Evidence of meeting #40 for Government Operations and Estimates in the 40th Parliament, 3rd session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was sauvé.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Denis Coderre Liberal Bourassa, QC
Did Bernard Côté call you when Mr. Sauvé started having problems with his contract?
Conservative
Christian Paradis Conservative Mégantic—L'Érable, QC
No. Mr. Côté never discussed that contract with me nor did he discuss any other contracts on which he might have worked. There was no connection between the two. As I say, my relationship with him went no further than what happened when I first met him. At the time, I was a member of Parliament and he was a member of Mr. Fortier's staff.
Liberal
Denis Coderre Liberal Bourassa, QC
Did you organize a fundraiser event for your riding at Magnan's in June, 2009?
November 30th, 2010 / 9:30 a.m.
Conservative
Conservative
Conservative
Christian Paradis Conservative Mégantic—L'Érable, QC
It may not have been in June, but there was an event at Magnan's.
A little earlier, Mr. Lemay asked me a question. He said he wasn't trying to trap me, but I was not prepared to provide an overview of all the events connected to my nomination or political fundraising. If I'd known, I would have prepared.
The question is whether there was political interference regarding contracts that were awarded for the West Block. The answer is no. I want that on the record, Mr. Chairman. I don't want people trying and catch me out on that.
Liberal
Denis Coderre Liberal Bourassa, QC
Mr. Chairman, I have one last question since this is the end.
Mr. Paradis, if you knew that LM Sauvé was the name of a contractor and that he organized the benefit event, why did you ask your assistant to call to request that you be refunded for the loss of your coat?
Conservative
Christian Paradis Conservative Mégantic—L'Érable, QC
Mr. Prud'Homme told him to call Mr. Sauvé, and Mr. Mailhot thought that Mr. Sauvé was a member of the board of directors of the Bourassa riding association. The conversation lasted 15 seconds and the issue was referred to Mr. Prud'Homme. After that, we continued to go back and forth with Mr. Prud'Homme. It's as simple as that.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
Thank you, Minister Paradis. Thank you, colleagues.
It's now 9:30. I'm going to suspend for a couple of minutes.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
I'm going to suspend first. We'll go in camera, and then we'll deal with your point of order.
[Proceedings continue in camera]
[Public proceedings resume]
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
We're now in public.
The subject matter that is in public is the motion of Siobhan Coady.
For the purposes of the record, Ms. Coady, would you state your motion, please?
Liberal
Liberal
Siobhan Coady Liberal St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL
Okay.
It's that the committee order the Ontario Provincial Police to provide it with a copy of the report dealing with the final breakdown of costs incurred by the OPP that it is providing to Public Safety Canada; and that this report be provided to this committee at the same time that it is provided to Public Safety Canada on December 1, 2010.
This is the one I had tabled at the last meeting.
NDP
Pat Martin NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
Well, let me speak to the merits of this motion, Mr. Chairman.
We've been trying to get the information about the actual costs of the OPP in the G-8 and G-20 summit meetings for weeks and weeks—in fact, months. I think there was an effort made to keep those figures secret until such time as the byelection was held in Vaughan. I don't think anybody has to mince any words over this.
Now our fear--and I think it's valid—is that those numbers may be made available to the government, but there's no obligation or duty on the part of the government to release them to the general public. They might sit on that report for weeks, months, years.
The public has a right to know, and it should be within the context of the present study we have under way; therefore, I think we should deal with this smartly and quickly and get those figures by December 1, so that we can deal with them before the Christmas break.
Conservative
Paul Calandra Conservative Oak Ridges—Markham, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
As I stated on a number of occasions, both in committee and outside of committee, it strikes me that what the opposition are doing and have continuously done is try to label the Ontario Provincial Police as a corrupt force, somehow colluding with the government or with a former member of Parliament, Mr. Bevilacqua, and a whole host of other people to try to mislead the Parliament of Canada. That's obviously something the premise of which I could never support. I think the OPP are a spectacular force who do extraordinary work.
I know that on occasion the opposition members will come here and try to wrap themselves in the cloak of saying, no, this is not what they're saying at all, but then their actions are different. I noticed in I don't know which paper on the weekend that the member across said: “I'm concerned about what they're still hiding”, in reference to some of the release of information by the OPP.
That strikes me as additional evidence that the opposition here is simply trying to say that the Ontario Provincial Police are more a political force than they are a force of policing across the province of Ontario who have done extraordinarily good work.
I think they're also trying to tie in the fact that, somehow, the former Ontario Liberal Minister of Public Safety and Security is also somehow a part of this alleged big conspiracy effort, which includes, of course, the OPP and the former Liberal member of Parliament for Vaughan.
The entire premise of all of this, the direction the opposition is going in, is an insult to the people of Ontario, an insult to the Ontario Provincial Police, an insult to the former Liberal member of Parliament for Vaughan. It has more to do with perhaps Liberal infighting than it has with good work here at the committee.
But I suspect that's one of the reasons they don't have the courage to have a GTA member or an Ontario member come to ask for this information: they know that what they're doing is basically slinging mud at an incredible force. By virtue of that, a person who recently has been a....
Of course, I send my congratulations to the new member-elect for Vaughan. He is a 40-year veteran of policing across Ontario, with the Toronto police force, my force in York Region, and the OPP.
If that's what they want to do, why don't they just be honest about it?
Say what you say in the media: that you think the Ontario Provincial Police is corrupt; that you think the Liberal Minister of Public Safety was corrupt; and that you think that somehow the former Liberal member of Parliament was involved in a massive conspiracy to help win a byelection that undoubtedly you're upset about, because you held the seat for 22 years under massive majorities and we were able to win that one, and I know that's disappointing to the Liberal Party.
Why don't you be honest about what you're trying to do?
Liberal
Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
We've heard a lot of nonsense from Mr. Calandra about what conspiracy theories people might infer from the fact that we want to move a motion that has to do with what the government will receive tomorrow—the government, not the OPP. The government tomorrow will receive the report we're talking about, and the real question is, will the government sit on it for five months? If not, then why are the Conservatives here so opposed to this committee and the public seeing this document?
Mr. Chairman, I think Mr. Martin made the point very well that the government could sit on this information for the next five months without our seeing it. It seems reasonable to me that we are seeking to have that information at the same time as the government gets it.
What would be so wrong with that? What is it that the Conservatives are so afraid of?
Liberal
Siobhan Coady Liberal St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL
Thank you very much.
I think it's regrettable that we have such inflammatory remarks at this committee. There's no discussion of anyone's being corrupt; there's no insult to the people of Ontario. We are merely asking for our fiduciary responsibility for information with regard to spending on the G-8 and G-20, of which we've received information from other departments and other divisions, such as the Toronto police department.
There have been some challenges with getting information from the Ontario police department for whatever reasons—perhaps legitimate, or not so much; I don't know. All we are continuing to ask, for this committee, is for more information, so that we can make informed discussions during a period of study into the spending of the G-8 and G-20. It's nothing more than that: to ask for legitimate information that the government will have as of tomorrow and that should be in the hands of this committee so that we can ask the proper questions.
This is a tremendous amount of spending, and I think we have a responsibility. We have a fiduciary responsibility to the people of Canada. I find my colleague's remarks somewhat inappropriate in that there's no more intent than to ask for information that we legitimately require to have in order to do a proper job.
Thank you.