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.
6:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Ms. Koutrakis, I have to interrupt.
Mr. Falk, I have you on here twice. Okay, one of you disappeared. We are back to normal now. Mr. Falk was showing up in double.
6:45 p.m.
Conservative
Ted Falk Conservative Provencher, MB
I'm sorry about that, Mr. Chair, but my battery was running low on one device, so I had to switch to the other.
6:50 p.m.
Liberal
6:50 p.m.
Conservative
6:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
I see.
We are short some members. I'll remind members of the committee that they should be in attendance, especially the one who moved the original motion.
Go ahead, Ms. Koutrakis.
6:50 p.m.
Liberal
Annie Koutrakis Liberal Vimy, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'm sorry to hear that my honourable colleague thinks this is useless rhetoric. We are trying to establish relevance and what kind of information was kept in mind by the very competent and professional public servants when they were doing the redactions,.
I will continue.
With respect to cabinet confidence—
6:50 p.m.
Liberal
6:50 p.m.
Liberal
Peter Fragiskatos Liberal London North Centre, ON
The interruption is not toward Ms. Koutrakis. She knows the respect I have for her, but she did touch on an important point there.
Unparliamentary language needs to be identified as such. The word “useless” to describe the words of my colleague and other colleagues is just not on, Mr. Chair.
6:50 p.m.
Liberal
6:50 p.m.
Liberal
Annie Koutrakis Liberal Vimy, QC
I will continue. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
With respect to cabinet confidences, ISED in fact provided information to the committee on the Canada student service grant that was a cabinet confidence. This is in keeping with the public disclosures of information on this matter made by members of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada. A principled approach was adopted to this information to ensure a non-selective application of the protection afforded by cabinet confidentiality.
I should add that in determining the appropriate redactions, institutions also draw on the access to information manual of the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat. It contains discretionary administrative guidelines to help government institutions administer the legislation and meet policy requirements. It is a detailed guide that explains the requirements of the act, the regulations and the related policy instruments. It also contains policy advice, practical interpretations and best practices. Where appropriate, relevant case law is cited and excerpts are sometimes reproduced.
The Treasury Board Secretariat is responsible for issuing direction and guidance to government institutions with respect to the administration of the Access to Information Act and interpretation of this policy. This ensures a consistent approach and understanding across institutions. The work of TBS is critical, and is complemented by the knowledge and experience of the members of the access to information teams across government. Consultations form a key part of their work. These include consultations with other parts of the institution as well as with other departments and third parties when required. Redactions are only applied following the necessary outreach to those who provided the documents in order to obtain a clear understanding of why they believed a redaction should be applied. The same process applies when analyzing the documents retrieved to respond to a parliamentary committee. Redactions are applied carefully and only after a thorough round of consultations has taken place.
The goal throughout the process of preparing the documents for the committee was to release as much information as possible while respecting the relevant acts and in line with the intent of the committee's motion. It is reflection of the duty to assist embedded in the Access to Information Act that institutions seek to fully understand a request in order to provide the most documents possible in response.
I hope that my remarks today help members understand in some instances the scope and nature of the redactions that were applied. In the case of ISED, the decision on what information to publish or release and what information to protect or redact, as in all information requests, including this committee's, was made in keeping with the spirit of the Access to Information Act—the spirit of openness and transparency, based on the principle of and commitment to open government.
This is why, Mr. Chair, I have to reiterate at this point that unless we invite the relevant senior department heads, the deputy ministers who, along with their teams, did the redacting, to explain why they redacted the information they did, I'm not sure how we could go forward as a committee to vote on something that.... You know, that is key information that is missing, for me as a member of the finance committee, to ensure that I fully understand before I cast my vote.
I urge my honourable committee members, let's step up. Let's do the right thing. Let's vote on what is relevant here. Let's get back to doing the very important work we were all elected to do. It's certainly an honour and a privilege to be on the finance committee. We should be looking at pre-budget consultations.
I don't want to exhaust that point. All of us have discussed that. I am confident and certain that my colleagues across the way feel the same way. It's just a matter of agreeing on how to get there. Let's do what we have to do. Let's do what we were elected to do. Let's get on with the very important work the finance committee has to do. Hopefully, we can get through this tonight and, if we do have another meeting tomorrow, it will be on pre-budget consultations.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
6:55 p.m.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC
On a point of order, Mr. Chair, I'd just like to say to Ms. Koutrakis that that was perfect, with no repetition, and relevant. I was impressed with it as a filibustering speech, but if Liberal staffers are spending all this time preparing these speeches, they could actually be doing better things. If we had the vote, we could move on to pre-budget hearings.
6:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
I think you made your point of order. I imagine Ms. Koutrakis thanks you, but I believe you're beyond your point of order.
Ms. Koutrakis, thank you.
I have Mr. Fraser, followed by Ms. Dzerowicz.
Mr. Fraser, the floors is yours.
6:55 p.m.
Liberal
Sean Fraser Liberal Central Nova, NS
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I appreciate the opportunity to contribute further to the debate on the subamendment.
