SoVote

Context: House Hansard - 299 - Apr/15/24

Mr. Garnett Genuis (Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, CPC)

Apr/15/24 8:00:08 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, we are about to see historic consequences for historic Liberal corruption. Here in the House of Commons chamber, this week on Wednesday, Kristian Firth, one of the two people who work at GC Strategies, one of the favourite contractors of the NDP-Liberal government, will be hauled before the bar of the House of Commons. He will be brought into the House of Commons chamber, where normally just members of Parliament meet and debate, and after being admonished by the Speaker for failing to answer questions properly at committee, the favoured contractor of the NDP-Liberal government will be forced to answer questions in multiple rounds from members of all parties for over 100 minutes. This is the history that is going to unfold in the chamber this week, a historic response to historic NDP-Liberal corruption. GC Strategies got the contract for the arrive scam app, and it is not clear why. It is a two-person company. It did no work on the app. It got almost $20 million simply for receiving the contract and subcontracting. Essentially, its business model is that it goes on LinkedIn, finds other people who can do the work, receives the contract and subcontracts other people who can do the work. However, GC Strategies collected almost $20 million in the process, according to the Auditor General. GC Strategies disputes that number; it says that it was not $20 million but more like only $11 million that it collected. If we do the math according to GC Strategies' own figures, Kristian Firth collected over $2,500 per hour working for the government. How can anybody else who is good with LinkedIn get a piece of that deal as well? We are going to find that out when, in the historic moment this week, a representative of GC Strategies, Kristian Firth, is called before the bar. What we know already, and what we will probe further with questions when we have this historic exchange, is that GC Strategies was the favourite contractor of the NDP-Liberal government. The company, founded in 2015, benefited from processes that were clearly designed to benefit it. In fact, we know from the Auditor General's report that at one point senior officials sat down and met with representatives from GC Strategies to figure out the specifications of a contract that GC Strategies would then bid on and get, so it was a made-for-insiders process, designed specifically to benefit the two-person company that did no IT work, got the deal and then subcontracted. What we are seeing is historic corruption under the NDP-Liberal government. There are processes that are designed to benefit well-connected insiders at enormous expense to taxpayers. Arrive scam, GC Strategies and $60 million spent developing an app are just the tip of the iceberg, because we know now that there are 635 different firms that are doing so-called “staff augmentation” in the IT space for the government. There are over 600 firms whose business it is to receive contracts and then to subcontract the actual work. Is the government prepared to acknowledge and apologize for the system of costly criminal corruption that it has been presiding over for the last eight years?

545 words

Mr. Ryan Turnbull (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry, Lib.)

Apr/15/24 8:04:16 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I would like to reassure the member that we are taking the allegations seriously. As the hon. member is aware, the CBSA initiated an internal investigation as soon as there were allegations of inappropriate contracting practices. The matter was also referred to the RCMP for investigation. Contracts with three companies involved, including GC Strategies, have also been suspended through a stop work order from Public Services and Procurement Canada. We expect procurement practices to be followed properly, and anyone who does not follow contracting rules will face appropriate consequences. This has been and always will be the case. The procurement ombud and the Auditor General's reports have identified unacceptable gaps in management processes, roles and controls. Some recommendations have already been implemented, and the CBSA is taking further action to ensure that practices are aligned with policies and meet the expectations that Canadians have. Need I remind the hon. member of the context in which the app was developed? The CBSA needed to develop and launch this app as quickly as possible at the request of the Public Health Agency of Canada, after a global pandemic was declared in March 2020. The CBSA was working as quickly as possible to replace a paper process that was not meeting public health needs and was also impacting the border with significant wait times that disrupted the essential flow of people and goods. I wish to point out that the Auditor General did recognize, in her report, that the government improved the speed and quality of information collected at the border by using the ArriveCAN app rather than a paper-based format. The ArriveCAN app was an essential tool at the time to collect mandatory health information while facilitating travel and trade. The government is taking steps to ensure that all departments are better positioned to undertake projects of this nature in the future. In wrapping up my remarks, I want to emphasize that this should not detract from the commendable efforts of frontline border officers and all CBSA personnel, who diligently serve and protect Canadian citizens on a daily basis and in support of our country's economy. The government remains committed to acting on the findings of all audits, reviews and investigations.

