44th Parl. 1st Sess.
March 21, 2024 10:00AM
moved that Bill C‑68, An Act for granting to His Majesty certain sums of money for the federal public administration for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2025, be concurred in at report stage.
37 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/21/24 6:27:30 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I believe if you seek it, you will find agreement to apply the result from the previous vote to this vote, with Liberal members voting yes.
28 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/21/24 6:27:38 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, we agree to apply the vote, with Conservatives happily voting nay.
13 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/21/24 6:27:45 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the Bloc Québécois agrees to apply the results of the previous vote to this vote and will be voting in favour.
27 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/21/24 6:27:52 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the NDP agrees to apply the vote and will be voting in favour.
15 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/21/24 6:27:59 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I agree to apply the results of the previous vote, voting nay.
14 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/21/24 6:28:04 p.m.
- Watch
I declare the motion carried.
5 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/21/24 6:28:10 p.m.
- Watch
moved that the bill be read the third time and passed.
11 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/21/24 6:29:01 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I believe if you seek it, you would find agreement to apply the results from the previous vote to this vote, with Liberal members voting in favour.
29 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/21/24 6:29:13 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, Conservatives agree to apply the vote, with Conservatives voting nay.
12 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/21/24 6:29:20 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the Bloc Québécois agrees to apply the result of the previous vote and will be voting yes.
23 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/21/24 6:29:29 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the NDP agrees to apply the vote and will be voting in favour.
15 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/21/24 6:29:36 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I agree to apply the results of the previous vote, voting nay.
14 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/21/24 6:29:41 p.m.
- Watch
I declare the motion carried.
5 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/21/24 6:30:04 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, since this could be the last time that such a large number of us will be together in the House before spending the next two weeks in our respective ridings, we on this side of the House would like to wish all members and all Canadians a very happy Easter.
The Easter holiday is one of the holiest times in the Christian calendar, representing the death and rebirth of Jesus Christ. We certainly want to take a moment to wish all Canadians a most joyous and happy Easter.
90 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/21/24 6:30:55 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I want to join my voice and those of the official opposition to what the government House leader just said. As everyone has an opportunity to go home and spend the last few days of Lent in contemplation, everyone on this side of the House wishes all the staff, the House administration, members of Parliament, their staff and all Canadians who are observing this important feast in the Christian calendar a very blessed Holy Thursday, a holy week, a meaningful Good Friday and, of course, a joyous Easter.
When all thought it was dark and reason to despair, a light came at the end of it and life triumphed over death. Happy Easter to all Canadians.
118 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/21/24 6:32:39 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I am rising to add to the question of privilege raised yesterday following the tabling of the 17th report of the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates, a report that I tabled myself.
This is part of an entirely troubling pattern that we have long been witnessing. Witnesses, whether government officials or not, are ignoring the rights, powers and privilege of parliamentarians to act as grand inquisitors of the nation.
73 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/21/24 6:33:05 p.m.
- Watch
Order. I am sure that hon. members want to make sure that their colleague's question of privilege can be heard.
I ask members to exit if they want to have a conversation, or if they are exiting, to please not have a conversation as they exit. I know everyone is excited about going home soon, but this is not the appropriate time to have those conversations. That applies to both sides of the House.
75 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/21/24 6:33:37 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, it is indeed disappointing to see both sides of the House continue to behave like that.
If the government can so blatantly be cavalier with committees, it is not surprising that others would be too. No doubt, Kristian Firth of GC Strategies saw how government officials appeared at committee and based his own conduct on that. Lines need to be drawn. Parliament's dignity must be defended. Parliament and its committee cannot continue to be seen as mere toothless entities to be ignored when questions become inconvenient, embarrassing or damaging to the government or to the witness.
I want to clear up some misinformation that I heard last night that was stated in the House. There are those in this place who stated that Kristian Firth from GC Strategies supplied all the information that was asked of him at committee. The fact is that he provided some answers and refused to answer other questions. Questions were asked of him where it was agreed that he would provide answers in writing the next day by 9 a.m. He provided some of these by 9 a.m. and some of these much later in the day. I am not going to quibble on that issue, but he refused simple questions that are at the heart of the ArriveCAN scandal.
GC Strategies, made up of Kristian Firth and his partner, was accused of helping to write the work requirements for a contract that GC Strategies specifically would win that contract, and that they did. Mr. Firth was asked that information. I want to read from the blues. The member for Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek asked, “For greater clarity, I'm looking for the individuals or individual that you would have met with in developing the criteria, not who signed off on the contract in this particular case. I do want that name, but now I'm asking, who did you sit at the table with to develop the criteria for this contract?”
