Kelly McCauley
Edmonton West, Alberta · Conservative · Canada
“Madam Speaker, we listened to the Liberals earlier, especially the member for Winnipeg North , bash and attack anyone who disagrees with Bill C-9 , actually in fear that they are all far right, right-wing, crazy white supremacists if they oppose the government on this.”
“Mr. Speaker, this is obviously a very divisive issue. There are some parts of Bill C-9 that various communities support. There is also a wide range of issues within Bill C-9 that communities do not support.”
“Mr. Speaker, I understand what my colleague is saying; it is understandable. Various faith groups have expressed concerns about Bill C‑9 , such as the leadership for the Catholic bishops in Canada and others from the Abrahamic faiths. Can the member explain why those views and concerns on Bill C‑9 should be discounted?”
“Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to rise in support of this fantastic bill from my colleague from Calgary Centre . It is very disappointing to hear members of the Liberal government look at a very strong, common-sense piece of legislation and, of course, throw it away. It is interesting to hear them complain about costs.”
“Yet, when the Liberals have a chance to support a common-sense bill that would help Canadians, encourage investment in Canada and reduce greenhouse gases, we hear government members stand up and speak against it. Bill C-269 is a very simple, common-sense bill.”
“Madam Speaker, I should use this time to finish my speech on Bill C-269 . However, I have a simple question. We have late-night sittings, and we have plenty of time. Why is this government, once again, bringing the guillotine of closure and limiting debate?”
The complete record
Every one of 372 lines we hold for Kelly McCauley, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 7 of 8.
“My government will hire thousands of new RCMP and CBSA officers to crack down on illegal drugs and guns coming from the United States, increase funding to prosecute violent criminal gangs [and let them out later], make bail laws stricter for home invasions.... Apparently, that is for those who fight back against home invaders. Later, it reads, “Recruit 1,000 more RCMP personnel to tackle drug and human trafficking”. What do the Liberal numbers show? This is from the departmental plans, for those who follow the estimates process, which I think is one of us. Departmental plans forecast spending requirements as approved by the government three years forward, but also lays out the goals and priorities that justify spending to be approved by Parliament, should there ever be a budget.”
“The next year it was went up, under Harper, to 8.3%. The year after that, it went up 8.16%. Then the Liberals took over and what happened? The spending dropped 11% on the CBSA. Again, these are the government's own numbers. I know the Liberals are saying, “There are lies, damn lies, statistics and Treasury Board numbers,” but this is from the public accounts, from the Treasury Board. In 2016 and 2017, another full year into their mandate, it had dropped 18% from the Harper era. Let us look forward. I quoted earlier Trudeau's election promise to end the omnibus bills. Let us look at the government promise from the last election. It reads: Canadians deserve to feel safe where they live, play, work....”
“I brought this up before, and the member for Winnipeg North said they were just statistics and they do not count, that what counts is what they say on that side. This is from the government's own websites: GC InfoBase, the Library of Parliament and the Treasury Board. (1950) On full-time equivalents to CBSA, when the Liberals took over from big, bad Harper, there were 14,113 full-time equivalents with the CBSA. Two years later, under the Liberals, there were 13,707 full-time equivalents, so where was the cut? The cut was not under Harper. The cut was under the Trudeau Liberals. On spending for CBSA, we saw, as I said, eight different ministers, including the former minister in charge of CBSA, who is now doing the free trade attempt with the U.S., stating that $400 million was cut by Harper. Well, in 2012-13, spending was $1.7 billion.”
“Kelly McCauley: I know; we would think that, but I actually brought receipts. Mr. Speaker, this is just in the last couple of years. The Prime Minister , eight different ministers and six different parliamentary secretaries have stood here in this House and said this is about the Harper cuts. Members can see how many pages I have. Most of it is said by the member for Winnipeg North . I am just going to read from them; they are not a prop. According to him, Harper cut a thousand jobs. Jennifer O'Connell, who is no longer with us thankfully, repeatedly said Harper cut 1,000 jobs and cut $400 million. Let us just put that to rest once and for all. I am going to quote numbers from the government's own Treasury Board site.”
