the possibility that undesirable effects to human cells and tissues (e.g. cell proliferation, toxicity) may be caused by conceivable mechanisms of action, such as (i) the creation of aberrant proteins by means of ribosomal frameshifting, (ii) the concomitant injection of residual DNA plasmid fragments, which, according to Speicher et al., are known to exceed by 188 to 509 fold the guideline limits for residual DNA that the United States Food and Drug Administration and the World Health Organization set at 10 ng/dose when measured by fluorometry, and the subsequent transfection of these fragments into the cell’s nucleus with the help of the lipid nanoparticles (LNPs), (iii) the concomitant injection of other contaminants such as double-stranded RNA or fragmented RNA, (iv) the presence of abnormally high levels of IgG4 antibodies due to repeated vaccination, (v) the concomitant injection of bacterial endotoxins previously detected in Pfizer and Moderna vials, which may also be transfected via LNPs, (vi) the potential for reverse transcriptase of mRNA into DNA, (vii) the presence of SV40 promoter/enhancer DNA as an additional contaminant that could transfect the cell and integrate into the genome, (viii) the LNP-facilitated entry of mRNA and spike protein across the blood-brain barrier, across the placenta, into breast milk, and into organs and tissues, particularly of the heart, bone marrow and brain; (b) when considering the mechanisms of action in (a), can Health Canada definitively exclude the possibility that any combination of two or more of these mechanisms may cause undesirable effects of cell proliferation or toxicity; (c) has Health Canada completed a risk-benefit assessment in relation to (i) each of these singular mechanisms of action, (ii) the combination of any of the mechanisms listed in (a); (d) if the answer to (c) is affirmative, what is the risk-benefit assessment; (e) if the answer to (c) is negative, why has Health Canada not completed a risk-benefit assessment; and (f) did Health Canada set new safety limits for levels of residual DNA in the presence of a lipid nanoparticle delivery system in an mRNA vaccine product? With regard to the Canada-wide Early Learning and Child Care program: (a) how much does it cost the government to administer the program annually, in total and broken down by province or territory; and (b) how many employees or full-time equivalents are assigned to work related to the administration of the program, in total and broken down by province or territory whose program's administration the employee is assigned to? With regard to what the Minister of Finance and officials in the Department of Finance knew about the allegations contained in a February 6, 2024, report from Sam Cooper that, since 2015, more than 10 Toronto-area branches of the Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation (HSBC) had issued at least $500 million in home loans to diaspora buyers claiming exaggerated incomes or non-existent jobs outside of Canada: (a) were the minister and Department of Finance officials aware of these allegations prior to approving the acquisition of the HSBC by the Royal Bank of Canada in December 2023, and, if so, what impact did these allegations have on the approval decision; (b) was the government aware that these fraudulently obtained mortgages facilitated a large money laundering operation, and, if so, when did it become aware; and (c) what action, if any, is the government taking in response to these allegations? With regard to Correctional Service Canada (CSC), in total and broken down by year since 2016: (a) how many federally incarcerated inmates have sought a medically assisted death; (b) how many federally incarcerated inmates have been granted a medically assisted death; (c) what is the breakdown of inmates in (a) and (b) by (i) dangerous offenders, (ii) high-profile offenders, (iii) multiple murderers; (d) of the inmates in (b), for how many was a natural death (i) reasonably foreseeable, (ii) not reasonably foreseeable; (e) what is the breakdown of inmates in (b) by (i) those who received a medically assisted death inside a prison or CSC facility, (ii) those who died in a hospital or other similar location; and (f) of those who received a medically assisted death within a CSC facility, what is the breakdown by (i) location, (ii) name of facility? With regard to the increase to the government's tax on alcohol scheduled for April 1, 2024: (a) how much revenue is the government projected to receive from the tax on alcohol in the 2024-25 fiscal year; and (b) how much additional revenue is the government projected to receive in the 2024-25 fiscal year as a result of the April 1, 2024, tax increase on alcohol? With regard to patrols on land by Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) employees in the area of southwest Nova Scotia: (a) how many DFO employees are conducting regular patrols on land in (i) Queens County, (ii) Lunenburg County, (iii) Kings County, (iv) Annapolis County, (v) Digby County, (vi) Yarmouth County, (vii) Halifax County, (viii) Hants County; (b) what are the hours, including standby hours, worked by the employees in (a), from 00:00 to 23:59; and (c) what is the Conservation and Protection Detachment responsible for each of the counties in (a)? With regard to the finding of the Auditor General that the government's ArriveCAN application mistakenly told 10,000 people that they needed to quarantine in June 2022: (a) what compensation or recourse has the government made available to these 10,000 people; and (b) which minister has taken responsibility for this mistake? With regard to federal investments in Canada’s grocery sector since January 1, 2006: how much federal funding has been provided to (i) Loblaws, (ii) Metro, (iii) Walmart, (iv) Sobeys, (v) Costco, broken down by company, year, and type of funding? With regard to properties owned and operated by government departments or agencies: what is the inventory of government buildings and properties (i) within the municipality of Crossfield, Alberta, (ii) within the municipality of Airdrie, Alberta, (iii) within