Information & Ethics Committee on July 22nd, 2020

[Élisabeth Brière, Liberal, Sherbrooke, QC]

I have nothing to add, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rachael Thomas]

Thank you.

Ms. Shanahan is the last person on my speaking list.

[Brenda Shanahan, Liberal, Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC]

I have nothing to add.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rachael Thomas]

Having gone through all the speakers, I will now move to a vote.

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

Can we have a recorded vote, Madam Chair?

[The Chair, Conservative, Rachael Thomas]

We can.

We will vote on the main motion as amended.

Following the vote on the motion as amended, we have five in favour and five not in favour.

I will now suspend for a moment. Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rachael Thomas]

I call the committee back.

Having determined that the motion is within the purview of this committee and that it is in the best interests of the Canadian public for there to be transparency around this matter, I vote yea.

(Motion as amended agreed to: yeas 6; nays 5)

[Damien Kurek, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

I would like to move an additional motion, or do I need to wait until the vote is read?

[The Chair, Conservative, Rachael Thomas]

We are done with the one motion. I've acknowledged you, so you can go ahead.

[Damien Kurek, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

I would move an additional motion, of which I have copies. I would be happy to—

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

I have a point of order, Madam Chair.

Can Mr. Kurek move his motion? I did say I had a motion to put forward as well.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rachael Thomas]

That is correct. According to procedure, you would need to raise your hand in order to officially move your motion.

[A voice]

[Inaudible—Editor]

[The Chair, Conservative, Rachael Thomas]

Thank you. That's acknowledged.

Mr. Kurek.

Actually—I'm so sorry—you cannot move a motion on a point of order, Madame Gaudreau. Once Mr. Kurek is done, you are welcome to put your name on the speaking list. At that point, when you're called upon, you will be able to move your motion.

I will put you on the speakers list, Madame—

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Madam Chair, I understood that we agreed that, once we had dealt with this motion, the amendment and all that, I would be next.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rachael Thomas]

Madame Gaudreau, according to procedure it's not the way things work. You may have been led to believe that; however, as the chair my role and responsibility is to keep this committee functioning according to procedure.

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

I'm new. Is that the standard procedure?

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

The motion has already been put forward. You can't speak to another one until the one in hand has been discussed.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rachael Thomas]

I'm sorry. You have not been subbed into this committee, so you are not able to raise a point of order. However, if you wish to be put on the speaking list you are welcome to raise your hand, and I will acknowledge you on your turn.

Mr. Barrett.

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

Madam Chair, on a point of order, can you confirm if Mr. Kurek gave notice of motion prior to the meeting?

[The Chair, Conservative, Rachael Thomas]

I can. As all of you are aware, Mr. Kurek does have a motion that prior notice was given for. Mr. Kurek has not been afforded the opportunity or the luxury of being able to read his motion. I'm not yet sure whether it's the one on notice. However, if it is then I'm able to let it stand.

Mr. Kurek.

[Damien Kurek, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

I appreciate the opportunity, and certainly there are elements to the procedural realities of Parliament that I am also getting used to. For the benefit of the clerk, it is the same motion that would have been circulated last Wednesday afternoon, if my memory is correct. I'd be happy to hold on for a brief moment.

Let me take this opportunity to thank the clerk and all those who work diligently during these challenging times to make sure that Parliament can function. They are to be applauded for their efforts, from the security to the staff who run the buildings to those who deal with the legislative matters. Thank you very much for that.

Madam Chair, I'm happy to read the motion into the record. However, as it was distributed and has now been distributed once again, I would have a number of comments if it is allowed to stand as presented.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rachael Thomas]

Are there committee members who wish Mr. Kurek to read the motion into the record? Excellent, then it stands as written before you.

Mr. Kurek, go ahead.

[Damien Kurek, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Each day, each hour and it seems like, today, each minute, more is revealed about the growing WE scandal. We had stunning revelations from the Minister of Finance today. We've had, of course, much conversation about the Prime Minister's actions. We have had inferences and references to other members of cabinet who have connections to this organization or have been lobbied by this organization and, in some cases, maybe even lobbied without that having been in the manner that is prescribed by the relevant acts. I believe, as I have mentioned before, that Canadians deserve answers on this.

This motion is very simple. I would encourage all members to consider it our duty to see that those members of Parliament who have been appointed to cabinet, who hold the highest and most powerful offices in our nation, would be asked to simply spell out what they know so that we, as a committee, can review and Canadians can understand what there is to see here. We have a strong tradition in this country to ensure that executive government is held to account, and that's done through Parliament and its structured committees.

Madame Brière mentioned at some length last week the stereotype that is given politicians. Certainly, when I started the journey of getting into public office midway through last year, I got into politics understanding that there is a certain stereotype that exists. According to one Reader's Digest article I read, this is one of the least respected professions, only above that of lawyers. Maybe there's a correlation, with lawyers often being politicians, but I am not a lawyer.

It is a stereotype that I work diligently to break. I work to be transparent, to be open, to be honest and to ensure that Canadians are well served, and specifically that the 110,000 or so people who live in Battle River—Crowfoot are well represented, that they can trust me and that they are served by me, as I have the honour to briefly hold the title of the member of Parliament for Battle River—Crowfoot. I don't take that for granted one day. That's why I fought so hard to see Parliament resume, albeit modified. I've been very disappointed with much of how the parliamentary procedure has taken place over these last number of months.

In the interest of time, I would just make a couple of small comments. One is that I find it very interesting that a number of members of this committee have referred to the job of the Ethics Commissioner, which I have the utmost respect for. However, in previous comments, Mr. Vaughan specifically didn't refer to this, but the other members did. I find it tragic, actually, that a number of members said that it is the committee's job to review the reports of the Ethics Commissioner, yet a number of months ago, right prior to the COVID pandemic breaking out and seeing Parliament greatly change, we saw that members of the government voted against having the Ethics Commissioner come to this committee to explore one of his reports.

I believe it is in the interest of Canadians to do everything possible to shed light on this issue. Certainly I can imagine there are many members within government who are trying to figure out a strategy to deal with the ever-evolving WE scandal, but as a member of the opposition, I would encourage all members of this committee to truly look at this as an opportunity to have all members of Her Majesty's government in this country shed light on the connections that they have. This is not meant to be anything other than that proactive disclosure, which we have seen unfortunately not done by certain members who hold cabinet positions.

There is the ability for Canadians to understand what their government is dealing with, and to trust that the dollars are being spent in the right way, that we have that relationship between members and their constituents. All of those things depend on that subject that I talked about before, and that is trust.

I would simply say this: Let's make every effort possible to help restore trust in our institutions, and let's shed light on the scandal so that we can get the answers that Canadians deserve.

With that, I will conclude my comments and move the motion as distributed.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rachael Thomas]

Madame Shanahan, are you raising a point of order, or do you wish to be added to the speakers list?