Again, the subamendment is trying to cure multiple defects, but one in particular is the problem that exists because of incomplete document disclosure. The incompleteness was not by virtue of a decision of the government, but instead by the ineffective transmission of certain documents, specifically the remittal letters.
Frankly, before I get into the specifics about redacted documents and why they have been redacted, which is the subject of the subamendment, I know that different members have made statements about getting to the bottom of this. I can't help but feel that I should put it on the record that we have in fact gotten to the bottom of it. What has happened is that the Prime Minister himself has admitted that he made a mistake and should have recused himself from the conversation around the Canada student service grant. Nevertheless, the government has produced thousands of pages explaining, in unimaginable detail, specifically what had taken place. The argument around this—
6:55 p.m.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC
On a point of order, I apologize to Mr. Fraser, but I just want to clarify with the clerk that the table has the replacement papers for Daniel Blaikie, who will be taking on this delightful finance filibuster for the next few hours.
6:55 p.m.
Liberal
October 21st, 2020 / 6:55 p.m.
The Clerk
Yes, we've received the documentation.
6:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
We hate to lose you, Peter. I will miss that orange background that I always see behind you. It's sharp to the eye.
Okay, Mr. Fraser.
6:55 p.m.
Liberal
Sean Fraser Liberal Central Nova, NS
And my friend Mr. Julian will be disappointed. I was excited about what was coming next.
Mr. Chair, one of the issues I keep coming back to is the inability to understand the context of the documents that have been produced in the absence of the letters that have explained why certain redactions have been made. Specifically we can look, for example, at the remittal letter that the opposition seems to insist should not be produced, which comes from the Clerk of the Privy Council and Secretary to the Cabinet. It was a letter dated August 7 that accompanied disclosure sent to David Gagnon who, of course, is well known to members of this committee as the clerk at the time. It said:I am pleased to provide records from the Privy Council Office (PCO) that were requested under the motion adopted by the Standing Committee on Finance...on July 7, 2020 in relation to the committee's study on the WE Charity and the Canada Student Services Grant...(Annex 1).
I'm also pleased to provide information related to the undertakings that I agreed to at my appearance before the committee on July 7, 2020 which were as follows:
1. A detailed timeline of events.
Attached at Annex 2 is a timeline describing PCO's knowledge of and involvement with the file.
2. A full list of organizations that were consulted on program development.
On Friday, July 24, 2020, the Department of Employment and Social Development (ESDC) provided the Committee with a list of the national coalition member organizations of the Canada Services Corps...who ESDC spoke with in March and April of 2020.
I am told that on April 9, 2020, Department of Finance officials were provided with a report on stakeholder outreach regarding support for students during the COVID-10 context....
3. PCO media monitoring from the dates when Margaret and Alexandre Trudeau had speaking engagements for WE Charity.
I can confirm that PCO Media Monitoring does not have any media content of the public appearances for either Margaret Trudeau or Alexandre Trudeau.
The PCO media centre monitors coverage of the Government of Canada priorities, programs and services and does not monitor media coverage related to the relatives of the Prime Minister or their public appearances.
4. All communications between PMO staff and PCO staff; the Finance Minister's Office and PCO; and the Finance Minister's Office and the Finance Department relating to WE charity contribution agreement and the CSSG.
These communications are included in Annex 1 and in the package from the Department of Finance.
5. Names of participants, notes, and recording of mid-April meeting between Rachel Wernick, Michelle Kovacevic (and whether PCO personnel were aware of the meeting taking place and participated)
I am told that a teleconference between officials with the Department of Finance and....ESDC...was held on the evening of April 18, 2020.
Participants: Michelle Kovacevic, Assistant Deputy Minister, Federal-Provincial Relations and Social Policy Branch, Department of Finance Suzy McDonald, Associate Deputy Minister, Federal-Provincial Relations and Social Policy Branch, Department of Finance Benoît Robidoux, Associate Deputy Minister, Employment and Social Development Canada Rachel Wernick, Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Skills and Employment Branch, Employment and Social Development Canada Annik Beaudry, Director General, Learning Policy, Partnerships and Service, Employment and Social Development Canada No officials from PCO participated in the call or were aware of the meeting. There is no recording of the meeting. Meeting notes that were taken by Rachel Wernick and an e-mail thread about setting up the call are attached at Annex 4.
6. Due diligence analysis of any financial scrutiny undertaken with regard to the WE charity during this process.
7 p.m.
Liberal
Peter Fragiskatos Liberal London North Centre, ON
Mr. Chair, on a point of order, again, it's not my intent to interrupt colleagues, but I noted that Mr. Poilievre has been missing for about 20 minutes. I did say that on a one-on-one level, I do not find Pierre to be a bad guy. I'm just checking in. Is he all right? Is everything...?
7 p.m.
Liberal
7 p.m.
Liberal
Peter Fragiskatos Liberal London North Centre, ON
It's just care for a colleague, Mr. Chair. I don't see him and he hasn't come back on screen. So maybe Conservative staff can check—