the municipality of Cochrane, Alberta, (iv) within the municipality of Canmore, Alberta, (v) within the municipality of Banff, Alberta, (vi) within the electoral district of Banff-Airdrie that are not included in the aforementioned municipalities? With regard to the government’s funding of the $34 million Sault Smart Grid: (a) what was the process by which the government made the decision to invest in this project; (b) what internal policy analyses were done on the project, and what were the results of those analyses; (c) were any privacy and security risks identified for this project; (d) if the answer to (c) is affirmative, what are those risks; (e) were any consultations done by the government before approving the project, and, if so, who was consulted and what feedback was received; (f) if the answer to (e) is negative, why not; (g) what conditions are attached to this funding; (h) how will the funding be disbursed; (i) are there reporting requirements as part of the funding agreement, and, if so, what are the details of those requirements; (j) is the government aware of any public consultations that Sault Ste. Marie has undertaken with the community on this project; (k) if the answer to (j) is affirmative, what concerns, if any, is the government aware of that were raised by community members, including (i) data privacy concerns, (ii) security concerns, (iii) cost concerns; (l) has the government done an internal analysis of the costs and benefits of automated meter information technology, and, if so, what are the results of that analysis; and (m) what efforts has the government made to ensure Sault Ste. Marie will (i) protect the system’s security, (ii) ensure redundancy, (iii) protect privacy?

Madam Speaker, furthermore, if a revised response to Questions No. 1589, originally tabled on September 18, 2023, Question No. 2002, originally tabled on January 29, 2024, Question No. 2261, originally tabled on March 20, 2024, and the government's responses to Questions Nos. 2279, 2281, 2284 to 2288, 2290, 2292, 2295, 2296, 2298, 2299, 2301 to 2303, 2305, 2309, 2312, 2314 to 2316, 2319 to 2321, 2324, 2327, 2331, 2333 to 2335, 2338, 2341 to 2343, 2345, 2346, 2351 to 2353, and 2355 could be made orders for returns, these returns would be tabled in an electronic format immediately.

With regard to the New Horizons for Seniors Program (NHSP): (a) how many project applications were submitted in each province for the last three calls for community project proposals, broken down by constituency; (b) how many of the projects in (a) received a grant or contribution, broken down by constituency; (c) what calculation formulas are used to allocate grants and contributions by province when calls for project proposals are made; (d) according to the memorandum of understanding, what are the details of the collaboration between the Government of Canada and the Government of Quebec for the implementation of the NHSP; and (e) who sits on the selection committee established by the memorandum of understanding in (d)? With regard to government contracts signed with GCstrategies since November 4, 2015, and broken down by department, agency, Crown corporation, or other government entity: (a) what are the details of all such contracts, including, for each, the (i) date signed, (ii) value, (iii) start and end date of the work, (iv) detailed description of the goods or services, (v) details on how the contract was awarded (sole-sourced, competitive bid), (vi) titles of officials who approved or signed off on the contract; and (b) for each contract in (a), what is the current status, including if any aspects of the contract remain open, or if the contract has been completed and settled? With regard to bonuses for executives at the Correctional Service of Canada (CSC), broken down by year since 2020: how many and what percentage of executives got bonuses (i) in total, (ii) broken down by province, (iii) broken down by correctional institution or other place of employment (i.e. CSC head offices)? With regard to the mandate and responsibilities of the Grocery Task Force, broken down by month since its inception: (a) what are the details of all engagements with governments and consumer advocacy stakeholders, including the (i) date of the engagement, (ii) purpose of the engagement, (iii) name of the organization or government being engaged, (iv) activities being coordinated; (b) what are the details of all engagements with external partners, experts, and industry representatives to undertake analysis, including the (i) date of the engagement, (ii) purpose of the engagement, (iii) partner, expert, or representative being engaged; (c) what work has been done with consumer groups to report findings to Canadians, including the (i) date that work was initiated, (ii) consumer group with which work was done, (iii) details of the findings that resulted in work, (iv) date on which those findings were reported to Canadians; and (d) what grocery-related information has the task force shared with Canadians to help them make informed marketplace choices? With regard to vehicles owned by Parks Canada: (a) how many vehicles does Parks Canada own, in total and broken down by National Park, Historic Site or other location where the vehicle is based out of; and (b) of the vehicles in (a), how many are electric vehicles, in total and broken down by National Park, Historic Site or other location where the vehicle is based out of? With regard to federal childcare investments, since October 1, 2021: (a) how many new childcare spaces have been built as a result of federal funding, broken down by province or territory, and by year; and (b) how many early childhood educators have been trained or hired as a result of federal funding, broken down by province or territory, and by year? With regard to federal investments to private sector pharmaceutical companies, since January 1, 2006: how much federal funding has been provided, broken down by company and by year? With regard to the Port of Montreal, broken down by year, since 2019: (a) how many stolen vehicles does the government estimate have arrived