- 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 9:25:57 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I have three observations.
First, members have wide ambit during estimates in the questions posed to the minister. That has been respected this evening until I posed a question relating to the Prime Minister's potential criminality that irked the member for Kingston and the Islands.
Second, the order in council with respect to cabinet confidence indicated that the RCMP went to the Department of Justice first to ask that the order in council and its scope be extended.
Third, the matter of the SNC-Lavalin scandal, and what followed, arises from a decision of the director of public prosecutions that is housed within the minister's department.
110 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/16/24 11:30:00 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, 60 million taxpayer dollars wasted, fraud, forgery and corruption; that is arrive scam and the Liberals have tried to cover up the scandal every step of the way. They obstructed parliamentary committees, they attempted to obstruct an investigation by the Auditor General and now they are obstructing an RCMP criminal investigation.
When will the Liberals stop the obstruction and turn over the documents to the RCMP?
68 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/15/24 6:51:34 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I rise to follow up on a question I posed to the Minister of Industry in question period last November, namely which Liberal insiders the minister is protecting at the Liberals' corrupt green slush fund.
The level of corruption, conflict of interest and self-dealing at the fund is staggering. According to whistle-blowers, more than $150 million of taxpayers' money has been misappropriated by Liberal insiders at the fund. An independent fact-finding report revealed that board members of the fund funnelled tens of millions of taxpayer dollars from the fund to their own companies; talk about self-dealing and corruption.
The minister has the authority to fire the corrupt green slush fund board, but incredibly, the minister refuses to do so. Why does he? When the scandal broke, the minister claimed he was unaware of corruption at the green slush fund, but the minister's claims are contradicted by the facts.
Here is a fact: As early as 2019, the minister's predecessor, the Liberal industry minister at the time, Navdeep Bains, was informed that the Liberal-appointed chair was in a major conflict of interest because her company was receiving millions of dollars from none other than the fund. Not only that, but the minister sent his officials to each and every green slush fund board meeting, including the very meetings in which decisions were made to inappropriately and perhaps illegally funnel money from the fund to board members' companies. According to whistle-blowers, the minister and his department are engaged in a coordinated campaign to cover up corruption at the fund, and the minister is more interested in damage control than in getting to the truth.
With these things taken together, it is evident the minister knew of corruption at the green slush fund, did nothing about it and turned a blind eye to it, thus enabling Liberal insiders to get rich. When the corruption was revealed, the minister continued to stand behind the green slush fund board. Again, why is he protecting corrupt Liberal insiders?
342 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/21/23 3:05:53 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the independent report revealed that multiple board members voted to funnel money from the fund to companies they had an interest in. This is scandalous.
In the face of evidence of self-dealing and corruption, the minister has not seen fit to fire anyone. Why? Which Liberal insiders is he protecting?
53 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/1/23 7:56:10 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I rise to pose a follow-up question to a question I had asked in question period: What does the Prime Minister have to hide?
What does the Prime Minister have to hide now that it has been revealed that the Prime Minister obstructed an RCMP criminal investigation into his wrongdoing during the SNC-Lavalin scandal? The Prime Minister's obstruction of a criminal investigation into himself is another chapter in the Prime Minister's sordid and corrupt conduct surrounding SNC-Lavalin.
This is a Prime Minister who obstructed justice by politically interfering in the criminal prosecution of SNC-Lavalin, which was facing a raft of bribery and corruption charges, by putting pressure on his then attorney general to resolve the charges by way of a deferred prosecution agreement. In other words, the Prime Minister attacked the independence of his attorney general, and when his then attorney general, Jody Wilson-Raybould, stood up to him, spoke truth to power and refused to acquiesce to the Prime Minister's corrupt demands, what did the Prime Minister do? He fired her and then threw her out of the Liberal caucus. That is what happens to people with integrity who stand up to the corrupt Prime Minister. They get thrown out, thrown under the bus.
The Ethics Commissioner launched an investigation into the Prime Minister's scandalous conduct and found that the Prime Minister had breached ethics laws in relation to his political interference. This marked the second time that the Prime Minister had been found guilty of breaching ethics laws. He is the first Prime Minister in Canadian history to have been found guilty of breaking ethics laws. That is the record of the Prime Minister.
The RCMP launched its own criminal investigation into the Prime Minister, which did not make progress. We now know why it did not make progress, and that is because the Prime Minister obstructed the investigation by refusing to turn over documents requested by the RCMP, hiding behind cabinet confidence.
Last Monday, the RCMP commissioner was set to appear before the ethics committee to testify about the Prime Minister's obstruction, but before the RCMP commissioner could utter a word, the Prime Minister ordered Liberal and NDP MPs to shut down the committee to silence the RCMP commissioner. The Prime Minister's brazen effort to silence the RCMP commissioner demonstrates that the Prime Minister has something to hide, and it must be bad. It must be really bad.
What incriminating evidence is contained in those cabinet documents that the Prime Minister refused to turn over to the RCMP? What is the Prime Minister afraid the RCMP commissioner would say about his obstruction, which he wants to keep the lid on?
Again, it is a simple question: What does the Prime Minister have to hide?
469 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/24/23 2:18:09 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, after eight years, the NDP-Liberal government will stop at nothing to cover up its corruption. Yesterday, in a brazen effort to shield the Prime Minister, Liberal and NDP MPs voted to shut down committee to block the RCMP commissioner from answering questions about the Prime Minister's obstruction of an RCMP criminal investigation into his conduct during the SNC-Lavalin scandal.
