Discussion · Government Orders

Alex Ruff Conservative

“The government gave a security contract to a company instead of the Commissionaires. That only happened because the government ended an old rule that gave the Commissionaires first choice. The government will not explain why. The other company employs about 12 veterans, while the Commissionaires employs over 4,000. I want the member to explain why the rule changed and which company helps veterans more.”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, my question to the member, and he seems to be fairly informed, has two parts. First, the only reason CRA was able to issue this contract to a company other than Commissionaires was that Veterans Affairs removed the right of first refusal to Commissionaires, a policy that has been in place since 1945. The government refused to answer a question about that when I asked during question period. Maybe the member now knows why. Second, I just want to clarify that, during his statement, the member said, I believe, that Allied Universal has maybe 12 Canadian veterans currently employed by the company. I point out that Commissionaires has over 4,000 Canadian veterans. Which one does he think would actually provide more employment opportunity, especially for older Canadian veterans?

No comments yet.

Comment rules