Evidence of meeting #70 for Government Operations and Estimates in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was redacted.
A video is available from Parliament.
Deputy Minister, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
To clarify, there were 50 people in the department, but we used the Translation Bureau for the translation. So that adds to the number.
Bloc
Julie Vignola Bloc Beauport—Limoilou, QC
Okay.
I have not finished reading the 220,000 pages, but I am reading them. I am not just skimming them; I am actually reading them. I'm not sure if my colleagues are doing that, but I am. I can agree right away with everyone: I do see a problem with the translation.
Ms. O'Gorman, I have before me a contract in English, and I would like you to tell me whether you think it needs to be redacted. I will read it out in English.
It says:
This agreement (“Agreement”) is made in duplicate
Between
________ ("Contractor"), a corporation incorporated under the laws of _________, with its address for notice for the purpose of this Agreement as follows:
Then there are more lines and “Facsimile”.
The lines are already there in the document. I know they might have been redacted. In any case, tell me whether what I read out needed to be redacted.
President, Canada Border Services Agency
Can I ask whether those lines are the same as what you mentioned after comparing our first and second information packages?
Bloc
Julie Vignola Bloc Beauport—Limoilou, QC
It is from the documents provided, marked 001-037, part 1 of 4.
In English, the passage I read out is visible. In French, it has completely disappeared. Those are the types of differences we see in the redaction.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kelly McCauley
That is our time, I'm afraid.
Maybe, Ms. O'Gorman, you can get back to us in writing.
Mr. Johns, you have two minutes, please.
NDP
Gord Johns NDP Courtenay—Alberni, BC
Mr. Housefather had some good questions, Mr. Shea, in terms of advice on ensuring that there is transparency and accountability and no violation of parliamentary privilege. He talked about meeting with the chair of our committee to try to fix this.
You haven't reached out to do that. Do you have some advice for this committee on how we can solve this issue and ensure that parliamentary privilege isn't violated, but that we're also not putting at risk things like the Canadian pension plan and Canada's standing when it comes to investments like that?
Assistant Secretary to the Cabinet, Ministerial Services and Corporate Affairs and Chief Financial Officer, Privy Council Office
I do not know with confidence there has not been any discussion with the committee clerk or the committee chair. I know that is done in some cases. It's a different part of PCO, and I did not ask that question. I can't say with absolute confidence that hasn't happened. I can continue—
NDP
Gord Johns NDP Courtenay—Alberni, BC
I think that's what we want out of today, and that's what we're trying to work towards. In 2010 and this recent redaction, did cabinet make a decision around redacting either of these documents, whether it be now or in 2010, when the Conservatives were in power?
Assistant Secretary to the Cabinet, Ministerial Services and Corporate Affairs and Chief Financial Officer, Privy Council Office
These specific documents...?
NDP
Gord Johns NDP Courtenay—Alberni, BC
I mean the request for documents that were then decided to be redacted.
Assistant Secretary to the Cabinet, Ministerial Services and Corporate Affairs and Chief Financial Officer, Privy Council Office
Forgive me. I'm not sure I understand the question.
NDP
Gord Johns NDP Courtenay—Alberni, BC
Because of time, I just really need to go back to Mr. Leduc.
Mr. Leduc, you talked about the cost to pensioners. What could that cost be, the value of that?
Senior Managing Director and Global Head, Public Affairs & Communications, Canada Pension Plan Investment Board
What I would say is that it's not about a specific dollar figure. Ultimately, it does come down to the value of the fund.
Senior Managing Director and Global Head, Public Affairs & Communications, Canada Pension Plan Investment Board
It would absolutely be massive.
NDP
Gord Johns NDP Courtenay—Alberni, BC
Now, you reached out to everybody on this committee. Which parties met with you at your request?
Senior Managing Director and Global Head, Public Affairs & Communications, Canada Pension Plan Investment Board
We met with all of the parties except one, and one of the reasons we didn't—
Senior Managing Director and Global Head, Public Affairs & Communications, Canada Pension Plan Investment Board
Which one did we not meet with?
Senior Managing Director and Global Head, Public Affairs & Communications, Canada Pension Plan Investment Board
The Bloc, predominantly because Quebec does not participate in the—
Conservative
Conservative
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
Thank you, Chair.
The government's position is that it's the executive's prerogative to withhold documents from committees for certain reasons. Parliamentary counsel has given us the opposite advice; namely, that the constitutional principle of the supremacy of Parliament means that Parliament has the right to request documents. Therefore, you have two different positions. Normally when you have two different positions in law, somebody makes a ruling about whose position is law, and when the lawful authority makes a ruling, people abide by it.
I'll start with the parliamentary counsel.
Who is the lawful authority in this case for ruling on whose interpretation of the law is correct?