RCMP documents from 2019 reveal they looked at whether they could charge Trudeau based on the findings in a report from the federal ethics commissioner, which concluded that Mr. Trudeau had violated four sections of the Conflict of Interest Act. Investigators believed there were “reasonable grounds” to think fraud may have been committed, but a lack of clarity in federal rules that apply to accepting gifts stood in the way.  The relevant section of the Criminal Code has a provision which allows officials to accept benefits if they have written consent from the head of their branch of government.

However, Trudeau in the House of Commons said that, no, he was not given permission to take the trip. The RCMP just never asked. So, according to his own answers and the RCMP flowchart, Trudeau should be charged with fraud.

New evidence came out that the RCMP considered charging Prime Minister Trudeau over the free trip to the Aga Khan’s Island. Even though it was a conflict of interest and proven fraud, the RCMP thought it would ‘look bad’.

I can’t sit here and be part of a government cover up. And that’s why this morning I again wrote to the RCMP Commissioner regarding the RCMP criminal brief on the investigation into the Prime Minister’s $215,000 private island vacation. The criminal brief says the RCMP differed to the Ethics Commissioner. interpretation of the Prime Minister’s actions were not criminal in nature. However, we now know from the news, the former commissioner Mary Dawson was unfamiliar with the Criminal Code offense of fraud against the government, she had no interpretation to give. So has the Prime Minister spoken to the RCMP in the last week about his criminal behavior?

I think it’s important to recognize even before the Prime Minister was the Prime Minister, even before he was the leader of the Liberal Party, conservative members always had personal attacks against the Prime Minister. Ever since we’ve been in government. Their focus has been character assassination. While they want to focus on that, Mr. Speaker, we will continue to focus on programs that matter. And an excellent example of that is the National Child Care Program. Mr. Speaker, a program that is serving Canadians in every region of our nation today.

The Prime Minister should really answer his questions he can run but he can’t hide from the law. The RCMP difference to the retired Commissioner Dawson was asserted as one of the justifications for why it was not in the public interest to pursue a criminal investigation. But now all the public interest arguments by the RCMP for not pursuing charges have been undone in the past week. It is in the public interest for Canadians to know the Prime Minister is not above the law. So will the Prime Minister and his staff cooperate with the RCMP in this investigation of fraud on the government by the Prime Minister.

April we’re witnessing is an ongoing continuation of political theatrics from the Conservative Party. Three leaders ago they were talking about this, Mr. Speaker, at the end of the day, as I’ve pointed out in the previous questions, is that they can continue they can do what they want with their focus. What I can assure Canadians, Mr. Speaker is that this government, whether it’s the Prime Minister, other cabinet ministers, or the Liberal caucus, a whole as a whole will continue to focus our attention on making life better for all Canadians in every region of this nation.

I would like to start off by questioning Miss Lucky commissioner of the RCMP. Miss Lucky Do you acknowledge and agree that the RCMP is independent of the federal government and is free to investigate without influence? Yes. Has the RCMP ever been influenced and or deterred by the federal government to investigate a criminal matter? Not to my knowledge. Is the RCMP free from any influence or direction by the federal government to lay a criminal charge?

Absolutely.

If the subject matter of an investigation, is the prime minister himself, are you concerned about any government interference or reprisal? No.

The measures that were undertaken pursuant to the scope motion that Mr. brach himself voted for, and that’s with respect to the enforcement measures.

I suggest we listen to Mr. Brock here his line of questioning not sure, but I would imagine that there was a link there.

Miss Lucky? Are you aware that today in the house during question period, the Prime Minister admitted that he did not give himself permission to accept a free vacation from a federal lobbyist competing mission.

I’m gonna have to agree with Mr. Villani to rock unless you have an explanation to provide I don’t think this is relevant to our current study, on the declaration in the state of emergency.

I respectfully disagree. The prime minister as head of government, the Prime Minister was the lead voice in the invocation of the emergencies act. He is now under a cloud of suspicion with respect to the offense of fraud. Fraud is offense of dishonesty. Dishonesty involves the matter of integrity and character.

I would just like us to give Mr. Brock an opportunity to explain things he’s comments or I’ve said are not relevant. He’s trying to make an argument to try to convince us I’m listening but he hasn’t yet caused me to change my mind. I’m gonna let him have this opportunity to continue explain thing. Are you done? Mr. Brock?

I had one final point. Okay. On the issue of integrity and character and honesty, Canadians have a right to know whether or not our head of government has been compromised because of his involvement in this particular matter. And hence, there has been an erosion of trust in the federal government to grow the nation.

I’m sorry, Mr. Brock, but thank you, Mr. Brock. I’m maintaining my decision in that. This question, this line of questioning is not relevant to our debate.

Conservatives accuse in the House of Commons that the Prime Minister was found guilty on four sections of the conflict of interest Act and that the only reason the RCMP didn’t charge him was because he is the prime minister.  The RCMP said the Prime Minister was off the hook because he could have granted himself permission to accept a luxurious vacation gift worth $215,000.