44th Parl. 1st Sess.

February 27, 2024 10:00AM

Context: House Hansard - 286 - Feb/27/24

Feb/27/24 11:12:48 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, in fact, I mentioned in my speech that the CBSA has already put in place conditions to cancel or no longer move forward with management consultants. There is more work to be done, based on the results of some of the work done in multiple reports. I also want to point out that one of the things highlighted by the AG was the fact that the CBSA routinely approved and paid invoices that contained little or no details of the work completed. This is a very serious issue, an issue that, again, the Conservatives seem outraged about, yet they themselves did the same with the very same companies. To my hon. colleague's question, this is why CBSA has also initiated a full review of CBSA procurement practices. It is because we want to make sure, as I said in my speech, that Canadians see value for money and that there is transparency in the system. This is not something that just happened overnight, but we are committed to fixing it and giving that assurance to Canadians.

179 words

Hear!
Rabble!
add
star_border
share

Context: House Hansard - 286 - Feb/27/24

Ms. Nathalie Sinclair-Desgagné

Feb/27/24 11:46:23 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, yes, we do agree because we want to get to the bottom of the matter. A committee could look at everything that has been done with large companies, but the members would drown in the sea of hundreds of thousands of pages of contracts that we do not necessarily have the training to understand. We need to call for a public inquiry. We need outside people who are trained to do this kind of work to come in and get to the bottom of the story. As I mentioned, and as my colleague said, ArriveCAN is just the tip of the iceberg. We do not know where taxpayers' money is going, and that is shameful.

117 words

Hear!
Rabble!
add
star_border
share

Context: House Hansard - 286 - Feb/27/24

Mrs. Julie Vignola (Beauport—Limoilou, BQ)

Feb/27/24 3:02:56 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, ArriveCAN is the result of the federal government's dependence on dubious consultants. GC Strategies, a two-man company offering no real services, pocketed $20 million, but it was not the only one. Dalian, another two-person company offering no real services, got $8 million. Ninety-nine per cent of Dalian's contracts are with the federal government. It is hard to know what that company is doing with all that money because La Presse has revealed that it does business in two tax havens. How many other companies like these is the federal government giving our money to, and what is it doing to make sure our share comes back to us?

117 words

Hear!
Rabble!
add
star_border
share

Context: House Hansard - 286 - Feb/27/24

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.)

Feb/27/24 5:09:32 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the member did good in terms of the lines, so the programming worked in that sense, I must say. My question to the member is about something I raised previously with respect to his own leader. The leader of the Conservative Party was the minister ultimately responsible for millions of dollars' worth of grants that went to Coredal Systems Consulting, which is the same company as GC Strategies with just a change in name. The same two individuals are involved in both companies. Does he believe this should also be considered? Many constituents who we represent are wondering how two individuals get to the point where they were able to do what they did through the procurement process. I think that going back to the origins of the company would be a good thing. Would he not agree?

140 words

Hear!
Rabble!
add
star_border
share

SoVote

House Hansard - 286