“The new government will fix things, maybe. As for money laundering, if we read Sam Cooper's book, it is about $128 billion a year in this country. I cannot talk about this year's budget because we will not see it, but in last year's budget, I think it was about $450 billion. If we think about that, money laundering is almost 30% of the value of our tax haul, and the government has done nothing for 10 years. I do recall that Sam Cooper's book identified several Liberals with their fingers in the till earning money off of money laundering, including one of their former MPs, who was linked to money laundering. Again, as Newman says to Seinfeld, what took so long? When we ask this of the Liberals, they stand up and say Harper cut from CBSA. Frank Caputo: Lamoureux never says that.”
“Bill C-2 talks about finally bringing in controls over precursors coming in from mainland China, which are being used for fentanyl. It is not legislation yet; only now are the Liberals talking about it in a bill after almost 10 years. They are talking about strengthening the border, again after 10 years. They are talking about crime. We on this side have been bludgeoning the government over crime. We heard earlier today my colleague from Lethbridge , in tears, going over a horrific crime inflicted on a Canadian, and the government says, “Just wait a bit longer. Didn't you hear? We're going going to bring in bail reform.” It brought in bail reform I think a year or two ago with Bill C-48 , which did nothing. However, now it is promising this again because it is a new government, not the old government.”
“This one specifically reminds me of a Seinfeld episode where they did a play on the “Son of Sam”, David Berkowitz, except it was Newman, the post office man, playing the criminal. I think it was about killing his neighbour's dog. When Jerry and Elaine catch him, he asks what took them so long. That is the question I have for the Liberals. What took them so long? We have had crime issues, border issues and immigration issues for 10 years, not just since the new government. It is not a new government. It is the same old, tired, corrupt, incompetent Liberal government that has been running things for the last nine and a half years. It is the same people who have been in charge for all these years and have done nothing.”
“Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to rise on Bill C-2 . I have been here almost 10 years, long enough to remember the Liberals in 2015 and their campaign promise of no more omnibus bills. Obviously, that promise, along with so many others, has been broken. This is another example of an omnibus bill, with the government trying to squish everything into one large bill and jam it through Parliament despite very valid concerns expressed by quite a few people in the House today. They have tried to paint Conservative, Bloc and NDP members as not co-operative if we disagree with one part of this massive omnibus bill. Bill C-2 reminds me, like many other government bills, of Seinfeld .”
“Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for his excellent speech tonight. Being a border MP, he knows what he is speaking about. He brought up the Canada Post Corporation Act. We actually had the head of Canada Post at the government operations committee, the mighty OGGO. He went on the record and said that the government has not even consulted Canada Post about the changes it is proposing in Bill C-2 . Can my colleague comment on the fact that the government is trying to make changes without even consulting Canada Post?”
“Mr. Speaker, I wonder if my colleague actually read the public accounts before making a statement that the Conservatives cut, because if he had, he would have seen the high point for several years was during the Harper years. In the first three years, the Liberals cut spending, labour and FTEs for the CBSA, which the member's party supported. Would he like to clarify his statements?”
“Mr. Speaker, the government was just talking about adapting for criminality. Should, perhaps, the government adapt to keeping prisoners in jail instead of releasing violent offenders immediately on bail?”
“Mr. Speaker, my colleague talks about nation building. I ask a simple question: Does he believe pipelines would be nation building? The natural resources minister cannot even say the word in the House, and the Liberals' Quebec lieutenant says Canada does not need more pipelines. Does my colleague believe a pipeline would be a nation-building project?”
“Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the following two reports from the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates, known as the mighty OGGO. The first is a report entitled “Canada's Postal Service: A Lifeline for Rural and Remote Communities”, and the second is a report entitled “Renewal of the Parliamentary Budget Officer's Mandate”, where the committee recommends the renewal of the mandate for the PBO and also recognizes his service to Canada. Pursuant to Standing Order 109, the committee requests that the government table a comprehensive response to the first report.”
