Government Operations Committee on Sept. 12th, 2024

[George Chahal, Liberal, Calgary Skyview, AB]

Mr. Chair, on a point of order—

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

We have a point of order.

I'm sorry; I can't see who it is, but go ahead.

[George Chahal, Liberal, Calgary Skyview, AB]

It's MP Chahal here.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Go ahead, Mr. Chahal.

[George Chahal, Liberal, Calgary Skyview, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I've heard this from a number of speakers, and previously Ms. Kusie, and Mr. Brock in particular prior to that, and now Mr. Genuis is also leaning into his mic and speaking quite loudly and aggressively and—

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Mr. Chahal, what is your point of order, please?

[George Chahal, Liberal, Calgary Skyview, AB]

My point of order is for the health and safety of interpreters—

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Mr. Chahal, let me just say this once, because I seem to have to say it every single time to new people on this committee: If there is an issue with the interpreters, they will contact the clerk. You do not need to interrupt the proceedings.

Thank you very much.

[George Chahal, Liberal, Calgary Skyview, AB]

Mr. Chair, if I could just finish, all I'm saying is I'm online—

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

No, that's not point of order.

If there's an issue, Mr. Chahal, the interpreters will advise the clerk. I do appreciate your concern for them.

[George Chahal, Liberal, Calgary Skyview, AB]

I would just ask, respectfully, if speakers could not speak so loudly or yell into the mics.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

That's not a point of order.

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

If he could not speak at all, we'd appreciate that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Mr. Genuis, please go ahead.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair, for showing Mr. Chahal how a committee chair is supposed to operate.

Mr. Clark, I'll go back to you.

You're describing a scenario that seems kind of fanciful to me. The purchase has not been completed yet. An offer has been made, but the purchase has not been completed, and you are brought to tour the property.

Normally, when somebody is touring a property that they might live in, in the course of that tour, a conversation is going to happen about the suitability of the place. If you were staying miles away from this decision, it would have been natural for you not to go on the tour.

Ostensibly, you had a reason for going on the tour, though. When you went on this tour before the property had been purchased, you were shown the glorious features and amenities of this property. You would have us believe that you said absolutely nothing about them and that nobody asked whether this seemed like a suitable place. There was no back-and-forth whatsoever. You just looked at it, were silent, and then walked back to your office.

Is that what your testimony is?

[Thomas Clark]

That's what my testimony is. I was curious.

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

Okay. This is sort of—

[Thomas Clark]

I was curious; that's why I went.

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

You understand that the tour of silence, on top of the email that says you were involved, kind of suggests that members of this committee and the public have a reason to be a bit skeptical about aspects of your testimony.

I want to try to get one more question in.

The government is purchasing a $9-million luxury condo for you to live in. We understand that a consul general would entertain guests in their residence, but obviously, the whole residence is not for entertainment. You're not going to be inviting prospective investors into your bedroom, for example.

Now, we have the floor plan of the new space. Would you accept that this luxury condo has a much smaller percentage of representational space and that the tradeoff is much less representational space and much more luxurious personal space? Would you acknowledge that, based on what you've seen in the tour?

[Thomas Clark]

No.

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

Sir, we have the floor plans, and you're not entertaining people in every part of this space. The personal space is a much larger proportion, and it's much more luxurious than in the previous residence, which leans much more towards representational space. That's pretty clear in the floor plans, but are you denying that?

[Thomas Clark]

Yes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

That is our time.

Mr. Chahal, we'll go to you, sir, please, for five minutes.

[George Chahal, Liberal, Calgary Skyview, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, now that you're allowing me to speak.

Mr. Clark, thank you for providing testimony today.

Earlier on, Madame Vignola mentioned or asked you a question regarding the usage of your space, and I think your time ran out. As I begin my questioning about the role and the importance of your space, I would just like to provide you with the opportunity to finish. If you want to add anything that you didn't get to add earlier when you were asked that question, please do so.

[Thomas Clark]

I appreciate that.

May I take this occasion to apologize to Madame Vignola for not being sufficiently conversant in French so as to give her the full answer in French.

Allow me to go to some documents here that will help you understand what we do in terms of the space. Each of the 38 events that I've held— dinners, lunches, breakfasts and receptions—at the official residence has always had one thing at its core, which is that it is a time to bring Canadians and Americans together. If I'm having a conference or a dinner, for example, on private equity and how that affects Canada, or on venture capital and how that affects Canadian companies, I have Canadian experts in that area come down, and we sit around a table with Americans. That is a very effective way of bringing people together and advancing Canada's case here in New York city.

The receptions themselves tend to be rather small, as opposed to the larger ones that we would do here at the mission, because we have the ability to have 80 or 100 people here at the mission. I think everybody knows that official residences, whether they are political or diplomatic, are often used in a way to advance our cause. Advocacy is at the heart of everything that we do, and we use the tools that are available to us to do it, whether it be a residence or a mission.