SoVote

Nov/23/21 3:52:36 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I would like to bring to your attention certain points that I believe are essential for your consideration with regard to my colleague's question of privilege. On the last day of the last Parliament, you promised the House that in the event of its dissolution should the government call a general election, the Speaker of the House of the new Parliament would review and rule on the questions of privilege that remained unanswered. We are currently debating one such question regarding the failure by the president of the Public Health Agency of Canada to table documents requested by a formal order of the House on June 2, 2021. I believe that this question needs to be given priority, especially given its importance in maintaining the authority and dignity of the House of Commons and protecting constitutional rights, both the collective rights and privileges of the House and those of elected representatives as individuals. I want to remind the House of two points. First, the government failed to comply with the orders issued by the Special Committee on Canada-China Relations on March 31 and May 10, 2021, and the orders issued by the House of Commons on June 2 and June 17, 2021. Second, the Speaker admonished the Public Health Agency of Canada's top bureaucrat for contempt. It is quite worrisome that the Liberal government's response to the House of Common's order was to take legal action against the House in Federal Court to seal the requested documents. For all these reasons, we cannot let this stand. I repeat that this is about protecting the authority and dignity of our institution, and the Speaker has a duty to protect the constitutional rights of the legislative branch. The authors of the third edition of House of Commons Procedure and Practice addressed this point on page 82, stating that disobedience of a legitimate command of the House must be considered contempt, especially when a witness without reasonable excuse refuses to provide information or produce papers required by the House. I would like to quote what you said on June 21 about this matter: The privileges held by the House of Commons are an integral part of the Constitution Act, 1867, and the Parliament of Canada Act. These rights include the right to require the production of documents. Under the Standing Orders of the House of Commons, committees of the House exercise these same rights when carrying out their respective mandates. Although he was ordered to produce documents at least four times, the president of the Public Health Agency of Canada failed to respect the will of the House, which is significant, and voluntarily failed to produce the requested documents relating to the security breaches at the National Microbiology Laboratory in Winnipeg and the firing of the two scientists from the lab. The June 17 order was very clear that two things had to happen. First, the president of the Public Health Agency of Canada, Mr. Stewart, was to attend at the bar to receive the deserved admonishment for the repeated failure to comply with the previous orders of the Special Committee on Canada-China Relations. Second, he was to table the required documents, which, unfortunately, has not yet happened. We debated it at length on the last day of the previous Parliament. The arguments that were made and the references that were mentioned give Parliament the full authority to use its power to enforce the orders adopted by the majority. In closing, given the foregoing comments, we ask you to protect the parliamentary rights and privileges of the House and the elected representatives who make it up, to preserve the authority and the dignity of the House, which is no small matter, and to rule accordingly under the circumstances so that the order of June 17, 2021, is duly respected and the documents are properly submitted to the House. The Bloc Québécois therefore supports the official opposition's proposal in this regard.

679 words

All Topics

Hon. Mark Holland (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.)

Nov/23/21 3:57:28 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I will say to the opposition House leader that absolutely we have excellent conversations. I appreciate the opportunity to begin working with him. I congratulate him on his reappointment to that position. To the opposition House leader of the Bloc, who was just speaking, we similarly have had very strong conversations, as we have with the House leader for the NDP. I think we will have ample opportunity to be able to discuss these matters in detail. The problem that arises, and this was the point I made earlier, is that in the absence of a motion or a committee report that would be necessary to proceed in this, it is simply premature. I would state that this is not to be before the House at this time. This is not a matter that should be dealt with here, at this moment. However, I would encourage the House leaders, who are going to be meeting in about an hour, to continue the conversation in that forum, as that would be the appropriate place to continue the conversation.

179 words

All Topics

The Speaker

Nov/23/21 3:58:27 p.m.
Watch

It is nice to hear that discussions are going on and about to happen, and hopefully they are fruitful. The hon. member for Vancouver Kingsway is rising on a point of order as well.

