SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

Michael Cooper

  • Member of Parliament
  • Member of the Joint Interparliamentary Council
  • Conservative
  • St. Albert—Edmonton
  • Alberta
  • Voting Attendance: 68%
  • Expenses Last Quarter: $119,185.60

  • Government Page
  • May/23/24 6:54:06 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, the Parliamentary Secretary claimed that the minister addressed the matter. The minister has done no such thing. Indeed, the minister has refused to stand in the House to answer a single question, and when I asked him a question at committee, he misdirected by falsely claiming that it had been cleared by the Ethics Commissioner when the arrangement clearly had not been. Here are the facts: The minister was being paid by a firm owned by his business partner that was lobbying his own department, and it secured $110 million in federal grants for its client. That smacks of a conflict of interest. Is the parliamentary secretary comfortable to stand in the House to tell Canadians that this is the low ethical bar set by the government?
129 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/23/24 6:46:32 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I rise to follow up on a straightforward question that the Minister of Employment refuses to answer. How much has the minister been paid by Navis Group since the minister was appointed to cabinet? The minister's dealings with Navis Group raise serious ethical questions, including whether the minister broke the law by contravening the Conflict of Interest Act. Navis Group is owned by the minister's business partner. The minister was receiving, and continues to receive, payments from Navis Group. As the minister was receiving these payments, Navis Group was lobbying the minister's own department and managed to secure $110 million in federal contracts for its client. This has all the markings of self-dealing, conflict of interest and corruption. When the Minister of Employment appeared at committee on the estimates, I asked him about his shady arrangement with Navis Group. The minister effectively said that there was nothing to see here, and that it was all above board. The minister claimed it had been approved by the Ethics Commissioner. However, the minister's statement at committee was patently false. It was patently false because, in fact, the minister actively concealed from the Ethics Commissioner his connection to Navis Group. More specifically, the minister's disclosure to the Ethics Commissioner conveniently hid behind a numbered company without disclosing that the numbered company was Navis Group. A statement from the Office of the Ethics Commissioner confirms that the Ethics Commissioner was unaware of the minister's connection with Navis Group. Therefore, the Ethics Commissioner was unaware that the company that was paying the minister was simultaneously lobbying the minister's department and successfully securing $110 million in grants for its client. What we have is a shady deal, a shady arrangement, that the minister actively concealed from the Ethics Commissioner. When the minister got caught, he attempted to misdirect by peddling the falsehood that it had been approved by the Ethics Commissioner, raising additional questions about the minister's fitness for office. Since this scandal broke, the minister has not had the guts to stand in the House once and answer questions. Instead, the minister has been shielded by other ministers in the government who have dodged and deflected on the minister's behalf. On behalf of Canadian taxpayers, who have footed the $110 million bill to Navis Group, how much did the minister pocket from Navis Group? I just need a number.
406 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/7/24 3:09:28 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, the minister actively concealed his connection to Navis Group, hiding behind a numbered company. As a result, the Ethics Commissioner could not have known that the minister's business partner was lobbying his own department. If there are no ethical issues with the minister's connection to Navis Group, as the minister claims, then why did he hide it from the Ethics Commissioner?
65 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/7/24 3:08:09 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, at committee, the Minister of Employment claimed that he had been cleared by the Ethics Commissioner to receive payments from Navis Group, a firm owned by his business partner who was lobbying his own department, except that is not true. The Office of the Ethics Commissioner has indicated that it was unaware of the minister's connection to Navis Group. Why did the minister claim that he was cleared when clearly he had not been cleared? Why did the minister mislead committee?
84 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • Nov/29/23 7:32:18 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I rise to follow up on a question that I posed to the Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry, a question that he conveniently refused to answer concerning corruption at the Liberals' billion-dollar green slush fund known as SDTC. An independent, fact-finding report reveals a cloud of mismanagement, conflicts of interest and self-dealing at SDTC. The report found, among other things, that the board improperly paid out nearly $40 million in so-called COVID relief payments, including funnelling millions of dollars to companies that board members had an interest in. The chair of SDTC, during questioning before the ethics committee, was forced to admit that she funnelled $220,000 to her own company, and then funnelled $120,000 of that into her own personal bank account. She even moved the motion at the board. Incredibly, she claimed it was all okay because she and the board had received legal advice. It turns out that the lawyer who provided that legal advice is none other than a member of the SDTC council. In other words, the lawyer was providing legal advice about conflicts of interest when he, himself, had a conflict of interest. In providing that advice and being paid for that advice by SDTC, as he was, the law was broken, because section 16 of the SDTC act prohibits any member of the SDTC council from profiting from SDTC. Yesterday, we learned that another board member at SDTC had funnelled a staggering $42.5 million of taxpayers' money into four companies that she had an interest in. She enriched herself to the tune of $42.5 million. It is unbelievable. It appears that this only scratches the surface of corruption and mismanagement at SDTC, because according to whistle-blowers, the level of corruption and self-dealing exceeds $150 million of taxpayers' money squandered. Despite the well-documented corruption and mismanagement involving tens upon tens of millions of dollars of taxpayers' money, no one has been held accountable. The chair resigned but not at the request of the minister, and the minister continues to stand behind the corrupt SDTC board. Why? Why is the minister more interested in protecting Liberal insiders who got rich improperly at the expense of taxpayers rather than rooting out the rot and corruption at the Liberals' green slush fund?
388 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border