Government Operations Committee on Dec. 14th, 2023

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

We posted so many good amendments. There were 15 good amendments. This is one of the ones the Liberals voted against, unfortunately, and it didn't pass.

To understand why the government seals voted against it, we needed to see what the department of bureaucrats told them was wrong with it, because those are secret memos, apparently. Apparently, the government is trying to hide the reasons—much like this contract—that it wants this motion that we put forward to amend the Investment Canada Act defeated. That, again, would not take 2,959 days, which is a slightly different number than the last one, and it wouldn't take 2,961 days, a separate number, but for some reason, it's the exact same amount of time—2,960 days.

The Phoenix pay system is at work here in the openness and transparency under these Liberals that Mr. Masse wants to depend on for the release of the contract.

Mr. Masse has been in this place a long time. I believe it's since 2004. Did I get that right? It was since 2002. Thank you, Mr. Masse.

[An hon. member]

I was in high school.

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

I have to tell you that this is impressive public service and an impressive number of elections won by MP Masse. I have to say that I suspect that even for somebody with the patience of Job—which Mr. Masse has, having been in this place for so long—needing 2,960 days to release the reasons the department didn't want that amendment to the bill is too long. Mr. Masse was present on this bill, a very important bill that Mr. Masse did very good work on with us in that committee, and he wouldn't want to wait that long to find out why that important one was defeated.

Mr. Masse, we should probably do some access to information on the reasons the government voted against your amendment. You would think that voting against your amendments would motivate you to want to make sure there was more openness and transparency here. However, apparently we have a problem here again on the ability of access to information to work.

We asked again for the emails, memos and texts from someone named Mehmet—sorry, Mehmet, if I pronounced your name wrong—Karman. Now, Mr. Karman is a senior policy analyst.

Do you remember when I talked a minute ago about policy folks, then directors, then directors general, then ADMs, then DMs, then the elected minister over them and how that's the hierarchy of government? Well, he's one of those policy analysts who would have worked quite a bit on the meat, on the details, of this stuff.

[An hon. member]

You're sweating.

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

Am I? How can you tell? I have so much hair.

We asked him for his emails and for mentions made of him in the drafting of Bill C-34 to amend the Investment Canada Act.

Now, just to shake it up a little, I think, in analyzing these access to information requests, the creativity in the innovation department comes through in their response in this one. Instead of saying, as they did in the past, the number of 2,960 days, they became very creative on this one and said 2,440 days.

File, print, memo, sort, sent.... Apparently, it's a difficult thing in the innovation department. Maybe the government screening doesn't allow them to go on YouTube. I don't know. Maybe it does; maybe it doesn't. If they can go on YouTube, at least they could do it at home, because I know they're dedicated public servants. They could go home and google it on YouTube on their home computers if they wanted to see how to print an email on Outlook, if they don't have an IT department in the innovation and industry department.

Like I say, I'm a generous fellow and I have an excellent staff. I can send 23-year old Graham O'Brien over in between working on my legislative stuff and working on the master's degree that he's taking right now at the same time. He's a very talented man.

He's doing all of that. Because he does get paid by the House of Commons, I will allow him, during question period—that's the only time—to go over to the industry department and show them. Maybe the government members could organize this meeting; perhaps I should ask the minister if he'd be willing to sit in on the meeting. Graham can do a tutorial for the department about how to hit “File” and then “Print”. It's a difficult thing. Here's a pro tip: It's “File” and then “Print”.

It was 2,440 days—very creative— but that's where the creativity ended, because on the next one, when we asked for the emails, memos and texts with regard to CPC amendment 2.... Now, remember that some of the CPC amendments had 2,690 days or something else. Apparently when they were running this one through their AI machine for how they were going to respond to it, they didn't tell the AI machine to, when we submitted an order to them, actually vary the number of days to make it look like they put some creativity and thought into this, that they actually put some work into finding out whether or not this could be done in a meaningful, open and transparent way, as Mr. Masse wishes for in this memo and as government members apparently support, since they skipped over my motion.

I guess they were offended by my motion. It's unfortunate. They must have been offended by my motion, since my motion at the beginning of this meeting.... I know how fascinating you're finding these access to information requests, but all of this could have been avoided if we were debating my motion now and you hadn't skipped over it.

I know the government members were afraid of my motion because it said to let the Parliamentary law clerk determine what can be released and what can't, not government officials who clearly are very open and transparent; not government members who have been saying that they haven't read the contract. The Minister of Industry said that he never read this contract on Stellantis. The Minister of Health said he never read the Medicago contract before writing a $150-million cheque to the largest company in Japan, claiming that it required an advance payment.