374 words

Mr. Garnett Genuis

Apr/15/24 8:06:58 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the question was not about the frontline workers. It was about the costly criminal corruption that has become commonplace under the NDP-Liberal government. Kristian Firth, who will be hauled before the bar of this chamber and forced to answer questions on Wednesday, admitted previously, before a committee, that it was systematically part of his process to doctor the résumés of those doing the work before submitting them to the government. The government's favoured contractor, the person who it rigged the process to benefit, admitted to systematically altering résumés. This is not about all the other points of misdirection that the parliamentary secretary is trying to serve up in the House. This is about the question of corruption in procurement and why the government was intentionally designing processes to direct contracts to its friends who engage in such corrupt practices. Why did the parliamentary secretary and his government constantly favour GC Strategies?

163 words

Mr. Ryan Turnbull

Apr/15/24 8:08:06 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the government is committed to transparency and accountability. We acknowledge that the procurement ombud and the Auditor General's reports have identified gaps in management processes, roles and controls at the CBSA. Some recommendations in the report have already been implemented, and the CBSA will take further action to ensure that management practices are aligned with policies and processes to maintain the confidence of Canadians. We welcome the ongoing investigations and look forward to the findings. In addition, Public Services and Procurement Canada will continue to strengthen all aspects of the federal procurement system and will use the findings from these reports to improve the way the government does business with its suppliers. I wish to assure the hon. member and all Canadians that this government takes any allegation of misconduct very seriously. We will keep prioritizing efficiency, accountability and transparency in the management of public resources.

149 words

Mr. Gerald Soroka (Yellowhead, CPC)

Apr/15/24 8:09:10 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, on March 21, I questioned the government about the punitive carbon tax burden on Alberta families. According to the independent Parliamentary Budget Officer, the average family in Alberta will be hit with $2,943 in carbon taxes this year. In a completely out-of-touch response, the member for Edmonton Centre claimed this was not a problem because these families will receive $2,160 in rebates with the rural top-up. As I know the Liberals struggle with it, let us do the math together. If we have $2,943 and minus $2,160, that leaves families $783 out of pocket. That is nearly $800 that hard-working Albertans will pay directly from their pockets, thanks to the government's policy. The situation is even worse for those not qualifying for the rural top-up as they face a staggering $1,043 in carbon taxes not covered by any rebate. The evidence is clear: The average family in Alberta pays more than they get back and it is not debatable. The PBO has also dismantled the Liberals' claim that eight out of 10 Canadians come out ahead with these rebates. In truth, the PBO states that 60% are actually worse off under this tax scheme. Furthermore, constituents are sending me their heating bills, outraged to find that the carbon tax often exceeds the cost of the gas itself. I would be happy to send these bills to the minister, so he can explain to them why everything costs more. This is not just an abstract statistic. It is a harsh reality eating into household budgets. These are budgets already suffering because of the inflation caused by the Liberal government. Additionally, the impact on our communities is devastating. Data from food banks across Yellowhead, like in Edson, show usage has increased by nearly 300%. This tax is not just a line item on a bill. It is a factor driving more of our neighbours toward food insecurity. Let us talk about the supposed environmental benefits. This tax has done nothing to reduce emissions or address climate change. The government boasts about reduced emissions since the tax was implemented in 2019, conveniently leaving out that a global pandemic significantly cut emissions by reducing travel and economic activity. With the end of the pandemic, emissions in Canada have surged once again. What a surprise. Let us not forget that Canada makes up less than 2% of global emissions, meaning if we went net zero tomorrow, countries like China, which does not have a carbon tax, would offset our efforts within a year. The carbon tax forces Canadians to pay up without offering any real alternatives. As the minister from Edmonton should know, Albertans need natural gas to heat their homes and gas-powered cars to get to work, especially when EVs fail in our cold climate. Conservatives have a common-sense plan. We will incentivize innovation across industries to develop green technologies that not only lower emissions in Canada but can be marketed globally to tackle worldwide emissions challenges. We will axe the carbon tax and bring home affordability for all Canadians.

