Evidence of meeting #142 for Finance in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was budget.
A video is available from Parliament.
2:40 p.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Jasraj Singh Hallan
Mr. Turnbull, from my recollection of the last meeting, the chair did give quite a bit of latitude when colleagues were talking about Mark Carney, who was also in the subamendment, and Chrystia Freeland, the Minister of Finance. As I recall, those conversations have continued, with the chair giving quite a bit of latitude on what was discussed at this committee.
Mr. Lawrence, please continue—
2:40 p.m.
Bloc
Gabriel Ste-Marie Bloc Joliette, QC
The interpreters are indicating that the sound quality for Mr. Turnbull and Mr. Weiler is not good enough for them to do their work. I'm sorry.
2:40 p.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Jasraj Singh Hallan
Mr. Turnbull, I'd advise you to talk to IT in the background until we get that resolved.
In the meantime, Mr. Lawrence can continue.
2:40 p.m.
Conservative
Philip Lawrence Conservative Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON
I will connect Mr. Carney back to what I was talking about: the money-laundering issue. I want to put it very clearly on the record, though, that Conservatives are absolutely unequivocal that if we cannot conduct business in both English and French, we should not be recognizing members. As harsh as that might be, we are a bilingual country, and Conservatives will stand up at every opportunity that they have for francophones and the right to speak French and to hear French. We are unequivocal on that.
I was giving a little preamble, with the indulgence of the chair, but the connection is from a recent CBC article written by Mr. Pittis. Mr. Carney said with respect to money laundering that it was “deeply troubling” and that bankers have to “substantially raise their game to levels of conduct” expected “in any other aspect of life”. Mr. Carney has commented many times, quite notably, with respect to money laundering, and as he's a former governor of the Bank of Canada, one would think there's a fair bit of relevance to talking about the substantial problem that is money laundering.
With that point of order put to rest, I'd like to continue and discuss the importance of money laundering. We've seen piecemeal attempts by this Liberal government to fix some of the money-laundering issues, but what we really need is a comprehensive approach, one that approaches this head-on and sees a solution, because the reality is, as I said, that after nine years of this NDP-Liberal government, we have seen failure after failure of the government to deliver on the most basic—
2:40 p.m.
NDP
Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC
I let it pass the first time, but it's a basic rule of Parliament that we don't actively mislead. This is the second time that Mr. Lawrence has referred to nine years of the Liberal-NDP government. That is factually incorrect. There have not been nine years of an NDP-Liberal government. He knows that there has been a confidence and supply agreement for the last two and a half years, but prior to that, there was no basis to say this. I would just ask him to please respect that basic fact of Parliament.
2:40 p.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Jasraj Singh Hallan
Mr. Davies, the clerk will double-check that. From what I remember, there was a ruling in the House on “Liberal-NDP”, if I'm not mistaken, but we will see if we can get the clerk to verify that point of order for you.
In the meantime, I'll ask Mr. Lawrence to continue and to keep that in mind.
2:40 p.m.
Conservative
Philip Lawrence Conservative Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON
Out of courtesy to Mr. Davies, I'll refrain from saying “nine years of the NDP-Liberal government”. I think Mr. Davies would grant me that in the last two and a half or three years of the Liberal government supported by the NDP, we have seen no notable or material improvement with respect to money laundering in the Canadian economy. In fact, as I mentioned earlier, there are numerous media reports on the significant impact that money laundering is having on the Canadian economy. Nearly every major media outlet has reported on that.
We've seen some of Canada's largest financial institutions receive fines, both here in Canada and in the United States, for their lack of safeguards and protections against money laundering. At this committee, we've heard from FINTRAC, among other organizations, about the lack of enforcement and the impact this is having on the Canadian economy.
Let's get real and serious at this committee as the finance committee. This is a scourge. It's a blight on the Canadian economy and our country. Passing a motion to call for the study of money laundering and actions we can take would take a strong stance, not just here in Canada but across the world, on protecting our country. It would also take a strong stance on protecting, quite frankly, the most vulnerable, whether they are young women being sucked into the horrible world of human trafficking or young folks across our country being sucked into the opioid crisis.
This is an opportunity for us to do something that's right. It's valid. Let's not let partisan bickering and silliness get in the way of that. Let's just pass this motion.