“Mr. Speaker, we can always tell the level of truthiness from the member's speech. The louder he gets, the less factual it is. So, we can certainly hear the level of truthiness, I guess, in today's speech. The member talks about the one strong economy, and yet the government is a government that helped kill pipelines, energy east, which now leaves us bringing in $20 billion a year of oil from from Donald Trump's America instead of bringing it in from Alberta. The Liberals are keeping the unconstitutional Bill C-69 , the “no new pipeline” ban; they are keeping the oil and gas cap, which is going to drive out many thousands of jobs; and the Quebec lieutenant says, “No more pipelines”. The resource minister cannot even say the word “pipeline” in the House. How is that building one strong Canada?”
“Mr. Speaker, you are doing a fantastic job. I would like to thank my colleague for his excellent speech today, especially the heartwarming tale of his adopted children. The Liberal government itself even admits that it has broken the immigration system. Its own immigration website states that concern about immigration is at the highest level it has been in two decades. The government notes that it is tied to concerns about the impact on housing and public services. Considering the government does not even know how many people this bill would affect, does my colleague think that it would increase or alleviate concerns about how badly the Liberals have bungled the immigration file?”
“Mr. Speaker, we have heard repeatedly, both inside the House and outside, how the Liberal government has broken the immigration system and not just Canadians' trust, but our ability to serve new Canadians. Through my office, I found out that getting an initial work permit or an extension has gone from 60 days to 210 days. Spousal applications for people already here in Canada used to be one year. Now the service standard is about three years. Family reunification is now over four years. I am wondering if my colleague would comment on the changes the government is making without even knowing how many new people will be affected and how the current wait times will be affected.”
“Mr. Speaker, in his well-thought-out speech, my colleague talked about trust and how the government cannot seem to tell Canadians how many people would be affected and what the cost would be. This is from Immigration Canada's own website: Support for immigration among Canadians has decreased substantially. These are the government's own words. The number of Canadians who say we're bringing in too many newcomers is up 50% in two years. The government says it is the most concern about the rate of immigration that it has seen in 20 years. Does the member think the government making these changes in Bill C-3 without knowing how many people would be affected will add trust and confidence to the system?”
“Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate the member for Winnipeg North on his maiden speech of this afternoon. It is remarkable to sit here and listen to the member drone on and on, blaming Harper. It is almost as if the member had not been sitting in that exact same spot for the last 10 years as part of the government that sat and did nothing about this problem. On a different issue, the immigration department released its report this week on misconduct and wrongdoing in the department, including rampant bribery issues, problems with misconduct, ethical lapses and privacy breaches. I wonder if the member opposite could tell us what the government is going to do about these problems within the immigration department, instead of blaming Harper.”
“Mr. Speaker, one of the issues we have with the government is the abject failure of minister after minister on the immigration file. We have seen it here today. When I look at the departmental plans that just came out, late, of course, from the government, over the last four years, I see that it has failed on over 50% of its metrics. Every single year, the department is failing more than it is succeeding in achieving its goals. I wonder if my colleague could provide some insight as to why the government is focusing on issues instead of fixing its problems in-house.”
“If the Liberals continue this way and do not present a budget until spring, it will have been at least a year since the last budget, the longest period since the sixties, outside COVID. Canada needs a budget now to control inflation, reduce deficit, stop tax hikes and reverse the lost decade of Liberal failure.”
“Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are asking Parliament to approve half a trillion dollars in spending without committee oversight, without ministers being able to answer even simple questions in the House and without a budget. The Parliamentary Budget Officer stated that the deficit could be as high as $20 billion more than originally projected and that legislators must risk placing even more faith in the government than usual because there is no budget. Sure, we should put more faith in a government that promises a significantly reduced consulting spending but is increasing it to $26 billion this year for their friends, such as those at McKinsey. Sure, we should put more faith in a government that promised a 2% spending cap increase, yet is increasing it by 8%.”
“Mr. Chair, the minister is reading an answer for the wrong question. Canada Mortgage and Housing paid out $30 million in management bonuses despite the housing hell that the government caused. CMHC's purpose on its website is to promote housing affordability. Does the minister believe housing is affordable and thus warrants $30 million—”
“Mr. Chair, under the legislation was the Minister of National Revenue. There was $138 million paid in bonuses of public service management last year, based upon Treasury Board guidelines. The government only achieved 51% of its targets last year. Does the minister support his rules, which paid out so much of taxpayers' money for so much failure?”