521 words

Mr. Ryan Turnbull (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry, Lib.)

Apr/15/24 8:12:51 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, let me remind my colleague that the numbers are very clear: Carbon pricing is not what is causing increases in grocery prices. Economists estimate that as of December, the carbon price contributed less than half a percentage point to grocery price increases. However, I think we can all agree that many Canadians are suffering from the cost of living crisis. That is why we are addressing it with our affordability plan and many of the new actions we will hear more about in tomorrow's budget. It is categorically false to claim carbon pricing is causing major increases to grocery prices. Let me remind my colleagues of a few other facts. Households in Alberta received their Canada carbon rebate today. A family of four receives $450 today and $1,800 over the course of this year, with rural households getting a 20% top-up if the Conservatives support it, which it seems they will not. Eight out of 10 households get more money back than what they pay, on average, which is exactly what it says in the Parliamentary Budget Officer's report, and lower income households benefit even more. I am not sure where the $3,000 number that my colleague is citing comes from, but the Parliamentary Budget Officer's March 2023 report indicates that for 2024-25, the net average cost per household after the Canada carbon rebate is actually $558 in savings, not costs. My colleagues in the House should know that when a policy does not generate any revenue for the government and the money is given back to Canadians, we are talking about a regulatory charge that is essential to reduce pollution, not about a tax. Making it free to pollute will not save Canadians money. It will cost them more in the long run while endangering Canadians and jeopardizing the natural environment we all depend on. We know that there are better ways to make life more affordable for Canadians without destroying the environment and incurring more devastating costs farther down the road. Putting a price on carbon pollution reduces emissions, yes, but it also encourages innovation, and this is what we need in order to make significant strides in fighting climate change. It encourages reductions across the economy while giving households and businesses the flexibility to decide when and how to make those changes. It creates incentives for Canadian businesses to develop and adopt new low-carbon products, processes and services, and when it is done right, as we are doing here in Canada, it is both effective and affordable for consumers. That is because the bulk of the proceeds from the price on carbon pollution go straight back into the pockets of Canadians in provinces where the fuel charge applies. Our actions today are for everyone's tomorrow. The Government of Canada's plans are making a difference. We have successfully bent the curve on emissions and are fully committed to reaching our 2030 emissions reduction goals for a secure and prosperous future for all Canadians.

507 words

Mr. Gerald Soroka

Apr/15/24 8:16:14 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I will talk slowly so the member might understand. According to the independent Parliamentary Budget Officer, the average family will be hit with $2,943 in carbon taxes this year. This is coming from the Parliamentary Budget Officer, where their “eight out of 10” statistic comes from. Yes, the Parliamentary Budget Officer did state that, but it refers only to the fuel charges. Once one includes everything else the carbon tax is charged on, such as groceries, then over 60% of Canadians are worse off. If the member would only read the entire report, not just the sections the Liberals want to promote, then we would actually get the truth out of them for a change.

120 words

Mr. Ryan Turnbull

Apr/15/24 8:17:12 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, respectfully, the member opposite obviously has not read the PBO's report, because it does not say what he is claiming it says. Putting a price on carbon pollution has been a pillar of our climate policy since 2019, and experts around the world, including over 300 economists in an open letter, say it is the cheapest and most effective tool to fight climate change. We know now that, based on the Canadian Climate Institute's recent report, it will account for one-third of Canada's greenhouse gas emissions reduction, so that is pretty significant. However, make no mistake: Failing to address climate change will make things even more expensive for Canadians. The cost of inaction is stark. If we ignore climate change, by 2025 we could see a $25-billion annual slowdown in our economic growth, and the Canadian Climate Institute estimates that will be 50% of GDP growth. Are the Conservatives really saying they want to jeopardize the future prosperity of Canada for ideological reasons?

170 words

The Deputy Speaker

Apr/15/24 8:18:16 p.m.
Watch

The motion to adjourn the House is now deemed to have been adopted. Accordingly, the House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 10 a.m. pursuant to Standing Order 24(1). (The House adjourned at 8:18 p.m.)

38 words