at or passed through the port; and (b) of the stolen vehicles in (a), how many did the (i) Port of Montreal, (ii) RCMP, (iii) Canada Border Services Agency, seize before they were transported aboard? With regard to the government's purchase of COVID-19 vaccines, beginning January 1, 2020: (a) which companies did the government purchase the vaccines from; (b) for each company in (a), (i) how many vaccines were purchased, in total and broken down by type of vaccine, (ii) how much was each company paid by the government for each order placed, (iii) where is each company headquartered, (iv) in what city and country did each company manufacture the vaccines; and (c) what is the breakdown of each vaccine purchased and how many were (i) distributed domestically, (ii) distributed internationally, broken down by country, (iii) not used or destroyed due to expiration or other factors? With regard to the government's purchase of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic, beginning January 1, 2020: (a) which companies did the government purchase PPE from; and (b) for each company in (a), (i) how much equipment was purchased, in total and broken down by type of PPE, (ii) how much was each company paid by the government for the equipment, (iii) where is each company headquartered, (iv) in what city and country did each company manufacture the PPE? With regard to the government's purchase of COVID-19 rapid tests, since January 1, 2020: (a) which specific companies did the government purchase these tests from; (b) how many tests did the government purchase from each company; (c) how much was each company paid by the government for the tests; (d) where is each of the companies in (a) headquartered; and (e) in what city and country did each company manufacture the COVID-19 rapid tests? With regard to the sales and transfers of military equipment and weapons from Canada to Israel and in light of the International Court of Justice determination that Israel is carrying out a plausible genocide in Gaza and has issued several orders to Israel: (a) what military equipment and weapons has the government of Canada sent or approved to be sent to Israel since October 7, 2023; (b) what military equipment and weapons has the government of Canada sent or approved to be sent to Israel since January 26, 2024; (c) what military equipment and weapons has the government of Canada rejected sending to Israel since October 7, 2023; (d) what military equipment and weapons has the government of Canada rejected sending to Israel since January 26, 2024; (e) what surveillance equipment has the government of Canada sent or approved to be sent to Israel since October 7, 2023; (f) what surveillance equipment has the government of Canada sent or approved to be sent to Israel since January 26, 2024; (g) what surveillance equipment has the government of Canada rejected sending to Israel since October 7, 2023; (h) what surveillance equipment has the government of Canada rejected sending to Israel since January 26, 2024; (i) what is the monetary value of the military equipment and weapons the government of Canada has sent to Israel since October 7, 2023; (j) what is the monetary value of the surveillance equipment the government of Canada has sent to Israel since October 7, 2023; (k) what is the monetary value of the surveillance equipment, military equipment and weapons the government of Canada sent to Israel in 2021, 2022, and 2023; (l) what surveillance equipment, military equipment and weapons the government of Canada sent to Israel in 2021, 2022, and 2023; (m) as a signatory to the Genocide Convention, has the government of Canada taken legal advice to comply with the orders that the International Court of Justice has issued to Israel and to ensure the government of Canada does not contravene them; and (n) what plan, if any, does the Government of Canada have to comply with the orders of the International Court of Justice? With regard to Reaching Home: Canada's Homelessness Strategy, broken down by province and territory from its inception in 2019 to present: (a) how much of the funding allocated to the program has been committed to date, broken down by its four funding streams, the (i) Designated Communities stream, (ii) Rural and Remote Homelessness stream, (iii) Territorial Homelessness stream, (iv) Indigenous Homelessness stream; (b) how much of the allocated funding has been spent to date, broken down by its four funding streams, the (i) Designated Communities stream, (ii) Rural and Remote Homelessness stream, (iii) Territorial Homelessness stream, (iv) Indigenous Homelessness stream; (c) how many people have been recipients of programs or services associated with Reaching Home, broken down by (i) gender, (ii) status as Indigenous, (iii) those self-identified as Black or racialized, (iv) status as immigrant or refugee (v) those self-identified as Two-Spirit, Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, Intersex, plus (2SLGBTQI+), (vi) those living with a disability, (vii) those living with a substance use disorder, (viii) those living with unmet mental health needs? With regard to childcare workers spanning from 2017 to present, broken down by province and territory: (a) what was the total number of childcare workers, broken down by (i) self-identified gender, (ii) self-identified racial background, (iii) self-identified status as Indigenous, (iv) status as immigrant or refugee, (v) self-identified Two-Spirit, Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, Intersex, plus (2SLGBTQI+), (vi) self-identified as living with a disability, (vii) resided in an urban region, (viii) resided in a Northern, rural, or remote region, (ix) income tax bracket, (x) education level; (b) what was the median income of childcare workers, broken down by (i) self-identified gender, (ii) self-identified racial background, (iii) self-identified status as Indigenous, (iv) status as immigrant or refugee, (v) self-identified 2SLGBTQI+, (vi) self-identified as living with a disability, (vii) resided in an urban region, (viii) resided in a Northern, rural, or remote region, (ix) education