34 words

All Topics

Mr. Don Davies (Vancouver Kingsway, NDP)

Nov/23/21 3:58:38 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I actually rise to speak to the point of privilege raised by my hon. colleague from the official opposition. Before I start, I would take this opportunity to thank the wonderful people of Vancouver Kingsway for doing me the honour and privilege of electing me to represent them. I will be mercifully brief and concise. Yesterday, on the opening day of the 44th Parliament, we heard repeated invocations from all sides of this House about the need to honour and respect this institution and each other. We were reminded of the foundational principles of this place. Those principles include democracy, the rule of law and the supremacy of Parliament. No government of any stripe is entitled to ignore these fundamental principles of our nation. To do so is an act of autocracy and a repudiation of the basic tenets of our nation, for which so many fought and died. If a majority of members in this place vote to produce documents that they deem necessary to carry out their duty to the people they represent, who elected them to be here, then this must be complied with. This is regardless of how embarrassing or inconvenient a government of the day may find such a request. Indeed, that is often when it is most important to comply. It is about accountability. It is about transparency and it is about respect for Parliament. New Democrats will always support these cherished cornerstones of responsible government. As such, we support this claim of privilege and respectfully ask you to uphold it in our name.

262 words

All Topics

The Speaker

Nov/23/21 4:00:51 p.m.
Watch

I want to thank the hon. member for being brief and concise, the way that it should be. The hon. member for Saanich—Gulf Islands is rising on this issue as well.

33 words

Ms. Elizabeth May (Saanich—Gulf Islands, GP)

Nov/23/21 4:01:09 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I will be even more brief and concise than my friend from Vancouver Kingsway to say on the record that the Green Party is equally concerned and supports the concerns of the hon. member for Louis-Saint-Laurent, the hon. member for La Prairie and the hon. member for Vancouver Kingsway. Time has gone by, and it is hard to assert that this matter is premature.

68 words

All Topics

The Speaker

Nov/23/21 4:01:32 p.m.
Watch

Before beginning with the hon. member for Barrie—Innisfil, I just received something here about the Speaker's role and exactly what the Speaker is supposed to do. It ought to be explained that the issue that is before the Speaker is not finding of fact. It is simply whether a first impression of the issue that is before the House warrants priority consideration over all other matters of the day that are put before the House. I just want to make sure that we understand exactly what the process is and why we are bringing it up. We make sure that the issue is very pressing and then we run with it. When any new items come up, we want to make sure they are important, and that is something that the Speaker will have to rule on and determine. I am not saying it is or it is not. I am just saying this is the process and I want to make sure everyone understands so we do not go into too many details that will not leave us anything to debate afterwards. The hon. member for Barrie—Innisfil.

193 words

All Topics

Mr. John Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil, CPC)

Nov/23/21 4:02:40 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, let me begin by congratulating you on your election as Speaker. As we all know, it comes with a tremendous amount of responsibility to conduct oneself in an impartial manner, and I have the utmost confidence in your ability to do that. Congratulations once again. I am rising on a question of privilege today concerning the very troubling allegations published this month respecting the Clerk of the House. I am sure we have all watched or read Ashley Burke's reporting on these matters. It was based on at least 10 different credible sources as well as primary documents, but it is important to put the most pertinent details on the record of the House. Broadly speaking, the allegations fall into one of two distinct but no less troubling categories. One concerns a management style that has led to a rapid loss of top talent and deep experience from the table, and the other concerns demonstrations of partisanship through the Clerk's comments and actions. I understand that some of the complainants' letters, cries for help really, have even recently made it into some Parliament Hill inboxes, and it is my respectful view that all told, these allegations amount to a prima facie case of privilege, which the House must address urgently. I will be focusing on the partisanship allegations, but I cannot turn a blind eye to what the CBC confirmed. Three senior figures at the table took sick leave and then early retirement, while a fourth senior official is now on sick leave, owing to the Clerk's management style. According to CBC, Colette Labrecque-Riel—

271 words

The Speaker

Nov/23/21 4:04:30 p.m.
Watch

I am disturbed by the attack on individuals in our administration from either side. Something we have to look at is that these items are personnel items and normally dealt with at the Board of Internal Economy. To attack someone with allegations who is already in our administration I find very troubling. I feel that if the hon. member wants to deal with that item, I would feel much more comfortable and would ask him to have his members of the Board of Internal Economy bring it forward and actually look into the facts rather than the allegations that are being brought forward. To attack someone who cannot defend themselves in the chamber, I feel, is very troubling, and I must stop that attack. I ask the member to talk to his representatives on the Board of Internal Economy so that we can look into it deeper, find out what the facts are and then proceed from there.

