SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 258

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
November 29, 2023 02:00PM
Context: House Hansard - 258 - Nov/29/23
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.)
  • Nov/29/23 7:26:07 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I always find it interesting that the member opposite will take an issue, whatever that issue might be, will associate it with the Prime Minister or the government and then will add onto the end of it “scandal”. The member is very consistent in doing that. It does not matter to what degree it is factual. He insists on always putting in the word “scandal” and then trying to associate it with the government. I am not saying there are no wrongdoings. In fact, when the member asked the question and the minister responded, here is what the minister indicated: ...what I am happy to explain to the House is how seriously our government takes allegations of inappropriate behaviour with taxpayers' money and contracting or subcontracting. We are obviously very pleased that the committee is looking into this matter. We are pleased that the Auditor General is also seized with this question. We are also pleased that the Canada Border Services Agency, when these issues came to light, took the appropriate action with internal reviews and, as was appropriate, referred any and all of these circumstances to the appropriate authorities. As the minister clearly indicated, we take the allegations very seriously, and the government is determined to support the work on the matter, whether by the Auditor General or the standing committee. At some point in time, hopefully sooner as opposed to later, we will see allegations substantiated or will get to the bottom of the issue. The government is committed to addressing it. I do not know by whom, but I was provided a letter that I thought was kind of interesting. It was dated in October. I do not know whether it was the member himself, but somebody asked for the RCMP to come before one of the standing committees. I think it was addressed to the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates. The member looks a little puzzled, so I am not too sure if he is aware of it. Maybe the document is in another committee. I am not 100% sure, but the bottom line is that the letter, signed off by the RCMP, indicates what the RCMP understood: ...the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates (OGGO) has adopted a motion calling for the appearance of, among others, Sergeant Kim Chamberland in respect of “reports that the RCMP is investigating allegations of misconduct by three companies involved in the development of the ArriveCAN app.” Contrary to public reporting, the RCMP is not investigating the ArriveCAN matter. The letter goes on and states, in essence, that the RCMP does not think that person would be able to contribute positively or in any way to the committee. I do not know how that was ultimately resolved. I just came by this particular letter and am curious to know whether the member is aware of the facts with respect to it. Suffice it to say, just as I started my comments, I note that the government is being very diligent in going through the process and ensuring that tax dollars are protected.
523 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border