level; and (c) what job-related benefits were childcare workers entitled to, broken down by (i) self-identified gender, (ii) self-identified racial background, (iii) self-identified status as Indigenous, (iv) status as immigrant or refugee, (v) self-identified 2SLGBTQI+, (vi) self-identified as living with a disability, (vii) resided in an urban region, (viii) resided in a Northern, rural, or remote region, (ix) education level? With regard to the enactment of the Emergencies Act by the government in 2022: (a) what was the cost burden for the government, broken down by federal department and agency, including (i) actuarial costs, (ii) equipment costs, (iii) skilled labour costs (e.g. judges, police officers), (iv) other costs broken down by type; and (b) what is the total value of costs that were disbursed to other levels of government, broken down by (i) province, (ii) municipality? With regard to government advertising on social media to promote COVID-19 vaccines: (a) what was the amount spent on such social media advertising, in total, and broken down by year since 2020; and (b) what is the breakdown of (a) by type of spending (graphic design, celebrity endorsement fee, ad placement) and by social media platform? With regard to the government's requirement during the COVID-19 pandemic that federal public servants provide proof of vaccination: (a) what are the total expenditures on compensation, severance packages and settlements to employees who were impacted by the requirement, including, but not limited to, payments made to mediators, agents, lawyers, or for legal proceedings; (b) how many employees received payments mentioned in (a); and (c) what is the breakdown of (a) and (b) by reason for the payment and how the amount was arrived at (negotiated settlement, legal proceedings, etc.)? With regard to the government's rebranding of the carbon tax: (a) which consulting, polling or research firms is the government using services or data from, in relation to the rebranding; (b) what are the details of all contracts related to the rebranding, including, for each, the (i) date, (ii) value, (iii) vendor, (iv) description of goods or services, (v) manner in which the contract was awarded (sole-sourced or competitive bid); and (c) on what date did the government begin conducting research on the rebranding of its carbon tax? With regard to the government's claim that 97% of fuel used on farms is exempt from the carbon tax: (a) how did the government come up with that figure; and (b) what specific data was used, and what assumptions were made by the government in arriving at that figure? With regard to the 2 Billion Trees Commitment, broken down by province or territory since its inception: (a) what is the total amount of funding allocated to the (i) cost-sharing agreements with provinces and territories, (ii) Private Lands stream, (iii) Urban Lands stream, (iv) Federal Lands stream, (v) distinctions based Indigenous stream; (b) for the funding identified in (a), what amount of funding has been delivered to provinces, territories, or organizations; and (c) what is the total amount of funding that is on hold or remains undelivered as part of this program? With regard to the federal government's commitment to resettle 15,000 refugees in Canada following the renegotiation of the Safe Third Country Agreement: (a) what is the breakdown by country of origin; (b) what is the breakdown by country of citizenship; (c) what is the breakdown by demographics of the claimants by (i) age, (ii) sex or gender; and (d) how many claims were (i) accepted, (ii) refused, (iii) still awaiting a decision? With regard to the $285 million committed over five years to the Wildfire Resilient Futures Initiative: how much of this commitment has been spent to date, in total, and broken down by specific investments? With regard to the Apartment Construction Loan Program and its precursor the Rental Construction Financing Initiative, broken down by year, by province or territory, and by type of end user (market housing developer, non-profit housing developer, municipality), between fiscal years 2017-18 and 2027-28: (a) how much funding has been allocated to the program; (b) how much funding has been committed; (c) how much funding has been transferred to the recipients; (d) how many units have been constructed or are expected to be constructed; and (e) how much has the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation spent, or is it projected to spend, administering the program? With regard to the Affordable Housing Fund, and its precursor, the National Housing Co-Investment Fund, broken down by year, by province or territory, and by type of end user (market housing developer, non-profit housing developer, municipality), between fiscal years 2017-18 and 2027-28: (a) how much funding has been allocated to the program; (b) how much funding has been committed; (c) how much funding has been transferred to the recipients; (d) how many units have been constructed or are expected to be constructed; and (e) how much has Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation spent, or is it projected to spend, administering the program? With regard to the Rapid Housing Initiative, including Rounds 1, 2, and 3, broken down by year, by province or territory, and by type of end user (market housing developer, non-profit housing developer, municipality), between fiscal years 2017-18 and 2027-28: (a) how much funding has been allocated to the program; (b) how much funding has been committed; (c) how much funding has been transferred to the recipients; (d) how many units have been constructed or are expected to be constructed; and (e) how much has the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation spent, or is it projected to spend, administering the program? With regard to the Housing Accelerator Fund, broken down by year, by province or territory, and by type of end user (market housing developer, non-profit housing developer, municipality), between fiscal years 2017-18 and 2027-28: (a) how much funding has been allocated to the program; (b) how much funding has been