Ned Kuruc

Did your bank fund it?

You provided a loan to a company that outsourced Canadian jobs, when we have several shipbuilders here in Canada. That's my question. You can dance around it—I don't think you are—but you funded it. Without funding, that wouldn't be possible. There are many jobs that don't get funded, but we have to protect Canadian jobs, especially in this economic downturn and especially after 11 years of a [more]

I would like to begin my remarks by stating that public infrastructure should strengthen Canadian industry, support skilled trades and keep strategic work here at home. I represent Hamilton. Our steel built this country. We have shipbuilders in Hamilton as well. My first question is this. The Canada Infrastructure Bank dished out $8.6 million in bonuses from 2024 to 2025. The records show that [more]

Thank you for explaining it. My question was more along the lines of...in nine years, you guys have completed 11 projects. I don't know what the measuring stick for success is. I'm not sure if that is or isn't, but we are public accounts, so we have to take the taxpayers' money into account. That's why I asked that question. I'll move on to another question. Were you involved in the decision by [more]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to touch a little on theory and reality. We heard my colleague across the way talk about launch capability and how it is going to create jobs and all this good stuff, but then we actually have reality. The reality is that Maritime Launch Services leased to Canada for $20 million a year a concrete pad, which is being leased for $13,000 a year. Our Canadian taxpayers are [more]

Thank you, Chair, for allowing me to speak. I want to thank my colleagues across the way for introducing me to my very first filibuster. Make no mistake about it. It was a very elegant one and a very polite one, but nonetheless a filibuster. This is quite concerning to me, considering that my colleague from the Bloc Québécois is trying to pass a motion to understand why there are cost overruns [more]

Please don't.

I have a point of order about relevance. Where are you going with this?

I want to say thank you to all the witnesses for coming today. My line of questioning will focus on the taxpayer dollar and the value for money, as I often tend to do. Ms. Kovacevic, the Auditor General found that your department failed to implement over 50% of their recommendations. Her office gave recommendations, I believe between 2015 and 2022, to improve barriers in health; dental care; [more]

That's fair enough, but the person couldn't speak French. For service and communications, this is a key factor on the Hill. I will leave it at that. Thank you very much. I'm good, Mr. Chair. Thank you.

That's fair enough. Thank you for the answer. This specific person couldn't speak French. They were unfamiliar with software. They had no experience in government and lacked expertise. Again, you still haven't acknowledged any wrongdoing or any errors in judgment. You don't have to answer this if you don't want to, but I find it very concerning, because now you're in a portfolio where we need [more]

Thank you all for coming today. I appreciate your attendance. Ms. Fox, I want to turn back to you. You mentioned the ethics report. In your answer to my colleague and in some of the reports I've read since Friday, you haven't really acknowledged any wrongdoing or errors. Is this because you believe your conduct was in line with the government's diversity, equity and inclusion guidelines in the [more]