“Mr. Chair, I can assure the member that I actually have read the estimates, unlike himself, apparently. The Liberals called small businesses tax cheats. Is this why the government is cheating small businesses of that $108 million?”
“Mr. Chair, public accounts show $3.3 billion set aside for small businesses for the carbon tax rebate. These estimates show $3.192 billion. Where is the missing $108 million set aside for small businesses?”
“Mr. Chair, $26 billion is more than $20 billion. That is how much more the government is spending on management consultants this year. Does the minister agree that this is a significant cut, as his election campaign called for?”
“Mr. Chair, the Liberal government campaigned on “Significantly reducing” money spent on management consultants, yet the estimates call for $26 billion this year, $6 billion more than last year. Does the minister think $6 billion in added spending is a significant reduction?”
“Mr. Speaker, at the public accounts committee, we heard the assistant deputy minister testify that the government was actually not going after cases of fraud to recover money, only asking for the money back, saying it was open to negotiations with companies that were defrauding taxpayers through procurement policy. I wonder if the colleague across the way could explain why the government is so lenient with companies that are stealing taxpayers' money.”
“We hear the member saying that it is before the courts, but earlier today one of his colleagues, another parliamentary secretary, stood and said that it is not before the courts, because they have to discuss this with their lawyers first. Why did the government continue to grant contracts to GC Strategies for a full two years after the corruption came to light?”
“Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Kings—Hants for an entertaining 20 minutes. I give him points for providing more fiction per minute than even the member for Winnipeg North , but he did it without yelling and screaming. I could spend 20 minutes on detailing some of these things, but I want to bring to light a few of them before I ask the member a question. One is that the member brought up the difference between the public sector and the government, but we actually heard testimony that the minister of public safety at the time, Marco Mendicino, did interfere with the case after it came to light.”
“Mr. Speaker, it is funny. Every time I hear someone from the new Liberal government say that they are going to be ethical in the future, that they are going to do things right in the future and that they are not going to be corrupt in the future, it seems very clear that it is an admission that the last 10 years were nothing but ineptness, incompetence and corruption. It is very clear. The hon. member said that they are going ahead with trying to recover the money from GC Strategies through the courts. One of her colleagues earlier stated that they were not at that point because they were waiting for a legal opinion. At the same time, the deputy minister of PSPC says that they have the ability to recover the funds from suppliers any time they wish. Of the three, which is the truth?”
“Mr. Speaker, we heard in committee repeatedly from the deputy minister of PSPC that the government is aware of many cases of fraud like GC Strategies, but it is negotiating with the contractors to receive the money back for taxpayers, not demanding it back but negotiating. We heard from a parliamentary secretary today who said that despite the government banning GC Strategies from bidding on business because of the known corruption and the fraud, it will not seek the money until it gets a legal opinion. Could my colleague weigh in on why the government is fighting Parliament and common sense on getting the money back for Canadians?”
“Mr. Speaker, as always, I enjoy fiction storytelling time in the House whenever the member for Winnipeg North gets up. It is quite remarkable what lengths the Liberals are going to in trying to distance themselves from their past, the corruption and the tired old Liberal government. The member just has to take a look at today's proceedings to see how many times he has actually stood up and claimed it is brand new, compared, perhaps, to any new members. Earlier, one of the parliamentary secretaries made a statement that from now on they were going to follow the rules and were going to act with integrity. I gave him a chance to correct the issue. Could the member opposite inform us why, just now, after 10 years of the tired, corrupt government, the Liberals are vowing to act with integrity and offering to follow the rules on procurement?”
“Mr. Speaker, I was kind of shocked by one of the comments my colleague made in his speech. He said that from now on, regarding procurement, we will uphold high standards of integrity and follow the rules. I am wondering, does that imply, then, that for the last 10 years in the government, there was no requirement to act with integrity or follow the rules with purchasing? That appears to be the case with GC Strategies and many other issues.”
“Mr. Speaker, it is not just that the government is refusing to get our money back. The scandal was first exposed in 2022 in the operations committee, and one would think that the government would have actually stopped granting contracts to GC Strategies then. However, it continued to give it contracts until March 2024, two years after the scandal came to light. Not only is the government refusing to get taxpayer money back; it also fuelled the problem by continuing to give contracts to a company it knew was defrauding Canadians. It is disgusting.”