committed; (c) how much funding has been transferred to the recipients; (d) how many units have been constructed or are expected to be constructed; and (e) how much has the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation spent, or is it projected to spend, administering the program? With regard to the Federal Land Initiative, broken down by year, by province or territory, and by type of end user (market housing developer, non-profit housing developer, municipality), between fiscal years 2017-18 and 2027-28: (a) how much funding has been allocated to the program; (b) how much funding has been committed; (c) how much funding has been transferred to the recipients; (d) how many units have been constructed or are expected to be constructed; and (e) how much has the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation spent, or is it projected to spend, administering the program? With regard to government funding for initiatives to alleviate homelessness, broken down by year for each of the last five years: (a) how much has been spent by the government, in total and broken down by province or territory and by major metropolitan area for each department or agency that provides such funding; (b) what are the details of all funding provided, including the (i) date, (ii) recipient, (iii) location of the recipient, (iv) amount of funding, (v) type of funding, (vi) program under which the funding was provided, (vii) purpose of the funding or project description; (c) how much has the government spent to administer programs aimed at reducing homelessness; (d) how many homeless people, including all forms of homelessness, were there in Canada, broken down by province or territory and major metropolitan area; and (e) for each number in (d), (i) what is the yearly change in terms of both numbers and percentages, (ii) what is the total change over the past five years in terms of both numbers and percentages? With regard to the ArriveCAN application: (a) what was the cost of the update or release that resulted in the glitch in ArriveCAN that sent erroneous notifications instructing people arriving in Canada to quarantine, as reported by the CBC on July 22, 2022; and (b) what were the costs of any government-paid quarantines resulting from this glitch in ArriveCAN, in total and broken down by month, location, hotel, and type of cost? With regard to the electoral district of Courtenay—Alberni, broken down by fiscal year, since fiscal year 2005-06: what are all the federal infrastructure investments, including direct transfers to municipalities, regional district associations or First Nations, national parks, highways, etc.? With regard to Correctional Service Canada (CSC), in total and broken down by year since 2016: (a) how many times has CSC overridden an inmate's security level in relation to the security level cut-off scores in the (i) Security Reclassification Scale, (ii) Security Reclassification Scale for Women, (iii) Security Reclassification Scale for Women - Version 2; (b) of the instances in (a), how many times was the level of custody overridden to be (i) lower than cut-off scores, (ii) higher than cut-off scores; (c) what is the breakdown of instances in (a) by original and new security level (e.g. minimum security to maximum security, maximum security to medium security, etc.); and (d) of the inmates who were classified as (i) dangerous offenders, (ii) high-profile offenders, (iii) multiple murderers, how many had their security level overridden to a lower classification? With regard to government funding allocated to initiatives to alleviate homelessness, broken down by year for the next five years: (a) how much has been allocated by the government, in total and broken down by province or territory, for each department or agency that will provide such funding; (b) what are the details of all funding allocated, including the (i) project name, (ii) amount, (iii) purpose of the funding, (iv) type of project to be funded, (v) locations where the funding will be spent; (c) how much is the government projected to spend to administer programs aimed at alleviating homelessness; (d) what are the government's projections on how many homeless people, including all forms of homelessness, will exist in Canada, broken down by province or territory and major metropolitan area; and (e) for each number in (d) that increases, what is the government's rationale for projecting an increase? With regard to the government's use of data extraction tools capable of unlocking mobile phones, computers, or similar devices, since January 1, 2018, broken down by year and by department or agency: (a) how many times were such tools used with judicial authorization on individuals (i) employed by the department or agency, (ii) not employed by the department or agency; (b) how many times were such tools used without judicial authorization on individuals (i) employed by the department or agency, (ii) not employed by the department or agency; (c) for each time in (a), was the collected data kept or destroyed after it had been used; (d) for each time in (a) and (b), did the individual whose data was collected receive notification of the collection (i) before, (ii) after, their data was collected; and (e) were there any instances where, at any point, an individual whose data was collected was not informed, and if so, what is the description of each such incident and the rationale for not informing the individual? With regard to travellers entering Canada, broken down by year since 2020: (a) how many travellers entered Canada, in total, and broken down by type of point of entry (air, road, marine); and (b) for each category in (a), how many and what percentage of travellers (i) submitted their declaration through the ArriveCAN application prior to arrival, (ii) arrived without using the ArriveCAN application? With regard to Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) employees in the Human Resources and Corporate Services sectors, broken down by fiscal year from 2014-15 to 2023-24: (a) what was, or is, the total budget for each sector; (b) for Human Resources, what is