With that, I move that we adjourn debate on Mr. Turnbull's motion to move forward to the subject of the Standing Order 106(4) request and Mr. Chambers's motion.
2:40 p.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Jasraj Singh Hallan
Given that this is a dilatory motion, we'll go to a vote on what Mr. Lawrence is proposing.
(Motion negatived: nays 6; yeas 4)
Mr. Lawrence, you have the floor again.
2:40 p.m.
Conservative
Philip Lawrence Conservative Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON
Thank you.
I'm disappointed in that. The Conservatives brought up this meeting. Just to be clear, in no way would having this meeting obstruct any other parliamentary business. We certainly could have continued the discussion and debate over Mr. Turnbull's programming motion and had an important discussion.
We're not even on the motion that we were here to propose, which Mr. Chambers had put on notice. We have not even set a timetable. This would have been a simple up-and-down vote. I had assumed we'd have unanimous support in the fight against money laundering.
Unfortunately, the Liberals have used a technicality to delay and deny. It's delay and deny. We're left in a position where the Conservatives wanted to send a strong stance out there to all the folks who—
2:40 p.m.
Conservative
2:40 p.m.
Liberal
Julie Dzerowicz Liberal Davenport, ON
Mr. Chair, it seems like Mr. Lawrence has run out of steam in speaking about Mr. Carney. If he would like to talk about budget 2024, we're happy to vote on the subamendment on Mr. Carney and then happy to get to the original programming motion that my wonderful colleague Mr. Turnbull made. However, right now, whatever Mr. Lawrence is talking about has absolutely no relevance to Mr. Carney.
2:40 p.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Jasraj Singh Hallan
Thank you, Ms. Dzerowicz.
Mr. Lawrence, again, I know there's usually a preamble before everyone talks, but let's get to our main points.
2:40 p.m.
Conservative
Philip Lawrence Conservative Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I respect parliamentary procedure and that members have the right to make points of order. However, I did mention previously—and I guess I'll mention it again—that Mr. Carney is on record as saying that money laundering is “deeply troubling” and that the financial institutions need to step up and do more. The subamendment is with respect to Mr. Carney. Having Mr. Carney appear here would provide us greater light on Canada's money-laundering issue. Also, it's directly on today's topic.
I can tell that perhaps our Liberal members are frustrated with hearing me talk, so I'll sum up here out of courtesy and respect to them. What I'd like to put on the record is that Conservatives came here today in good faith to put forward a motion to fight money laundering. That is a significant issue for Canadians. However, Liberals have chosen, at the finance committee, to delay and deny this important motion, this important fight against illicit financing activities that finance human trafficking, finance drug trafficking and even finance—
May 17th, 2024 / 2:40 p.m.
Liberal
2:40 p.m.
Liberal
Joanne Thompson Liberal St. John's East, NL
Again, it's on relevance. I appreciate that Mr. Lawrence is concluding his remarks, but let's stay with the subamendment on bringing the minister to the committee and also Mr. Chambers—Mr. Carney.
2:40 p.m.
Some hon. members
Oh, oh!
2:40 p.m.
Conservative
Philip Lawrence Conservative Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON
I appreciate that, and I would like to hear from Mr. Chambers at any opportunity, but in all seriousness, Mr. Carney has testified before the Senate and is outspoken in the media. We've asked him to come here, and he has denied our request to speak at the finance committee. If he can speak to The Globe and Mail, the CBC and the Senate, I'm unsure as to why he wouldn't want to come to the finance committee. I would certainly invite him to speak on anti-money laundering, as he has been outspoken on it in the past.
We're not sure why he's not being allowed to speak and whether it's maybe internal Liberal politics. He does appear to have an edge on the deputy leader, Ms. Freeland, according to recent polling, so maybe the PMO doesn't want to hear him speak. As there has been, of course, repeated speculation that the Prime Minister will be stepping down towards the end of this session, maybe it's the Prime Minister who's a bit nervous about Mr. Carney.
I believe the time is right for Mr. Carney. He looks to be the future Liberal leader, and as we have done, we will continue to interrogate witnesses and ministers about the failures of the Liberal Party. However, we also want to know what the plans are going forward.
