This is a problem that we have. As parliamentarians, we have come to just accept that people can come before us and they can lie and refuse to answer questions and there's no consequence. Why would anyone come here and tell the truth if there's no consequence for it?
I was absolutely not embarrassed by the questioning of Mr. Firth when he was admonished at the bar. He was found by the House of Commons, Canada's Parliament, to be in contempt. That wasn't a Conservative smear job. That was a failure by that individual. It was a failure of his character. It was a failure of his integrity. He was rightly admonished. The only thing that's a shame is that there weren't more severe consequences for the contempt that individual showed for Canadians, who elected us to come here and to get answers for them.
When we hold people to no standard, then we get no quality from people who are looking to protect themselves instead of being accountable to the people who were sent here by Canadians. We each represent about 100,000 people, and they expect us to be honest and forthright. The same is true for witnesses who come before committee.
The witness today swore an oath and it is black and white: He lied.
He lied. If it's uncomfortable for members of the other parties, if it's uncomfortable for Liberals.... I know that Mr. Kusmierczyk said that it's because Conservatives want to put words in in Mr. Doan's mouth. Well, let's just look at his words, where he said one thing at one meeting and something different at today's meeting: Were you lying then or are you lying now?
That's the binary we're left with, to say nothing of the fact that it's absolutely preposterous, his claim that the data was corrupted on his laptop. It's ridiculous. It's absolutely ridiculous. If members of the committee don't feel like it was an attempt to insult their intelligence, take another listen to what he offered.
We should, as a committee, bring someone here from the computer shop down on Rideau Street to tell us why it's absolutely absurd. I'm not going to involve the professionals who work in IT in this building, who would tell you that it's absurd: Control+C, Control+V? You've got to be kidding me—more like “Control+X” and “Delete”.
It's behaviour unbecoming of a public servant, and it's absolutely unacceptable behaviour by a witness coming before a standing committee of a House of Parliament. Does it warrant a conversation by the full House when the privileges of parliamentarians are breached? Absolutely it does, and the remedy is something that should be decided on by the House
I'm absolutely not in the least bit disappointed or ashamed, as other colleagues suggested, about how someone who lied to Canadians was simply asked to answer questions at the bar truthfully and to accept a verbal admonishment.
Also, with respect to the quote-unquote gruelling conditions today: kid gloves, five- and ten-minute breaks and appearing virtually with counsel and he still couldn't even tell the truth.
I'm not sure what Mr. Sousa's comment was. Maybe he wanted to offer us something about his experience with deleted emails in the Ontario legislature, but we can look at court records for that.
I have nothing further to add.