the number of full time equivalents (FTE); (c) for each FTE in (b), what are their (i) roles, responsibilities, or job description, (ii) job title, including Treasury Board classification, (iii) associated salary range; (d) for Corporate Services, what is the number of FTEs; (e) for each FTE in (d), what are their (i) roles, responsibilities, or job description, (ii) job title, including Treasury Board classification, (iii) associated salary range; and (f) what is the average salary of all FTEs in each sector? With regard to Polar Knowledge Canada and the Canadian High Arctic Research Station (CHARS), which Polar Knowledge Canada operates: (a) how many full time equivalent (FTE) positions have been vacated in each year since 2015, in total, and broken down by Treasury Board classification level (e.g. AS-04, EX-02, etc.); (b) how many FTEs have been hired in each year since 2015, broken down by Treasury Board classification level; (c) of the employees currently at Polar Knowledge Canada, how many and what percentage have been there longer than (i) one year, (ii) five years, (iii) 10 years; (d) how many complaints regarding workplace harassment, bullying, racism, sexism, reprisal for whistleblowing, assault or other matters have been made by former or current Polar Knowledge Canada staff or consultants, or others who interact with Polar Knowledge Canada or CHARS, against Polar Knowledge Canada or CHARS (i.e. their staff or the entities), in each year since 2015, broken down by (i) year, (ii) resolution status; (e) what are the total expenditures on payouts or settlements made to former or current staff or consultants, or others who interact with Polar Knowledge Canada or CHARS, related to complaints made regarding workplace harassment, bullying, racism, sexism, reprisal for whistleblowing, assault or other matters against Polar Knowledge Canada or CHARS (i.e. their staff or the entities); (f) how much in severance or other types of payouts has been paid to departing Polar Knowledge Canada and CHARS staff, broken down by year, since 2015; (g) what are the expenditures in legal fees spent by Polar Knowledge Canada or CHARS in relation to complaints made regarding harassment, bullying, racism, sexism, reprisal for whistleblowing, assault or other matters, broken down by year, since 2015; (h) since 2015, have any requests been made to increase funding related to legal fees beyond the original annual budgeted amount by either Polar Knowledge Canada or CHARS, and, if so, what are the details of any such requests, including, for each, (i) the date, (ii) who made the request, (iii) the outcome; (i) what is the total number of lawsuits regarding harassment, negligence, unfulfilled contracts or wrongful dismissal that were filed against Polar Knowledge Canada or CHARS, broken down by year; (j) what are the details of all contracts issued since 2015, including, for each, the (i) vendor, (ii) vendor address, (iii) date, (iv) total dollar value of the contract, (v) scope and deliverables of the contract, (vi) manner in which the contract was awarded (i.e. sole-sourced, competitive bid); (k) how many FTE positions are or have been filled by persons that are family members or close friends of existing employees at Polar Knowledge Canada or CHARS; (l) what are the details of Polar Knowledge Canada’s or CHARS' nepotism policy in their hiring policies from 2015 to the present, including the details of any substantive changes that have been made and the year any such changes were made; (m) what are the details of Polar Knowledge Canada’s and CHARS' contract procurement processes and policies from 2015 to the present, including the details of any substantive changes that have been made and the year any such changes were made; (n) what are the details of Polar Knowledge Canada’s and CHARS' workplace harassment policies, including prevention policies, and the details of any substantive changes that have been made and the year any such changes were made; (o) what are the details of Polar Knowledge Canada's and CHARS' current organizational charts, including all permanent full- and part-time positions, and any contractors involved in day-to-day operations, as well as associated Treasury Board classification levels; (p) what were the results of the aggregated data from the 2022 Public Service Employee Survey for Polar Knowledge Canada, broken down by survey question posed to employees (e.g. My Job, My Work Unit, My Immediate Supervisor, Senior Management, My Organization (Department or Agency), Mobility and Retention, Harassment, Discrimination, Stress and Well-Being, Duty to Accommodate, Compensation, Hybrid Work, General Information, etc); and (q) how many grants, contributions or contracts were flagged by Polar Knowledge Canada staff or members of its Board of Directors for potential conflicts of interests, broken down by year and value? With regard to the government's decision to rebrand the carbon tax incentive payment to Canada's carbon rebate: what are the projected costs associated with the rebranding, including the implementation costs and any costs incurred in the development process of the new name, broken down by type of expense? With regard to federal housing investments to build, repair, or renovate student housing since January 1, 2006: how many dollars of federal funding have been invested, broken down by (i) province or territory and city, (ii) funding type, (iii) year, (iv) number of units supported? With regard to records from Veterans Affairs Canada home care programs: (a) how many veterans accessed home care programs each year since 2016, in total, and broken down by province or territory; and (b) how many veterans living abroad accessed home care programs each year since 2016, in total, and broken down by country? With regard to Canada's 2021 census and information about veterans held by the RCMP and Canadian Armed Forces: (a) how many veterans live in each province and territory; (b) what is the breakdown of (a) by federal electoral district; (c) how many veterans currently reside outside of Canada, in total, and broken down by country; and (d) how