Mr. Firth responded, “Again, I apologize, but after speaking with my lawyer, my stance still stands the same with the RCMP investigation.... I don't interfere with that.” He would not answer. Members will remember that he was sworn in. He was warned of the consequences of not answering the questions. This was his third appearance, so this was not a new experience for him.
Later, at committee, the member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, on a point of order, said to him, “I'd like the chair to put the question to you, and you have an obligation to answer it, whether you want to or not, because of the rules that apply to Parliament, to its committees and to witnesses who come before it.”
We put forward the question to Mr. Firth. He responsded, “Again, I...appreciate the opportunity, Mr. Chair, that you've laid out clearly, but at this point, we're still remaining with our stance of there could possibly be a...RCMP investigation”. I went on to advise him, “I will advise you, as I'm sure you're aware, that you have parliamentary privilege, which would allow you the right to speak”, but he chose not to. We can see clearly here that Mr. Firth was given ample warning. He was given ample opportunity and he refused to answer.
Earlier, I mentioned the government's conduct in dealing with committee orders and privileges, and how it leads to such actions. In the previous McKinsey & Company study at OGGO, the Liberals, Conservatives, Bloc and NDP unanimously passed a production order for documents from both McKinsey and the government departments, demanding all contracts, reports, invoices, emails and documents between McKinsey and the government departments they worked for. McKinsey complied one hundred per cent. Guess who did not comply? The government departments did not comply. The Business Development Bank of Canada refused. Canada Border Services Agency refused. Canada Pension Plan Investment Board refused. Canada Post refused. The IRCC for citizenship and immigration refused. National Defence refused. Natural Resources refused. Export Development Canada refused. The Privy Council Office and the office of the Prime Minister refused. Atomic Energy refused. Canada Development Investment Corporation refused. The Department of Employment and Social Development refused. The Department of Finance refused. Veterans Affairs refused. The Public Sector Pension Investment Board refused. Trans Mountain Canada refused.
That was a unanimous order for the production of documents from the operations committee. I want to give an idea of some of the excuses as to why the government departments refused.
Mr. Matthew Shea, who is the assistant secretary to the cabinet from PCO says that there are privacy acts that apply. “We're also guided by 'Open and Accountable Government' [rules]”, which is a policy from PCO that he stated overrides parliamentary privilege and the supremacy of Parliament. He went on to say, “I think personal information and the Privacy Act is something that we have to be very sensitive to”, not the supremacy of Parliament but the Privacy Act.
Ms. Mélanie Bernier from PSPIB, who is senior vice-president and chief legal officer, actually lied to committee. She told us she could not provide the documents ordered by the committee because it costs money to translate. Then she went on to say that the money to translate the documents would reduce the amount of the pensions for public service employees, which is not true.
Mr. Matthew Shea returned, again, to committee and stated that, “A big part...of these requests, is the importance of, as a government, our working with the committee to find solutions”. It was not to obey the order of Parliament but to find solutions that suited him.
Filipe Dinis, chief operating officer of the Bank of Canada, actually wrote to committee explaining that the Access to Information Act had precedence over an order of Parliament and, therefore, they refused. It is no wonder that the Bank of Canada messed up inflation so badly, considering what their chief operating officer believes is the order of precedence. I can see their boardroom discussing monetary policy but deferring to the Access to Information Act when it comes to deciding how much money to print.
CPPIB also stated that it would be a disservice to the public interest to follow the order of Parliament.
Todd Winterhalt of Export Development Canada stated that they were guided by the Privacy Act as to what documents they could turn over to Parliament, not the supremacy of Parliament or an order of Parliament but the Privacy Act.
Immigration stated that it could not comply because it was too difficult to translate pages. My colleagues from the Bloc Québécois should think about that. Immigration refused an order of Parliament because it is too difficult to translate pages.
It gets worse. ESDC delivered documents that were redacted but not fully translated, which violates parliamentary privilege to table documents only partially translated. When we complained, they resubmitted without the French.
The refusal of these departments might be wide of the scope of the Firth issue, but it speaks to a bigger pattern committees face, especially the grand inquisitor committees like the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates.
In conclusion, we are seeing a clear erosion of respect for the privilege of parliamentarians. We have witnesses coming before committee and openly acting in contempt as they please. We have government departments openly defying orders passed unanimously by committees. We have witnesses refusing to answer questions simply because they decide not to.
We have to restore the rules of this place. We must restore the privilege of the members.
1294 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/21/24 6:42:19 p.m.
- Watch
I just want to remind members. There are still conversations being had. I have raised it twice, and it is on both sides and from various parties.
I would just ask members to please take their conversations outside.
The hon. member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan is rising on the question of privilege.
54 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
