Evidence of meeting #94 for Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was use.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:45 p.m.
Liberal
Mona Fortier Liberal Ottawa—Vanier, ON
Is it subjective, when we're in a committee talking about a social media study, and we're talking about the Prime Minister at this time? I think that maybe we should come back to the relevance of this topic we have in front of us as a study.
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Brassard
Mr. Brock, you have the floor. I expect you're going to get to a point where you need to go.
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
Larry Brock Conservative Brantford—Brant, ON
I think relevance will be established if I'm not interrupted by Liberal members.
Thank you, Chair.
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
Larry Brock Conservative Brantford—Brant, ON
Deputy Commissioner Larkin, can I have a response to that question?
If the service had reasonable and probable grounds to believe that Justin Trudeau had committed a criminal offence, the service would charge accordingly. Isn't that correct?
4:45 p.m.
D/Commr Bryan Larkin
I appreciate the question.
It's obviously very hypothetical in nature. Our mandate is to investigate criminal investigations, regardless of who the target is. We have a sensitive and international investigations section that has a mandate to investigate sensitive, high-risk matters that cause significant threats to Canada's political, economic and social integrity. Again, that is left to the frontline investigators, in consultation with prosecutors, etc., to determine that. It would be hypothetical to speak to a certain scenario.
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
Larry Brock Conservative Brantford—Brant, ON
I respectfully disagree with you. The mandate of every single police officer, whether it's frontline—
4:45 p.m.
A voice
What does this have to do with social media?
4:45 p.m.
Liberal
Mona Fortier Liberal Ottawa—Vanier, ON
It's the same as I mentioned earlier. It's on relevance. Unfortunately, we're not discussing the topic in front of us, Chair. I challenge the fact that we should really be focusing on this study today, which is not, unfortunately, what MP Brock is doing. The relevance should be stated, and we should go back to the topic we have in front of us.
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Brassard
I'm going to give him more time to establish where he's going with this. On the issue of relevance, as I said earlier, it's subjective. Mr. Brock has indicated that he's going to go to social media, and I expect that's going to happen.
Go ahead, Mr. Brock.
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
Larry Brock Conservative Brantford—Brant, ON
I'm going to circle back, with respect, to Deputy Commissioner Larkin.
It's hypothetical, but I think it's a question that's easily answerable, because every single police unit in this country—and you'd agree with me—has a singular legal threshold to lay a charge as simple as mischief or shoplifting, all the way to homicide.
Does the service have reasonable and probable grounds to believe an offence has been committed? Would you agree with me, sir, that this is the legal threshold for policing in this country?
4:45 p.m.
D/Commr Bryan Larkin
That would be the threshold of any criminal investigation, which is to follow the evidence to ensure we do comprehensive investigations and interviews and look at the entirety of it. That's the threshold to ensure it meets the facts and issues of the offence we're investigating.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
Larry Brock Conservative Brantford—Brant, ON
Thank you.
I appreciate that your service has a sensitive unit criminally investigating the Prime Minister for, potentially, obstruction of justice—
4:50 p.m.
Liberal
4:50 p.m.
Liberal
Mona Fortier Liberal Ottawa—Vanier, ON
Again, Chair, he said it at the beginning. MP Brock said that he would not be in line with questions on this study. I would like to bring it back to the study we have at this time. It would be appreciated if we could focus on.... As you know, we've been trying to focus on this study for a long time. We have great guests here who can answer many questions. At another time, if the MP wants to discuss another study, he can. However, today he's off on relevance with his questions.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
Larry Brock Conservative Brantford—Brant, ON
If Ms. Fortier or any member of the Liberal bench wishes to continue to raise a point of order on my questions before the question is even put to the witness, we are defeating the purpose for which we are here. I hear from Ms. Fortier that she wants to deal with questions surrounding social media and foreign interference. If she and her colleagues continue to interrupt me, there's going to be very little time for them to have the opportunity to deal with what they believe to be relevant questions.
I agree with you, Chair, that relevancy is a very subjective art. I stated it at the outset. With time permitting, I will be circling back to the content matter of this meeting, but I object to this constant interference by the Liberals.
4:50 p.m.
Some hon. members
Oh, oh!
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
Larry Brock Conservative Brantford—Brant, ON
They're laughing. Yes, you can laugh all you want, Carolyn Bennett, because it's not funny to Canadians.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative