Information & Ethics Committee on May 25th, 2010

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Mr. Chairman, I think....

Are you going to make a motion?

[Carole Freeman, Bloc, Châteauguay—Saint-Constant, QC]

Mr. Chair—

[The Chair, Liberal, Paul Szabo]

Madam Freeman, you had a motion...?

[Carole Freeman, Bloc, Châteauguay—Saint-Constant, QC]

I'd like...As a matter of fact, there is—

[The Chair, Liberal, Paul Szabo]

Madam Freeman has the floor.

You have a...?

[Carole Freeman, Bloc, Châteauguay—Saint-Constant, QC]

Mr. Chair, given the way in which this committee meeting is unfolding, it seems to me that utter disdain is being shown for a parliamentary institution that is deserving of the utmost respect in a democratic government. There is nothing positive about this situation. With all due respect for Mr. Baird, a person whom I admire greatly, I think we are showing disrespect for the committee and for the institution of Parliament. We are playing along with the government which is still continuing to interfere in an inappropriate way. Therefore, I ask that you adjourn this meeting.

[The Chair, Liberal, Paul Szabo]

Okay.

[Carole Freeman, Bloc, Châteauguay—Saint-Constant, QC]

I move that the meeting be adjourned and that the request of Mr. Dimitri Soudas be addressed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Paul Szabo]

It's not debatable.

Call the question.

[A voice]

To adjourn.

[Carole Freeman, Bloc, Châteauguay—Saint-Constant, QC]

I'd like the meeting to be adjourned.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

It's making a farce of Parliament, so let's adjourn the meeting.

[The Chair, Liberal, Paul Szabo]

Okay, we have a tie. The chair votes no.

(Motion negatived: yeas 5; nays 6)

We're going to move on.

Mr. Easter, you had a motion...?

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

No. I will go to questions.

I understand that you're not allowing Mr. Baird's statement.

[The Chair, Liberal, Paul Szabo]

Well, only if it was pertinent to the subject matter, and he has nothing further to add. He just reaffirmed that he's here on behalf of the Prime Minister.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Mr. Chair, just in terms of preambling my question, I might as well say in the beginning that I find that completely unacceptable. In a system of ministerial accountability, it is the minister responsible for the staff in whatever is that minister's area of authority who should be before this committee. I really do believe that Mr. Baird's presence here and the way this issue is being handled for the government is a blatant disrespect for this parliamentary institution, a blatant disrespect for this committee.

When a committee asks that a witness appear, we expect that witness to be here. I think it is proper parliamentary privilege that we have in this institution. I outline in the beginning that I really do believe this is a serious affront to Parliament and could establish—I hope it doesn't—a very serious precedent. In other committees I operate on, if we invite the president of CFIA—which Randy would know well—then what happens? Does the minister appear? If we invite a witness, does another minister appear? This is an extremely dangerous precedent that the government is employing to hide we don't know what and cover up we don't know what.

I think we're making some progress with Mr. Togneri's testimony before this committee, in which he admitted publicly that he un-released documents. This committee was trying to get to the bottom of that issue, which is a right. Now we find that the very people who are involved in the system, by prime ministerial or cabinet decree, are denied an appearance before this committee, this committee where we represent Canadians. Canadians want to know the truth.

We need to be able to get to the very people who could tell us the truth, not a minister who doesn't have an association directly with Mr. Soudas. The strange scenario, I might say here, Mr. Chair, is that we have a minister before the committee—and we all know how controlling the Prime Minister's Office is—and that Mr. Soudas appeared, unaccountable, unelected, well-paid, from the Prime Minister's Office to make a statement on the weekend, which was followed up by the Conservative House leader a few moments ago.

We have appearing before us a witness, answering on behalf of Mr. Soudas, when we know the Prime Minister's Office, through Mr. Soudas, often gives ministers in his cabinet directions. That's well known in this country. How this minister can answer for Mr. Soudas, I do not know.

I would ask the minister one question to start. Do you, as Minister of Transport, Mr. Baird, have direct authority over the employment and responsibilities for Dimitri Soudas, who is supposed to be the witness here today? Do you have direct responsibility, as minister, over his direction and his activities?

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

I think I've already said in my opening statement that I agreed with you, that Mr. Soudas is accountable and responsible to the Prime Minister. In our parliamentary system, that's the way it works. It's incredibly rare for a sitting Prime Minister to appear before committee.

I'm a senior member of the government. We have collective responsibility. I've been asked directly by the Prime Minister to come here and respond to any questions and legitimate concerns you might have about the oversight of government. I just think that if you have a problem with ministers—in this case, it's the Prime Minister—you should go after them. Don't go after their staff. Don't try to intimidate or bully the staff.

If you have a problem with someone, you go after them. If you have a problem with my office, you come after me. You can't haul people before this committee in a hostile, partisan interrogation—people who can't fight back for themselves. If you have a problem with the government, it is ministers in our system. You're a former minister; you know it well.

Ministers are responsible, and I'm here to accept that responsibility.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Let me just read for the record, Mr. Baird, what the motion is.

If I have a problem on policy, then yes, I'll ask you directly. But what we're seeing here--and we're seeing more evidence and we're even seeing it in the way you're appearing before this committee--we're basically seeing systematic political interference in the ability of members of Parliament to do their job. That's what I submit we're seeing here today with you sitting in the witness chair for Mr. Soudas, who you have absolutely no responsibility over.

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

I'm not sitting here for--

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

The motion reads that as part of the study of the committee “regarding allegations of systematic political interference by ministers' offices to block, delay, or obstruct the release of information to the public regarding the operation of government departments”.... That's basically what we're dealing with, and the only way--

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

I would correct the record, though.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

The only way--

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

I'm not here representing Mr. Soudas.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

--to get into that--

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

I'm here representing the Prime Minister—