many veterans have been released from the RCMP or Canadian Armed Forces in the last 10 years, broken down by year? With regard to contracts signed by the government with GC Strategies since November 4, 2015, broken down by type of government entity (i.e. department, agency, Crown corporation, other government entity): (a) what is the total value of the contracts; (b) what are the details of each contract, including the (i) date, (ii) vendor, (iii) value, (iv) description of the good or services provided, (v) manner in which the contract was awarded (i.e. sole-sourced, competitive bid); and (c) for each contact, did the government do a value-for-money assessment, and, if so, what was the result? With regard to the Canada Infrastructure Bank’s expenditures since 2017, incurred on projects that were not completed, indefinitely delayed, or otherwise abandoned, including those that never reached the Financial Close stage: (a) for each project, what is the breakdown of expenditures by (i) project name and project partners, (ii) category and type of expenditure; (b) what are the details of all contracts associated with expenditures in (a), broken down by project, and including, for each, the (i) amount, (ii) vendor, (iii) date and duration, (iv) description of the goods or services provided, (v) manner in which the contract was awarded (sole-sourced, competitive bid); and (c) for each contract in (b) that involved consulting or providing advice, including legal, financial, technical, and other advice, (i) what were the topics or questions which required consultation, (ii) what specific goals or objectives were related to the contract, (iii) were the goals or objectives met? With regard to bonuses paid out at the Canada Infrastructure Bank in the 2022-23 fiscal year: (a) what was the total amount paid out in bonuses; (b) how many and what percentage of officials (i) at or above the executive (EX) level, or equivalent, (ii) below the EX level, or equivalent, received bonuses; and (c) what is the breakdown of how much money was paid out in (a) to officials at or above the EX level versus officials below the EX level? With regard to the government’s housing policies and Immigration Levels Plan for 2024-2026: (a) what analyses has the government done to estimate the housing infrastructure required to meet its immigration targets; (b) what are the results of those analyses; (c) what is the projected gap in housing supply vis-à-vis the number of immigrants the government will be welcoming at each phase of its 2024-2026 Immigration Levels Plan; (d) according to the government’s own data and estimates, how many permanent and temporary immigrants are currently without affordable housing; and (e) what are the projected impacts of immigration levels on housing affordability going forward?

Is that agreed? Some hon. members: Agreed.

Madam Speaker, I would ask that all remaining questions be allowed to stand at this time.

Is that agreed? Some hon. members: Agreed.

Madam Speaker, I would be remiss if I did not note that we are experiencing the eclipse right now. We even saw a dimming of the light in the House of Commons. Unfortunately, that will not be the biggest cover-up we talk about today. It will also my great honour and privilege to split my time with the member for Mégantic—L'Érable. We will be talking about the privilege motion, which is the subject of debate today. I will start by going through some of the facts, specifically quoting some of the Auditor General's report, of the scurrilous accusations in here, which are really quite disturbing, and certainly there is more to come. It will give us the context. I will then discuss the importance of parliamentary supremacy and the need for this body to get the information it requires to fulfill its democratic duties. I will start by reading from paragraph 1.18 in the AG's report on the ArriveCAN application. It says: We found that financial records were not well maintained by the Canada Border Services Agency. We were unable to determine a precise cost for the ArriveCAN application because of poor documentation and weak controls at the Canada Border Services Agency. We estimated that the application cost approximately $59.5 million. For the rest of the speech, as a shorthand, I will refer to that amount as $60 million. That $60 million is a large amount of money. This was for a contract that was originally set to cost somewhere between $80,000 to $160,000, but it ballooned up to $60 million. Just as disturbing as a $60-million price tag is the fact that the Auditor General, who has an incredible team with probably hundreds of years of service combined, when trying to investigate and fact-find, was unable to get through the poor record-keeping and terrible lack of detail at the Canada Border Services Agency. This was despite the AG's incredible abilities. I believe that the Auditor General, in subsequent testimony, even said that she had never seen bookkeeping this bad in her entire career, and this is after many years of being a professional auditor. The AG could not even get to what the exact number was, but she estimated it as $60 million. It could be more, but we do not know that at this point. I will go further into the report, to paragraph 1.39, where it says: The Canada Border Services Agency informed us that GC Strategies was awarded the contract on the basis of a proposal that it submitted. Agency officials told us that they had discussions with 3 potential contractors about submitting a proposal to develop the ArriveCAN application. We found that the agency received a proposal from 1 of the 3 potential contractors, but this proposal was not from GC Strategies. There was no evidence that the agency considered a proposal or any similar document from GC Strategies for this non-competitive contract. The Canada Border Services Agency awarded a contract on a non-existent proposal. CBSA initially said there were three different proposals put out there, but the Auditor General only found one of those proposals, and it was not from the eventual winner of this non-competitive process. As far as I know, that