44th Parl. 1st Sess.
May 4, 2023 10:00AM
- May/4/23 10:18:39 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, yesterday in the House, I asked the Minister of Public Safety twice, as did other members, when his office learned of this, and he refused to answer.
I learned about it in The Globe and Mail, but CSIS told the committee that it most definitely briefs the government about instances when politicians are targeted by hostile foreign governments. Therefore, it is simply not credible for the government to claim that it found out about it from The Globe and Mail. The minister's office knew about it two years ago. That is why he will not say when his office learned of it, because it has been two years and the Liberals did nothing.
116 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/4/23 10:21:54 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the NDP agrees. There is no question that there needs to be a public inquiry, one that is completely independent and transparent. To that end, my question for the member is this. What does he think is necessary in order to ensure the process is one that all parties could agree to? For example, would the commissioner be chosen with the participation of all leaders in the House to make sure that it is something that we believe will be completely independent?
84 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/4/23 10:22:36 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, if a public inquiry is to have any credibility, whoever leads that inquiry must not only be independent but also must be seen to be independent, which is why Conservatives, along with all of the opposition parties, have called on the Liberal government to establish a process whereby the House leaders of all the parties agree and consent to whoever is appointed to lead such an inquiry. First, however, we need an inquiry.
75 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/4/23 11:25:37 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, as I said, I do not claim to be inside the government's head, nor do I wish to be.
That said, I will reiterate what I said at the beginning of my speech: The longer this drags on, the dirtier it gets and the more it becomes a partisan issue, when that is not what democracy should be. The longer the House continues to refuse to hold an independent public inquiry, the longer we will be embroiled in he-said-she-said debates, instead of putting measures in place to prevent foreign interference in the future. Unfortunately, we are mired in secrecy and innuendo, and the longer we delay creating an independent public commission, the more likely we are to descend into partisan squabbling, which, unfortunately, will not get anyone anywhere.
134 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/4/23 11:29:07 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I agree with my colleague’s premise, except perhaps that I believe the Bloc Québécois was the first to point out the importance of an independent public inquiry.
There are several things that can be done and put in place, including the creation of a foreign agent registry, which has been called for since November 2020. We have been told that consultations to set up such a registry are about to begin, when this registry is a tool that would make it possible to make certain arrests and lay charges for the interference that is currently occurring.
We do not have the legislative tools we need. All actions must be taken together, in a concerted manner. Individually, they are not enough. The independent public inquiry is the main one, but there are many other things we can do right now.
147 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/4/23 11:55:06 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, first, I want to thank the member for owning up to the fact that what he said was inappropriate and making that apology. I do appreciate it.
To the question about what would be a completely non-partisan public inquiry, which is absolutely essential, it would be for all the party leaders to come to an agreement on the mandate and who the commissioner is. It has to be completely above board and completely transparent. It needs to pass every single test, because so much rides on it.
If there is a shadow of a doubt being cast anywhere in that process, it undermines all the important work that needs to be done, and people like me will never get out from under it. It is too important for that. Too many people's lives have been put in danger, and too many people have died fighting for democracy for Canada.
153 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/4/23 12:56:01 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, as I reflect on the motion the Conservatives have brought before the House today, the only one of the four demands I really see as problematic is that calling for the establishment of the national public inquiry.
When this was first being discussed in the PROC committee, of which I am a sitting member, I actually thought, yes, it made sense to have a national public inquiry to get to the bottom of it. The problem is that, witness after witness who are privy to this sensitive information and understand how information would be provided and where information should and should not be provided, kept telling the committee, time after time that, no, a public inquiry would not be successful because we would be trying to put information in the public domain that cannot be discussed there for national security issues.
Could the member explain why it is that Conservatives, and indeed, the Bloc and the NDP, cannot wrap their heads around the fact that the experts are advising against that course of action?
176 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/4/23 12:58:35 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I thank my Conservative colleague for his speech. I did not have a problem with his speech, but I do have a problem with the fact that the members opposite are telling us that we, as an opposition party, understand nothing.
The government does not seem to understand that a public inquiry would be a transparent, democratic way of getting to the bottom of something that is having a serious impact on our democracy.
On this side of the House, we understand nothing, but the other side seems sworn to secrecy. Is it convenient for the Liberal government to keep secret all of the information that should be made public?
112 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/4/23 12:59:29 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, that is a great question.
Clearly, in areas of national security, not everything can be shared publicly, but that should not be a carte blanche for the government to be able to call anything “national security” when it might not actually pose a risk, or to keep secret whatever information it, for its political interests, wants to keep secret.
Again, we clearly have a problem here of foreign interference and a lack of government action. Let us have a public inquiry where we have a leadership structure that all parties can agree on and a competent outside person investigating what the government is doing. It could make public what it could, of course, not making everything public, but that would provide an accountability function that the government wants to avoid right now. The government wants to keep the sharing of any of this information out of the public eye, not just because of national security, but also, I think, primarily because the motivation is that it does not want to be accountable.
176 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/4/23 2:35:44 p.m.
- Watch
I would remind hon. members to please, when asking a question, not ask or speak directly to each other, but through the Chair.
The hon. public safety minister.
28 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/4/23 2:42:21 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister was informed, as early as 2021, that a member of the opposition was being targeted by threats from China. He did nothing. Today, he is refusing to either confirm or deny the information obtained by The Globe and Mail that China could be targeting other members of Parliament. We are simply asking him to tell us whether there are others and whether they are aware of the situation. That is why the Prime Minister is not to be trusted in the matter of Chinese interference. He has no desire to get to the bottom of things. When will there be an independent commission of public inquiry?
111 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/4/23 4:13:35 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, my heart goes out to the member for Wellington—Halton Hills.
I would like to ask him this. The government's blunders are piling up. Just consider the Trudeau Foundation, the appointment of an independent rapporteur who is not independent, or the failure to notify the member in a case like this or to formally crack down on foreign interference.
Is this not the very essence of what it means to undermine public trust in the government?
80 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/4/23 4:46:43 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question, which is very important.
As to whether there should be a public inquiry or not, an individual who is held in very high esteem will be making that determination and the determination on a number of recommendations the government will follow. I look forward to seeing those recommendations.
What we need to ensure is that all Canadians, the almost 40 million of us, have confidence in our electoral system, that there is no election interference and that we understand that in the world we live in, we must deal with foreign actors who do not have the best intentions here in Canada and in other parts of the world.
118 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