“Mr. Speaker, my colleague's question is a valid one about whether we would ask for the money back. Of course we would. The Liberal government, instead of admitting fault, tries to place the blame elsewhere. I want to quote the ADM of PSPC on the issue: “we have the ability to recover the funds from the suppliers...it's...our regular practice to do so.” This is the ADM's stating that it is a regular practice to claw back from contractors money that was taken illegally, or fraudulently obtained money. Why is the government fighting us on this?”
“Mr. Speaker, my colleague from Winnipeg North's intervention was nonsensical, as usual. The Auditor General looked at the contracting and did not find issues from the Harper era. The issues seemed to start in 2015, when the Liberal government took over. The Auditor General did two different reports on contracting around the issue, and not once was an issue brought up of poor procurement or fraudulent activity during the Harper era. It was all done during the Liberal era. I think the gentleman needs to reflect on himself and his comments, and look inward to see where the corruption is.”
“It cost $60 million for ArriveCAN. We know that the government has the ability to get the money back. We know the issue is serious enough that the RCMP actually raided the home of one of the owners to seize documents. The government needs to stop coddling its friends, high-priced management consultants. It needs to start getting value for money. It can start by clawing back the fraudulently stolen money from GC Strategies that was taken from Canadian taxpayers. It is time to put our taxpayers, not Liberal insiders, first.”
“I would have thought it would be inferred, as a condition of employment, that someone is not going to break the law or break rules when awarding contracts, but not with the Liberals. They actually forced them to put it in writing. Let us talk about GC Strategies and the issues we are trying to get money back for. Here are some of the issues. The company created and used fraudulent documents to ensure subcontractors' resumes met criteria for contracts. That is fraud. There were subcontracted individuals, but their work and payments were funded through other companies using the same general contract. That is fraud. Without knowledge or consent of individuals, GC Strategies used their identities to bill the government. The company used contractors with no security clearance, despite attesting they actually had security clearance.”
“They insisted that the ArriveCAN app saved thousands of lives. Eight different ministers, including the former prime minister and the parliamentary secretary, stood in the House and said that ArriveCAN saved up to 10,000 lives. Then they accused the opposition of being anti-vax and anti-science if they did not believe in the ArriveCAN app. I guess the Auditor General must be anti-science as well, because she came out with two damning reports on the government and its conduct in dealing with GC strategies. Procurement has gotten so bad with the government that it actually forced bureaucrats and officials to attest in writing to following government procurement rules before they award a contract.”
“The two employees had no programming skills; the only skill they seemed to have was how to work with the Liberal government to fleece money from Canadians. They basically won contracts and then subcontracted them out to others, taking a 15% to 30% cut along the way. In what world does a company with just two people get so much money and do no work? It is a Liberal world, apparently. GC Strategies even managed to win contracts and then subcontract them out to Microsoft. Microsoft is a pretty large company, yet Microsoft was not able to win the contracts from the government, but GC Strategies did and subcontracted them out. What happened when the outrageous conduct came to light? The Liberals, instead of fixing it or saying that there was an error and that they would look after it, were gaslighting Canadians.”
“(1025) McKinsey, if anyone has not realized, is probably one of the worst corporations in the world. It helped supercharge the opioid crisis. It represents some of the most despotic regimes in the world. If McKinsey were a human being, it would be a Bond villain, yet the government violated procurement rules to shove money into McKinsey's pockets. Even when government bureaucrats came forward and said, “We have the bodies available to do this work”, the government broke rules to give money to McKinsey. It was the same with ArriveCAN and GC Strategies. GC Strategies received close to $100 million from the Liberal government since it formed in 2015. The company had two employees working in someone's basement, doing no IT work, doing no other work except for getting government business and then contracting it out to someone else.”
“The app cost $60 million and somehow the government forgot. It did not have the resources to check if the update worked, but that is okay. Again, what do we expect from an app that only cost $80 million, we think? I say “we think” because even the Auditor General cannot figure out how much the app cost as the bookkeeping from the government was so poorly done. Literally, the departments have tens of thousands of people working in their accounting departments. The AG has a very large force, and they could not figure out how much this cost. Of course, we know the root cause of the problem. The root cause is Liberal incompetence. The cause, of course, is the Liberals' almost stalker-like affection for handing out Canadian taxpayers' money to high-priced management consultants, much like McKinsey.”
