Yes.
Evidence of meeting #2 for Finance in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was chair.
A video is available from Parliament.
Evidence of meeting #2 for Finance in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was chair.
A video is available from Parliament.
9:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
—as well as the transmittal letters. That's what we're dealing with. If you can speak on that point, we're more than happy to hear you. Those other points you make are very important in another context, but here we are debating the subamendment to the amendment.
9:50 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
Right. Well, Mr. Chair, you've let the other members ramble on for 20 hours about matters completely unrelated to the subamendment, the amendment and the main motion. It does seem a little bizarre that you're suddenly so concerned about relevance. That did not seem to be a preoccupation of yours in interventions gone by.
I think this is a government that thinks the role of committees is just for people to gather around a fire and shower praise on the Prime Minister. That's not our role here. If occasionally some indisputable facts appear that make Liberals uncomfortable, that is not my concern, nor should it be yours. Though you are a member of that party, you are meant to be a presiding officer over this entire committee.
9:50 p.m.
Liberal
9:50 p.m.
Liberal
Peter Fragiskatos Liberal London North Centre, ON
In 2014, the member said as follows: “Mr. Speaker, the decision on what to reveal”—
9:50 p.m.
Liberal
Peter Fragiskatos Liberal London North Centre, ON
—“is made by non-partisan public servants, for whom it has long been a tradition”—
9:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
That's not a point of order. That is a point of debate, and you put that on the record previously.
Mr. Poilievre, I give people a fair bit of leeway. I'm going to allow you a fair bit of leeway, but try to make it relevant to the subamendment, which is on the documents and those defending the redacted parts of the documents.
9:50 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
I don't think there are any public servants who are defending this redaction. These were political redactions.
I know it's true that in the previous government we deferred to public servants and allowed them to make decisions on what was appropriate and what was not because we respected public servants. That has clearly not happened here in this case. That is why I stand by my earlier quote from 2014, because quite accurately that was the practice back then. We deferred to public servants on these matters. At present, there's no doubt that there's been political interference at the highest level to black out documents that should be made public.
Mr. Chair, we as a committee asked for the law clerk to have the ability to determine what should be redacted and what should be public. The government allowed its political leaders, probably ministers, to make those decisions for this particular document. If all we're talking about in these documents is a bunch of phone numbers, then give it over to the law clerk. I can be sure the law clerk is not going to do prank calls on these public servants. I don't think you can imagine our law clerk is going to be up at two in the morning prank-calling all kinds of public servants in the middle of the night for the fun of it. I think he can be counted on not to publish private phone numbers on the Internet.
I think the government and its members know that these are not phone numbers that were redacted. In some cases, it's two or three pages of black ink. That's one hell of a long phone number. This must not be just an international call, or even interplanetary call, but an intergalactic call to the other end of the universe for a phone number that goes that long.
We don't have to take my word for it that phone numbers are not typically three or four pages long. Just give it to the law clerk. If all these pages upon pages upon pages of black ink are merely covering up people's phone numbers to protect them from prank calls, then I'm sure the law clerk can be counted on to ensure those numbers do not become public.
That's all we're asking for. Hand the documents over to the law clerk. Let the legal team that works for the House of Commons, in whom we all have confidence and who report through the clerk to the Speaker, who is a Liberal, do that work on behalf of all of us. The law clerk is our lawyer, the lawyer for all of us collectively in Parliament. He can be counted on to do it. He took the extraordinary step to write a letter, and he made it public, saying he didn't get the unredacted documents that Parliament asked for. It's that simple. To say that this is all public servants just quietly doing their work and politicians impugning them, we know that's nonsense. We know that the public servant who works for us in a legal capacity, the parliamentary law clerk, has said he does not have the documents he should have based on a motion passed at this committee. All we're asking for is that those documents be handed over.
If tonight the government were to send over those documents and we were to get a confirmation from the law clerk that he has received them, I would be prepared at that moment and under that condition to put my point of privilege aside, to be revisited only after the clerk confirmed that he got what the committee asked for.
There is a way out here for the government. They can hand those documents unredacted over to the law clerk tonight, and then we won't have to talk about this anymore. We can get on to what I want to talk about, which is the pre-budget consultations. For God's sake, our economy is a total disaster right now. We have the worst deficit in the G20 and the worst unemployment in the G7. Let's get to work on that, for God's sake. We don't need to be rambling on in circles, as the government members are doing. Let's solve this right now. Hand over the documents with no black ink. Let the law clerk do his work. He'll come back to us and say whether he got what he was looking for. He'll make sure that nobody's phone number is released, and then we can all get to the bottom of this scandal.
Does that sound fair?
9:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Mr. Poilievre, I, as chair, cannot respond to that, other than to say that the latter part of your motion would certainly have to be amended to accommodate what you're suggesting.
We'll go to the next speaker. Maybe you want to think about that in the meantime. If there's a way forward, we'll see where it goes.
Mr. Housefather, do you have your technology fixed up and ready to roll?
9:55 p.m.
Liberal
Anthony Housefather Liberal Mount Royal, QC
I think I do, Mr. Chairman. Hopefully everybody can hear me.
9:55 p.m.
Liberal
October 21st, 2020 / 9:55 p.m.
Liberal
9:55 p.m.
Bloc
Gabriel Ste-Marie Bloc Joliette, QC
Mr. Chair, I have a point of order.
It was working fine until Mr. Housefather raised his microphone. Now, the sound quality isn't good enough for the interpreters to do their job.
9:55 p.m.
Liberal
Anthony Housefather Liberal Mount Royal, QC
That's what I thought. I believe that when my microphone is here, the interpreters can hear me fine. Is that right, Mr. Ste-Marie?
9:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
You're coming through a little gravelly to me, but that's fine. It's the interpreters we need to worry about.
We'll see what Mr. Ste-Marie has to say.
9:55 p.m.
Bloc
Gabriel Ste-Marie Bloc Joliette, QC
The interpretation is coming through, but I'm being told that the sound quality is borderline. I'm not sure how much longer the interpreter can carry on.
10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Okay. We'll start.
Mr. Ste-Marie, you can give me a signal if it's not working, or the interpreters can yell and say that it's not working. We'll try it. If not, we'll go to Mr. Sorbara and then come back to Mr. Housefather again.
10 p.m.
Liberal
Anthony Housefather Liberal Mount Royal, QC
Okay. I will try my best. I believe they told me that the signal is now okay, so I'm going to try. I'm hoping that it will work.
I'm hoping that in the end result our committee will move more towards the path that the Republicans and Democrats took in Utah the other day, when they took a picture together and reminded everyone that despite political differences, everyone can work together.
Mr. Chairman, I'm hoping that I will be able to prevail upon my colleagues from all parties to support this [Technical difficulty—Editor].
10 p.m.
Bloc
Gabriel Ste-Marie Bloc Joliette, QC
Mr. Chair, the interpreter is flagging that the sound quality isn't good enough.
Sorry, Mr. Housefather, to interrupt you like that.
10 p.m.
Liberal
Anthony Housefather Liberal Mount Royal, QC
No, I understand. I wonder, if I try it like this....
Is this any better?
10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
No.
Okay. We'll come back to you again, Anthony. Work with IT and we'll go on.
I have Mr. Fraser next. This list is changing before my eyes. I believe Mr. Fraser is next, and then we have Mr. Badawey. I thought Mr. Sorbara was there a moment ago.
Mr. Fraser, you're up, if you're ready to roll.