Evidence of meeting #10 for Declaration of Emergency in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was police.
A video is available from Parliament.
6:55 p.m.
Bloc
The Joint Chair Bloc Rhéal Fortin
I only have a few seconds left. What did you try before invoking the Emergencies Act?
6:55 p.m.
The Joint Chair Hon. Gwen Boniface
Excuse me, Mr. Fortin, but your time is up.
We'll now move to Mr. Green.
6:55 p.m.
NDP
The Joint Chair NDP Matthew Green
Thank you.
I'll say, right off the top, welcome, Deputy Prime Minister. You're here both as Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance.
I have to say that I'm very concerned about the nature of the answers. I'm the fourth questioner, yet I'm not sure you've brought any additional facts. You're quoting news articles. You're quoting people. You're talking about primary sources.
I will put to you that we need you as a primary source, as somebody who supported this. I need to know if the government had, within its department—within your department, your ministry—facts that meant the economic impacts of the occupation were significant enough to meet the threshold of “threats to national security”, as legally defined in section 2 of the CSIS Act. I'm not talking about feelings. I'm not talking about reputation and how bad we might look in the world. I'm talking about quantifiable facts your department would have provided for the inevitable invocation of the act.
I'm going to put the question to you directly: What were the economic impacts of the occupation, and were they significant enough to meet the threshold of a threat to national security, under section 2 of the CSIS Act?
6:55 p.m.
Liberal
6:55 p.m.
NDP
6:55 p.m.
Liberal
Chrystia Freeland Liberal University—Rosedale, ON
I'm happy to answer your question if I'm not interrupted. I have to start again.
Sincerely, with all due respect, I dispute the contention that, when it comes to the economy, reputation doesn't matter. In fact, Canada's reputation as a reliable trading partner, as a reliable investment destination, as a country with peace, order and good government, and as a country with stable and effective political institutions.... These are some of the most precious things we have, as an economy, and they're the foundation of our prosperity.
I would—
6:55 p.m.
NDP
The Joint Chair NDP Matthew Green
That's not the question I asked you.
The question I asked you is, what economic impacts of the occupation did your ministry provide, and what legal opinion was provided that would have met the threshold, as defined under section 2 of the CSIS Act?
I'm not talking about pontification. I'm talking about facts, here.
6:55 p.m.
Liberal
Chrystia Freeland Liberal University—Rosedale, ON
I don't believe I'm pontificating.
Let me, again, be really clear. The economic impact was absolutely clearly there.
7 p.m.
Liberal
Chrystia Freeland Liberal University—Rosedale, ON
The economic impact on the region of Ottawa was clear, the economic impact on actual trade that was blocked, and the ongoing future economic impact and the harm done to our reputation as a reliable trading partner—
7 p.m.
Liberal
Chrystia Freeland Liberal University—Rosedale, ON
I had many conversations with Canadian business leaders.
7 p.m.
NDP
The Joint Chair NDP Matthew Green
That's not good enough.
Madam Chair, look. There are two things that are happening right now.
One, the audio and the feedback is making this very difficult for me to engage, and I don't know if somebody has a live mike there.
7 p.m.
NDP
The Joint Chair NDP Matthew Green
I'm not. I'm here on my headphones.
Second, it's a very frustrating process when we have such limited time and such evasive answers.
What we're looking for at this committee are specifics, the facts of the matter.
7 p.m.
The Joint Chair Hon. Gwen Boniface
Mr. Green, would you like us to suspend and make sure that your audio is correct? We will hold your time where you're at.
7 p.m.
NDP
7 p.m.
The Joint Chair Hon. Gwen Boniface
It's fine for us on this end, so it appears to be something on your end.
7 p.m.
NDP
The Joint Chair NDP Matthew Green
Okay.
Well, I'm going to go back to the most basic question: Can the Minister of Finance provide something generated within her department, which is not an external reference to an American governor or any external bodies, that quantifies the threshold under section 2 that goes beyond reputation? I'm talking about real economic impacts that are quantifiable and that her ministry, I hope, would have generated in some kind of report or some kind of briefing. If so, will she please provide it to this committee today?
7 p.m.
The Joint Chair Hon. Gwen Boniface
The answer is that, when you both speak at the same time, it is problematic.
Go ahead, Minister.
7 p.m.
Liberal
Chrystia Freeland Liberal University—Rosedale, ON
Thank you.
I have to say that I disagree so forcefully with the premise of the question. Reputational damage, when it comes to an economy, when it comes to a trading relationship, when it comes to Canada's reputation—
7 p.m.
NDP
The Joint Chair NDP Matthew Green
This is just repeating the same answer.
Look, at the end of the day, we have a job at this committee to get to the heart of the matter. You can reject the premise of the question. All you have to say is that your ministry did not generate any internal information that would be for the good and the welfare of this committee, because that's what I'm hearing right now in the repeating of these answers.
I'm going to move on.
You stated on February 17 that you had spoken directly with the heads of major banks and the director of FINTRAC. What was the nature of those conversations? Did the banks and FINTRAC express either support or opposition to any of the temporary measures in the order?
7 p.m.
The Joint Chair Hon. Gwen Boniface
Mr. Green, your time is up.
Mr. Fortin, may I ask you to take the chair?