“Millions had to endure the problems with ArriveCAN at the borders, coming in at the airports, dealing with an app that did not work, dealing with an app that sometimes would not work with certain Wi-Fi networks, enduring missed flights and long waits at the airport, enduring this horrible app. They thought it was a simple app that only cost $80,000, but then they found out that this app, which sent them into long lines and sometimes sent them into quarantine by mistake, actually ended up costing over $60 million. I mentioned how it actually accidentally sent people into quarantine. An app upgrade came out and actually sent 10,000 people, by mistake, into quarantine. We found out later that the government said that it did not actually test the upgrade before issuing it. Can we imagine?”
“Of course, we had the SNC-Lavalin scandal, in which the former prime minister interfered with the justice department. We saw the former prime minister and his cabinet interfere in the WE Charity scandal, trying to funnel $900 million to their friends and family members. We had the green slush fund, in which the current finance minister oversaw $400 million being grifted by Liberal insiders and, of course, the Edmonton-based “other Randy” scandal. Of all these bigger scandals, we have to wonder why Canadians were so consumed by ArriveCAN. I think that, even though ArriveCAN was not as large financially, it is because so many Canadians had to deal with the broken ArriveCAN app.”
“There are too many to mention, but there are some special ones I want to thank: Barb, Judy, Graham, Daime, Brandon, Donovan, Gilles, Jeff, Yolanda, Cheryl and Isabelita, as well as the kids from Parkland Immanuel Christian School who came out in force and door knocked with us, especially Tristan and Braiden, as well as Cheryl, who helped out, and all the door knockers who helped us hit 48,000 doors last election. We have a lot of new communities in my riding, as 28% of the riding is new, so I want to let those people know that we will look forward to serving them. On the issue at hand, GC Strategies and the arrive scam, I have been here for 10 years now. I have never seen the country so consumed with a scandal. We have had plenty from the government.”
“I want to thank my son Parker, who was my campaign manager. He did a phenomenal job. It was his first time as campaign manager and his third time helping me in the campaign. He did such a great job that we had our second-best results ever. I thank Parker. I would also like to thank my other son, Jensen, for his continued support. I thank my office staff, Oula, Linda, Margaret and Mick, for their continued support to the constituents, as well as my financial agent, Dennis, who actually, unlike the government, knows how to put together a budget, apparently. I thank the many volunteers.”
“Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to rise on this issue. It has consumed my life in the operations committee for several years. Before I start, though, I would like to seek the House's permission, as this is my first time speaking in a speech, to comment on the last election. I want to thank my constituents in Edmonton West for sending me here for the fourth time. I certainly appreciate the support, and I pledge to continue to serve the good people of Edmonton West, or as I call it, “Edmonton West Edmonton Mall”. I want to thank my wife, Sasha, for her continued support. This is the fourth election. She has been through probably 15 elections with me, four for myself. I thank her for her continued support. I realize that she does it so that she can get me out of the house and out of her hair, but I thank her very much.”
“Mr. Speaker, it ended years after they were exposed. Now, $64 million went to Liberal friends at GC Strategies, in rampant sole-sourcing of contracts with no justification and projects paid for despite no work being done. Incompetence is so ingrained in the government that it has actually ordered officials to put in writing that they are not violating procurement rules when they are granting contracts. Now the Liberals want $26 billion more for these consultants. When will the Liberals turn off the taps to their friends and focus instead on clawing back the money from this fraudulent GC Strategies?”
“Mr. Speaker, the Auditor General has once again exposed the Liberals' incompetence, highlighting millions wasted on their good friends and favourite consultant, GC Strategies. Not only have the Liberals not clawed back one penny from this scam, but every Trudeau minister with their fingerprints on the scandal has been promoted by the Prime Minister . Now the Liberals are planning an extra $26 billion of taxpayer money for their insider consultant friends. How about they spend less on insider friends and invest more on clawing back the money from GC Strategies?”