Finance Committee on Oct. 8th, 2020

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Thanks for clarifying.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

I don't believe there's anybody on the list after Mr. Fragiskatos, if you want to come in then.

Go ahead, Mr. Fragiskatos.

[Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal, London North Centre, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I did see Mr. Gerretsen with his hand up, but I'll let you revisit that. Mr. Gerretsen seems to be interested in speaking, Mr. Chair.

I appreciate the intervention, even though I was interrupted, but I know the member did it in a spirit of goodwill. Mr. Genuis and I have sparred a number of times in the chamber through debate, and it's a pleasure to sit with him on the special committee that examines, at the moment, Canada-China relations. He's an able member of Parliament and someone who is extremely intelligent and learned. Of course, we are all so very impressed that he can quote Winston Churchill. That is good to know, and I'm glad—

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

It's with Google.

[Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal, London North Centre, ON]

With Google—well, I won't say that, Mr. Chair. I don't know who said that. I heard something there—

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

You didn't let me say the quote. It makes much more sense in that context.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

We'll give you the opportunity later, Mr. Genuis.

[Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal, London North Centre, ON]

I'm sure he will take it.

To get back to the issue at hand, the subamendment of Mr. Gerretsen provides us with a framework that will not occupy the committee at enormous length and therefore prevent us from looking at, in a very serious way, the issue of pre-budget consultation. It is therefore completely in line with the spirit of Standing Order 83.1, which—as I have mentioned a number of times today—we need to recognize and follow.

We would have meetings on these documents. We would be allowed to question—and I would have questions, serious ones and not ones that would try to ignore the main issue or that would be partisan, but ones that would be very straightforward to public servants and to the law clerk. I would be very interested to hear what they have to say and put on record.

Why is the opposition trying to prevent those folks from coming to the committee and speaking to committee members? Is it because—and I'm just speculating here, Mr. Chair, and not making any accusations, which I would never do—

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

That would be a first at this committee, but go ahead.

[Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal, London North Centre, ON]

I always appreciate your point of view, Mr. Chair, and I will just try, in the spirit of being a good colleague, to be very sincere about what I am about to say.

I am not of the view at all that our job is to be partisan on these matters. Unfortunately, the opposition seems to continue to be anxious to score political points, because they're worried about scoring those points right now. What I'm worried about is making sure we have a decision here today that allows for meaningful discussions, for substantive meetings where we can actually question those involved in the decision-making around the redaction of documents.

Why that is such a problem I'm not sure. Perhaps they're looking at polling. I'm not quite sure. They want to score the points now. They're anxious. Maybe they've received orders from their whip that it is a must that the initial motion of Mr. Poilievre be accepted. If it's not that motion, then it must be the amendment of Mr. Kelly—who is not here right now, but was here earlier—that must be followed, so that the Conservatives cannot work with their colleagues in a spirit of good faith to agree to a compromise that gets to what the Conservatives want but also in a way that is, again, fair and just, to go back to that line of argument.

I will also make a point, Mr. Chair, that I've made a few times here, but I think certain members of the committee are not recognizing it. It is that where we are in the country necessitates a particular approach on the part of members of Parliament. We as MPs have an enormous responsibility, but we are agents of the state in so many ways. We are tasked with working within government and advocating to government on the part of our constituents.

There are many conceptions of the state, as you will know, Mr. Chair. I see Mr. MacGregor here from the NDP. It's good to have him here. If Mr. Julian was here, I'd say the same thing to him: that the NDP has a particular conception of what the state should look like and how it ought to operate, and it differs from how Liberals feel on the matter. It differs from how Conservatives feel—

[Alistair MacGregor, NDP, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC]

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

Go ahead, Mr. MacGregor.

[Alistair MacGregor, NDP, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC]

Just going back, I missed Mr. Fragiskatos' comments there. Did he say that we, as members of Parliament, are agents of the state?

[Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal, London North Centre, ON]

He did.

[Alistair MacGregor, NDP, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC]

Do you want to clarify that? I see myself as an agent of the people of Cowichan—Malahat—Langford.

[Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal, London North Centre, ON]

You could be many things at the same time. We operate within a state framework and therefore, in that sense, we are agents of the state, but I recognize, Mr. MacGregor, that you are also a member of Parliament. I don't know your personal situation, but you are also a son. Perhaps you are a husband. Perhaps you are a father. You can be many things at once.

The phrase “agents of the state” is not pejorative in any sense.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

We are straying a little from the relevance of this motion.

[Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal, London North Centre, ON]

I was about to bring it back, Mr. Chair. I was, but Mr. MacGregor wanted clarification on that point.

When I was going to bring it back, I was going to simply say that in light of the fact that we continue to deal with COVID-19, we must recognize that the state, as a whole, has a responsibility. Naturally the NDP will understand the responsibility of the state in a particular way, one that seeks to put in a place of primacy working class Canadians.

Who can forget the very famous poem recited by Tommy Douglas? It's an interesting fact that it wasn't Tommy Douglas who came up with the Mouseland poem and fable. It was someone else, but either way, the idea is that the working class should be at the very core of what parliamentarians are looking at and who they are seeking to support.

Of course, he used the analogy of the mice and the black cats—the black cats, of course, being the capitalist class, and the mice being the working class—

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

I do think we are straying from—

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

On a point of order, Mr. Chair—

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

—the motion we are debating.

[Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal, London North Centre, ON]

I was trying to work it back, Mr. Chair. I am working to—

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

We have a point of order from Mr. Genuis.

Go ahead, Mr. Genuis.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Mr. Chair, based on what the member was saying, I had assumed we were in camera and that these were not things he wanted on the record. Could you clarify whether we are in camera or in public?

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

This is public.