158 words

Mr. John Brassard

Nov/23/21 4:05:41 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, as I stated at the outset, the allegations are extremely disturbing and troubling. If we are going to go back and forth on this, I think—

29 words

The Speaker

Nov/23/21 4:05:50 p.m.
Watch

I will let the hon. government House leader rise on this question of privilege.

14 words

Hon. Mark Holland (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.)

Nov/23/21 4:06:00 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, let us not start this Parliament in this way, by attacking servants of the House. There is a forum for this. You have stated that that forum is the Board of Internal Economy. That is where we deal with personnel matters. We do not deal in this chamber in parlaying in rumours and things that people received in their inboxes, with all due respect to the member across the aisle. Every individual who works for this place, particularly those who are servants of this place and do not have the ability to defend themselves or stand in their places to give their side of the story, should have these matters adjudicated in camera, with the opportunity for all of the facts to be present as opposed to a one-sided smear of an individual who is trying to serve this place and to do so with distinction and honour. Mr. Speaker, we have heard enough. Please let us end this.

162 words

Hon. Michelle Rempel Garner (Calgary Nose Hill, CPC)

Nov/23/21 4:07:00 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, congratulations on your role. I would make this argument. Allegations have come to light about somebody who is serving in this room's capacity to serve the House. Those allegations speak to our privilege as members, in that some of the allegations that I believe my colleague will address speak to investigations that did not come to light. These did not happen at the Board of Internal Economy. The allegations that have also come to light since the dissolution of the last Parliament relate to the ability of the House to address sexual harassment issues, including from former members of staff. At the start of this Parliament, it is imperative that we understand if the House has the ability, under the leadership of this person, to conduct appropriate investigations and ensure that sovereignty is maintained. This is not just a breach of a staff member's privilege, but it is a breach of my privilege. On the 100th anniversary of the first woman being elected to the House of Commons, I would argue that systemic misogyny and the inability of the House to adequately address sexual harassment issues is in fact a breach of privilege. I believe what my colleague is about to do is to explore and give you, Mr. Speaker, evidence to consider whether or not this is the case. The time to do this is now, at the start of the first Parliament. The allegations that have come to light over the last several weeks deeply suggest that something is wrong and something is amiss, and that the typical processes through the Board of Internal Economy, in which someone in this room has a significant role, are not able to function. That in and of itself is a case of privilege. On this point of order I would say, respectfully, Mr. Speaker, out of respect for this institution, as well as a note to my colleague to be concise in his arguments, that this is something we absolutely must address in this place, particularly for the people at home who cannot speak here and who have been impacted by this. You were very right in saying that there are people here who do not have a voice and this place is for us to give a voice to them. Mr. Speaker, respectfully, and again to my colleagues, I ask that they bring these matters up in fact-based, non-partisan facts. We are dealing with the ability of the House to function in this Parliament. I am deeply troubled by it. I am also tired of having to stand up and give the same speech in the same iteration over and over again. I would ask respectfully that my colleague be allowed to continue. I will probably add to his argument. I would ask my colleague to be concise in his argument, but this must be addressed. Light must be shone on it. It is only to be done in this place.

497 words

The Speaker

Nov/23/21 4:09:56 p.m.
Watch

Just so that the hon. member has some background here, sexual harassment is something that is being dealt with as part of the agenda in the next Board of Internal Economy meeting. Looking at the facts is very important. The hon. member for Banff—Airdrie.

46 words

Mr. Blake Richards (Banff—Airdrie, CPC)

Nov/23/21 4:10:22 p.m.
Watch

On that same point of order, when a member rises in this place to bring forward a point of privilege, that is to bring arguments before you, Mr. Speaker, to give you the opportunity to determine whether there is in fact a breach of privileges. It is not for the government House leader or anyone else in this place to determine the validity of that point of privilege. He can certainly make his arguments, if he wishes, when the member making the point of privilege has finished making his points. As my colleague has just indicated, obviously whatever would have occurred at the Board of Internal Economy has not managed to resolve this matter. If it is a breach of members' privileges, this is the place for it to be dealt with. I would also remind the House that the Clerk is in fact appointed by the House, not by the Board of Internal Economy. There is an argument that needs to be made here in the House. I think it is important that this member be heard, and that he has the opportunity to bring forward his points so that you, Mr. Speaker, can properly determine this. It is not for anyone else to make that determination. I think he should be allowed the opportunity to make his points so that you can determine whether there is in fact a breach of privilege.

234 words

The Speaker

Nov/23/21 4:11:48 p.m.
Watch

I want to thank the hon. member for that point, and I agree with him on the point of process and how the Clerk is appointed. That is something that gets decided by members, and that is something we can look at. However, when it comes to personnel issues, I feel very strongly that these should be dealt with at the Board of Internal Economy. When these come up, they should be dealt with there by all members. There is representation from all sides on that one. I will let the hon. member for Barrie—Innisfil continue, but I want to ask for less innuendo. Just stick to the facts, please. That is all I ask, to say something that we can prove. We want to see the facts. I will ask the hon. member for Barrie—Innisfil to continue.

142 words

Mr. John Brassard

Nov/23/21 4:12:44 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the arguments that have been made are profound on the part of the privilege and the rights of members. The Speaker will recall that some very serious allegations have been made that I believe breach the rights and privileges of members, not the least of which is a table officer acting in a partisan manner. I am not attempting to bring those issues in a manner that exacerbates the kinds of challenges that exist. What I am trying to do is lay out the facts as we now know them so the Speaker can make a prima facie case of the rights and privileges of the members being dealt with. At the end of what I am presenting, I offer an option and a solution that the Speaker can act on, but in the absence of presenting the facts as we know them and the facts as they came out, it is awfully difficult for me to talk in terms that would give the Speaker a better understanding to make a decision that is in the best interests of the House. We are dealing with not just the rights and privileges of our members, but also the confidence in the ability of our democracy and our democratic institutions to function in the manner in which they should. Some of those accusations, as salacious as they are and as uncomfortable as they may be, are very important points I need to make in this discourse to the Speaker. I would ask for some latitude with that and ask that I continue to lay these out not as a way to disrespect a certain individual but to present the information that is in front of me, and that has been presented to all of us as members, as it relates to our rights and privileges. I will continue in the manner in which I started, which is to lay out this case to suggest that the rights and privileges of members have been breached as they relate to the functioning of our democracy. As I continue, according to CBC, Colette Labrecque-Riel, a former clerk assistant, wrote to the Speaker that—

362 words

The Speaker

Nov/23/21 4:15:47 p.m.
Watch

We have a point of order from the hon. government House leader.

12 words

Hon. Mark Holland

Nov/23/21 4:15:50 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, this is a terrible precedent. If we are going to adjudicate claims or rumours of harassment in this forum, where there is parliamentary privilege and where the individuals in question cannot defend themselves, it is an abhorrent precedent. We have the Board of Internal Economy. We have a process for this. I stand not only because of this situation, but for any person who would ever wish to serve the House and who could imagine themselves in a situation where their accuser was given the opportunity to fully display the arguments of the accusation, but the person who was being accused was afforded no opportunity of defence or to produce their evidence. There is a process for that, called in camera. It is called the ability to examine these facts. I remind members that we are talking about the Clerk of the House of Commons, a servant of 40 years whose integrity is being questioned at this moment. On the allegations, a third-party independent report was done that stated the attacks on his integrity and honesty were “baseless”. To litigate these matters in the House without the opportunity for the individual in question to stand and defend himself or to produce evidence to the contrary is an abhorrent violation of what any employee should expect in terms of protection so these matters can be looked at. There is a precedent being established in this chamber right now. There is a line being crossed. I ask the Speaker to please, for the sake of this place and the people who would serve it, to stop this absolute farce from continuing.

274 words

Hon. Michelle Rempel Garner

Nov/23/21 4:17:44 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I am rising on the same point of order. For what it is worth, I think you may have a point on perhaps not reiterating the entirety of the allegations that have been reported to the CBC. However, I would ask that you understand that these are material to the case that is about to be made. I am not a member of the Board of Internal Economy. I would like to speak to this point of privilege from a different angle than perhaps my colleague will, but I think it is important that you hear him speak to what he believes the breach of privilege is. This is the time to do it, at the start of this Parliament. I am acutely aware, personally, of the ramifications I might have in my role because of questioning someone in a position of power such as the person we are discussing. I understand what that might mean for me given the import of his role in the House of Commons. I would not be doing this lightly if I did not feel it material to the functioning of the House going forward. I would ask you respectfully to allow my colleague to continue. I would perhaps strongly agree with you that my colleague keep his argument tight to the matter at hand and only refer to the allegations and assumptions as we know them, but we are allowed to make the case of privilege.

245 words

SoVote

House Hansard - 2