This is the same Prime Minister who obstructed justice to protect SNC-Lavalin and when his former attorney general stood up to him, he fired her. This is the same Prime Minister who has been found guilty of multiple ethical violations. Now we learn that this is the same Prime Minister who thwarted a criminal investigation into his own wrongdoing.
The record of the Prime Minister is one of corruption and cover-up. After eight years he is not worth the cost.
146 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/22/23 6:04:57 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I rise in support of the concurrence motion, which was strengthened considerably as a result of the Conservative amendment brought forward at the procedure and House affairs committee.
In the face of the alarming revelations of Beijing's interference in two elections that took place under the Prime Minister's watch, Canadians deserve answers. This interference has been characterized by Global News and The Globe and Mail based upon their review of CSIS documents as a vast campaign of interference in the 2019 election and an orchestrated machine in the 2021 election to help the Liberals secure a minority government and to defeat certain Conservative candidates. Canadians deserve to know about the scale of Beijing's election interference and what is really at the heart of this scandal, namely: What did the Prime Minister know, when did he know it and what did he do or fail to do about Beijing's attack on our democracy?
In order to get to the truth, two things need to happen. First, the procedure and House affairs committee, which is seized with a study on Beijing's election interference, must be able to do its work unimpeded. It must do its work without the obstruction that we have seen over the past several weeks, driven by the Liberals but often supported by the junior partner of the cover-up coalition, the NDP. It is important that an independent public inquiry be called. This is a position that Conservatives have consistently supported. Indeed, we strengthened the very weak NDP motion at the procedure and House affairs committee, which I will get into momentarily.
On both of these questions, what is the NDP's track record? Well, it is a pretty pathetic one. At the direction of their boss, the Prime Minister, NDP members joined with Liberal MPs at the procedure and House affairs committee to block the testimony of Katie Telford. They worked with the Liberals not once, not twice, but three times to block Katie Telford from coming to the committee. She is a key witness for getting to the bottom of what the Prime Minister knows and what he failed to do about Beijing's election interference. Again, it is what one would expect of the junior partner of the cover-up coalition.
Then NDP members, no doubt facing public pressure, suddenly flip-flopped and indicated that they were supporting my straightforward motion to have Katie Telford appear at the procedure and House affairs committee. One would think that if they were posturing their support that they would welcome the Conservative motion that was brought forward in the House. However, all of a sudden, they flip-flopped again and voted against that motion.
Now, in fairness to NDP members, they did ultimately support my motion when the Liberals finally ended their filibustering. Still, it took weeks of pressure from the public and Conservatives before they finally did the right thing and supported bringing Telford to committee. However, it must also be noted that they voted against a much stronger motion that Conservatives put forward in the House, which was voted on yesterday. The NDP, the junior partner of the cover-up coalition, sided with the Liberals and voted against a motion that had considerably more teeth than the PROC motion does.
In addition to that, as the junior partner of the cover-up coalition, the NDP has worked with the Liberals to cover up the production of documents at the procedure and House affairs committee, not once but twice. They voted against a Conservative motion proposing that the independent parliamentary inquiry review relevant documents, having regard for national security and other considerations. This independent review would have been instead of giving the government; the PMO; and the Prime Minister, who has so much to answer for, a veto over what is produced to the committee. The NDP voted against that. They joined the Liberals in blocking the production of documents.
The NDP talks a good game about a public inquiry, but the motion they put forward at the procedure and House affairs committee was considerably weak. It would have given the Prime Minister the unilateral power to appoint the commissioner of the inquiry. What Conservatives put forward as an amendment was to say no, that the Prime Minister should not have the only say. If there is to be a public inquiry, as we believe there should be, such an inquiry must be truly independent. Moreover, it must be perceived to be independent. Therefore, our amendment provided that all recognized parties in this House should agree upon the head of the public inquiry to ensure not only the independence of that inquiry but the perception of its independence.
In that regard, Conservatives considerably strengthened the very concurrence motion that this House is debating today. By contrast, the NDP were prepared to let the Prime Minister have a do-over of Rosenberg. There, the Prime Minister appointed a Liberal crony, someone who was the president of the Trudeau Foundation for several years. Not only was he the president of the Trudeau Foundation, but he also actually facilitated a $200,000 donation from a Beijing political operative to the Trudeau Foundation. We said that should not happen again. That individual was appointed to review the 2021 election, completely undermining the credibility of the findings of Rosenberg's report.
Again, there we have it: the NDP members playing games, talking out of both sides of their mouths, flip-flopping and putting forward weak motions at PROC. They say they want a public inquiry, but they were prepared to turn it over to the Prime Minister. What we have is a completely unserious NDP when it comes to getting to the bottom of foreign interference, specifically Beijing's election interference. The NDP has actually spent more time criticizing Conservatives, trying to hold us accountable, than they have the Liberal government. We know, based upon all the reports and the limited documents that have been produced to our committee, that the government has a lot to answer for given that the Liberal Party was a beneficiary or that, at least, Beijing's objective was to assist the Liberal Party.
Why would it take weeks for the NDP to get around to doing what should have happened weeks ago, which is for Telford to come to committee? After all, she is the Prime Minister's top political advisor. She is arguably the second most powerful person in the government, outside of the Prime Minister, and she was intimately involved in both the Liberal Party's 2019 and 2021 election campaigns.
I am glad the cover-up coalition's junior partner finally—
1116 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