Guess what? I read the contract. I did. In fact, I have it here now if you want to see it. Graham has it with him, because Graham is a diligent staffer. He always comes prepared.

That contract does not have an advance payment clause, as the minister claimed before committee, but then how would the Minister of Health know? The previous minister of health actually negotiated the contract.

When I asked him if he had read the contract, he said no, so perhaps that's why he didn't know it existed. However, when I asked him and told him that the advance payment clause wasn't in that contract, he turned to his deputy minister, one of these fellows from the industry department, and asked, “Is he right?”

So—

[Charles Sousa, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

Mr. Chair, I have a point of order.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

I'm sorry, Mr. Perkins. We have a point of order.

Go ahead, Mr. Sousa.

[Charles Sousa, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

I just want clarity. Are you talking about the contract that you're not allowed to speak about?

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

Yes, I'm talking about the contract.

[Charles Sousa, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

You're releasing information on that contract.

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

I haven't released any information on the contract.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

That's not a point of order.

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

I haven't released any information on the contract.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thanks for clarifying.

Go ahead, Mr. Perkins.

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

I've released information that the minister, in a public committee, said he hadn't read the contract. He wrote a $150-million cheque to the largest company in Japan without reading the contract, the contract that doesn't contain what he claimed it contained. Take another look, if you have access to it. Take a look. You can look for that clause. I challenge you to look for it. Please, enlighten me with the clause. Just give me the clause number.

When they don't read the contracts, they're not actually doing their work. I'm not asking them to go into the room and negotiate. They have thousands and thousands of bureaucrats, but I would think they would actually read the contract before the minister put his signature on it.

Maybe he didn't put his signature on it. Maybe it went to the autopen. In each minister's office there's a mechanical arm that can write the minister's signature. It shouldn't be done on a contract because it's actually illegal, but it happens. That's another insider tip. It happens. A lot of the letters you get back from a minister the minister has never seen. They were signed by the mechanical arm. Maybe the response by Christopher Parsons was signed by the arm.

I have a few more of these to go through. I do see some smiles and I do see some great interest in them, but I can continue at another time if you like, because I'm sure there are colleagues who would like to speak.

I'd like to end my current dissertation on transparency this way: The earnestness with which this motion was put forward by both Mr. Genuis and MP Masse is beyond reproach. One wants to get a compromise to get out of these things; the other also wants that. We want transparency, something that seems difficult for the industry department to do, whether it's in access to information or in contracts.

I'm sure MP Masse will correct me on this, but we believe that in the haste with which MP Masse put this forward in all earnestness, there were a few minor typos, and we want to make sure that the motion is consistent with all of the public statements about openness, transparency and releasing the contract.

I'm sure MP Masse would want to make sure that his leader is not left in the lurch, in that he is now asking for something that his leader isn't. His leader asked for openness and transparency; the motion as it appears now, in our reading of it, is for secrecy and for keeping the contracts hidden, even though they will be reviewed by some other officer.

The amendment we're dealing with here helps to make sure we shine light and have clarity so that government members can prove us wrong. I know that's what the government members want to do. I can see it on their faces. They want to prove us wrong. You know what? I'd be happy if they proved us wrong by releasing the contracts and showing us that the clauses that guarantee good Canadian unionized automotive jobs are part of the condition and show that these plants could not leave once the subsidy ends. I know they want to do that. I know they want to prove us wrong. I ask them because I know they've been listening intently. I can see it on their faces. You can't see it at home, but I can see how intently the government members have been listening to this.

I think I may have convinced them. I hope I've convinced MP Masse on this, even though his Detroit Lions are not doing as well as he had hoped this year.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thanks, Mr. Perkins.

Ms. Vignola, go ahead.

[Julie Vignola, Bloc, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

That was a fascinating monologue, but I don't think it was all that convincing, unfortunately.

I did, however, start putting something together that may satisfy not only the opposition parties, but also the government, in all likelihood.

I'll conclude on that hopeful note—there's light at the end of the tunnel. Someone else can have my time.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

That's wonderful. Thanks, Mrs. Vignola. If it's a lengthy subamendment, I'd appreciate it if you could send it to us in advance.

I have Mr. Sousa. Then we go back to Mr. Perkins, and then we have Mr. Genuis.

[Charles Sousa, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

Mr. Chair, I move that the meeting be adjourned.

[An hon. member]

Hallelujah.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Before we get to too many cheers, we'll do a recorded vote.

(Motion agreed to: yeas 6; nays 4)

I wish everyone a merry Christmas. I thank our wonderful clerk and our wonderful analysts.

We are adjourned.