proposal still has not been tracked down. It is amazing that there would be a $60-million contract awarded on a missing, or non-existent, proposal. Once again, this is incredibly troublesome. We have heard from all members in the House that we are shocked. We share that almost unanimously. How could it happen that a $60-million proposal would simply disappear? The public service may face criticism on a variety of issues, but one thing I rarely ever hear is that it has a lack of record-keeping or a lack of data. The Auditor General said that she has never seen bookkeeping that bad. We move on to continue the discussion of GC Strategies. I believe it has been reported that it is actually called the Government of Canada Strategies, which says a lot on its own. We will go to 1.58 of the report: Some of the requirements or eligibility criteria were extremely narrow, which likely prevented competition. For example, bidders were required to have been awarded 3 informatic contracts with the Government of Canada [within] the last 18 months with a [greater] value...[of] $10 million. I don't think there would be too many of those. The report continues: We also found that the reasonableness of per diem rates in the bid was insufficiently assessed. Per diem rates were assessed on the basis of the 3 non-competitive contracts, which the Canada Border Services Agency...issued during the pandemic. In our opinion, the agency should not have used these prior non-competitive contracts as a reference point. It is just so odd. How does one define the request proposal process so narrowly that there is a handful, or even just one firm, that could possibly apply for this position? The amount of suspicion that comes from this is incredible. I will just say that again: One of the conditions for the bid for the ArriveCAN app was that a company had “been awarded 3 informatic contracts with the Government of Canada [over] the last 18 months with a value greater than $10 million.” It certainly appears to me, just a simple guy from Orono, Ontario, that in fact it was almost targeted directly at one particular firm. In this case, it was GC Strategies. We heard the testimony of Mr. Firth. I imagine I was one of tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of Canadians who tuned in to some of that committee coverage at the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates, or OGGO. I could not believe this gentlemen's audacity in which he talked. To be candid, he acted as if this was some type of unfairness that had been done to him. The reality is that we have allegation after allegation and have $60 million spent without, yet, a really solid explanation. We have firms being paid $1,000 or more a day, an hour. This has caused incredible upset for Canadians struggling to get by and seeing record-high usage of food banks. They want answers. That brings me back where I want to end, which is at the very heart of democracy. What separates this country from many others are our democratic principles and our commitment to the parliamentary Westminster system. It is this Parliament that guarantees the rights and freedoms of Canadians from coast to coast. When we say “privilege,” I think it is miscast. It is not my privilege, and it is not any of the members of Parliament's privilege; it is Canadians' privilege. It is due to the years of sacrifice throughout our history, through wars and otherwise, when we stood up for freedom and democracy, which has given us the ability to voice our opinions. I, and I imagine all MPs, still hear that sometimes the people of this great land are concerned and frustrated with their lack of a voice and their lack of power. I certainly go to work every day to act for them and to give them a voice, and Canadians want to know what happened to their $60 million for this app. How did a two-person firm make $20 million? How did they possibly justify this? Given the context of the AG saying that this is the worst record-keeping she has ever seen in her many-year history, Canadians deserve answers. That is what we are asking for.

Madam Speaker, as the member knows, the government is very open. It wants to see, and looks forward to, Mr. Firth being at the bar. The issues are going to be how we have questions and answers, and how we heighten the sense of accountability. However, I am interested in a comment. The member might not necessarily be aware of this, but when his leader was the Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Treasury Board, there was a $400-million scandal with ETS. It was a procurement scandal. If the leader of the Conservative Party had done his job back then and had not been successful in the cover-up, we might have seen some rules changed that could have prevented this. Is that a fair comment, on my part?

Madam Speaker, I have two children, an eight-year-old and a 10-year-old. When, occasionally, they do something wrong, one of them will immediately point to the other one when they are guilty. It is amazing. It is called “whataboutism”. That is the base level of the Liberal politics. They will deflect, deny and do anything not to take responsibility. The arrive scam is the Liberal government's fault, and we are going to get answers.

Madam Speaker, my friend down the way and I find common cause in this motion that is before us. Part of this motion is about the testimony of GC Strategies at committee, which was unsatisfactory and not consistent with the rules of parliamentary privilege. However, I think there is a larger issue at play here, which is that unless Parliament asserts its specific privileges, we risk getting to a place where no witnesses would have to come to committee to provide responses to our answers. We see this in other cases as well. I came out of a committee meeting today where witnesses were less than forthcoming with information about government programs and the fate of Canada Post. Does the member share my concern that unless the supremacy of Parliament is re-established, the ability of committees to get answers for the Canadians we represent will continue to be undermined?

Madam Speaker, I agree.