- Member of Parliament
- Member of Parliament
- Bloc Québécois
- Trois-Rivières
- Quebec
- Voting Attendance: 62%
- Expenses Last Quarter: $100,349.98
- Government Page
- Sep/19/23 7:31:48 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Chair, I thank my colleague for his speech, which, as usual, was full of common sense and sensitivity.
According to him, what prompted the government to actively wait to call an independent inquiry when these revelations had already been piling up for some time?
45 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/14/23 2:41:54 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, foreign interference continues while the government is still waffling, wondering what to do about the special rapporteur fiasco. It still cannot take the first step, which is to announce whether it intends to launch a public and independent commission of inquiry.
I am reminded of those profound words, full of wisdom, from Talleyrand, a French diplomat, who said something to the effect that there is only one way to say yes, and that is yes, and all the others mean no.
So is that a yes on an independent public inquiry?
94 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/30/23 2:37:38 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, since we found out that there was Chinese interference in the election process, the government has been acting as though it is in charge of elections. It is acting as though Parliament does not have a say and democracy falls under the exclusive authority of the Prime Minister.
It is pretty crazy that the majority of parliamentarians elected by the majority of the population have less clout than an unelected rapporteur, a friend of the Prime Minister who was appointed by the Prime Minister and reports to the Prime Minister.
Will the Prime Minister finally launch an independent public commission of inquiry, as the majority of elected members of the House are asking him to do?
118 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/2/23 2:39:07 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, things are moving quickly today. The Liberals keep lecturing about democratic values when anyone asks them about the foreign interference they are involved in.
Let us talk about democratic values.
The Prime Minister was warned by CSIS that China was threatening an MP and his family. Any democrat worth their salt would have alerted that MP, whether they be a Conservative, Liberal, Bloc or NDP member. However, the Prime Minister again chose secrecy. By prioritizing partisan secrecy over a family's safety, he has crossed the line into the unacceptable.
When will there be an independent public inquiry?
100 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/22/23 6:32:13 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, of course not. If he calls for an independent inquiry, then we will agree. However, I will say one thing. I will answer his question directly.
Imagine if, hypothetically speaking, the government appointed someone who has had an impeccable career in the field of, say, ethics, someone who has received accolades around the world, who received an honorary degree and is known for his publications. Imagine if it said that this person was independent, but that he had campaigned for the Bloc Québécois.
Setting aside my academic and professional record, would anyone have a problem with me being named rapporteur?
106 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/22/23 6:26:23 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, my colleague is having trouble hearing, and I am having trouble thinking straight.
I was saying that we have a rapporteur. We are told he is independent. There must be no conflict of interest or confusion of interests. There must be an absence of appearance as well. I was saying that the mere presence of Mr. Johnston creates doubt. Doubt breeds mistrust. Mistrust breeds defiance. We saw defiance on full display last winter. We do not like defiance. We do not want to get to that point.
However, I have questions for the government about this. They will precede the ones that will be asked of me. Nevertheless, what does it mean to call someone independent?
In Latin,“in” means “in relation to”, and the word “dependence” speaks of a choice. Someone who is independent is free to make their own choices. Is the rapporteur free to make his own choices? I do not know. I have not seen his mandate, but I am going to suggest four other things we should rely on.
Can we say that the rapporteur is neutral? I would be surprised if he was, because he still has to be for justice, for the public interest. He is not neutral.
Is he impartial? Impartiality is often confused with neutrality, but they are not the same thing. Impartiality means being able to decide fairly by taking a higher vantage point. An impartial person has a choice between A and B. He will make his choice, according to the principles that have been proposed to him. Is he impartial? That is my wish.
However, the two concepts that pique my interest are objectivity and subjectivity. It will come as no surprise to learn that the word objectivity comes from the Latin objectum which means “something presented to the senses”. An objectum is an object that is presented to oneself. It is in front of us; we see it. That is objective in English. We often confuse it with subjectivity, the subjectum, which is the person holding the object that is not yet in front of us.
Is the rapporteur looking at the object or holding the object? I hope a colleague will ask me that question. I would love to answer that one.
There is objectivity and subjectivity. I, personally, am looking for objectivity, to be honest. I think we need objectivity; otherwise, doubts will continue to persist and we will head down the same path again.
Now the thing to do, and I am sure everyone will agree, is to act responsibly, and I am referring to what the government should do, not the rapporteur. The word “responsible” is often mentioned, but rarely defined. I will continue with my definitions. The word “responsible” comes from two Latin words. The first, res, means “thing”, and the second, spondere, means “promise”. A responsible person is someone who can promise a thing. Is the government being responsible in this case? To answer that, there is a little test with three questions.
Here are the three questions. Does the Prime Minister or the government have the choice of means? In my view, yes, they have the choice of means. There are many means available to the government. Next, is the government exercising that choice of means, or is it stuck with just one option? I think we have a problem here. The first question is whether there is a choice of means, the second is whether that choice is being exercised, and the third is whether there is a will to act.
As far the will to act goes, I think that if the government were any more reluctant, it would be dead. It is extremely reluctant to act, and this reluctance is not healthy for democracy. It is not healthy because even if everything that is being said were true, doubts are keeping us from finding out or understanding the truth of the matter. We will certainly insist on having a public, independent and, I would add, objective inquiry.
I am adding an extra layer of difficulty here, but if the government is so sure that it is right, and I will give it the opportunity to respond, it should agree to make an objective choice, which cannot be done with the presence of Mr. Johnston, regardless of his credentials. I am the first to acknowledge academic value, but the shadow cast by doubt leads us to believe that this will not work out.
765 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/22/23 5:48:42 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, there is a lot of talk this week about the special rapporteur. People keep saying that he is independent. I have my doubts about that.
I would like to ask the member for Winnipeg North a question. If the rapporteur is independent, is he objective?
I am asking him the difference between independence and objectivity.
58 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/7/23 2:48:23 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, that gave me goosebumps.
We need an inquiry into foreign interference in our elections that is both transparent and independent.
Instead, the Prime Minister is appointing a special rapporteur who is supposedly independent, even though this person will be appointed by him. Then, this special rapporteur, appointed by the Prime Minister, will decide what the inquiry will and will not cover. This special rapporteur, appointed by the Prime Minister, will be the one to decide whether the Prime Minister should do more to counter foreign interference.
This rapporteur may well be special, but are we really supposed to believe they will be independent?
105 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
