Procedure and House Affairs Committee on June 9th, 2016

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON]

Fair enough. I think the answer is that you just don't know about the other departments' internal investigations.

[Jody Wilson-Raybould, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

I feel confident in speaking about things that I have direct control over.

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON]

That's fantastic and that's very much appreciated.

I want to ask this question. As I say, I think that any incorrect information, and it would be frankly a very slight technical error, can be explained by the journalist's misunderstanding of what would have been a verbal conversation. It's also possible, and only you would know this, that the wording as described in Laura Stone's article in The Globe and Mail is consistent with an earlier draft of the bill.

If our goal is to search for the provenance, the source of the leak, then it is not inconceivable that it could be someone who had access to an earlier draft. I'm asking you now, is the information inconsistent in the ways that you described with the current wording of the bill, or the bill as it was released, but consistent with an earlier draft? If so, we can narrow our search to individuals who had access to that version of the bill, but not the final version.

[Jody Wilson-Raybould, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

You've mentioned the reporter a number of times, and potentially, it was a technical error in terms of the reporting. I can't say one way or the other in that regard. The draft of the bill as it was introduced, and every previous draft, however different, if they were different at all, is subject to the same confidences of the Queen's Privy Council and the same procedures. Whether it was the final bill that was introduced, or previous iterations of that bill, they are subject to those same security realities. I am confident that we followed all security measures.

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON]

I just want to say thank you. I really do appreciate your taking the time in what really is a busy time, and being as helpful as you've been. Thank you.

[Jody Wilson-Raybould, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

If I could, Mr. Chair, I want to thank the member for the thoughtful nature in which he engaged with his constituents around Bill C-14.

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON]

In case you were wondering, we had a constituency referendum, and 67% of my constituents voted in favour of Bill C-14, on what I thought was an objectively worded question. So there you are.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Thank you.

Now we'll go to Mr. Christopherson for seven minutes.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

I hate to break up this mutual admiration society going on here, but we have a bit of a study we have to conduct.

I want to thank you also, Minister, especially for accommodating us during our time. We had opened up to meet with you at any time that would fit your schedule, and you were good enough to meet during one of our regular meeting times. We do appreciate that and thank you very much for being here.

Do you believe there was a leak? I think that has kind of been asked about, but was there a leak?

[Jody Wilson-Raybould, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

I recognize and think about the timeline. Our notice paper went up with respect to the introduction of our bill, and there were reflections around the legislation in the article that we're talking about. Whether or not that was a significant and substantive correct guess or not, all I know, and what I'm confident of, is that if in fact it was a leak, it was certainly not from the Department of Justice.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

That poses some interesting questions. You started out almost dissecting the information that was out there and it led me to think you were suggesting there wasn't a leak. Even now you're a little less than straight up about whether or not there was a leak. I'll give you another opportunity. Can you tell me straight up, do you believe there was a leak or not, ma'am?

[Jody Wilson-Raybould, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

I like to consider myself as always being straight up in the answers that I provide.

There is obviously some information that the reporter gained access to. I can't and won't hypothesize about how she was able to do that. What I have done, and what I will continue to do, is to fundamentally respect the principles of our constitutional democracy and my responsibility to ensure that I abide by those principles, and recognize that this breach that has occurred and the reason for your study is a very serious matter.

I look forward to the results of your thoughtful discussions.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Great. I'm not a lawyer, the furthest thing from it, but to me, “leak” and “breach” are close enough. If there's no leak, we shouldn't even be meeting. Somebody should be making the case that it's a wild goose chase. The fact that you're willing to say there was a breach means that we do have something here.

The last time we talked about this, for a very brief time, your chief government whip was in the room—not at the table, but in the room. I alluded to that. I asked whether the government had initiated an internal investigation from the get-go. I know you asked some questions, but was there what you would call an investigation? Did you turn to your deputy and say, “I want this investigated and I would like a report”?

[Jody Wilson-Raybould, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

I appreciate the question. Upon being made aware of the article, and hearing what transpired later on in the House of Commons, as you can appreciate, I was pretty busy that day introducing the legislation and had many events surrounding it in terms of media avails and briefings for members and senators. Upon learning of the breach, leak, whatever we want to call it—

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

We're getting there.

[Jody Wilson-Raybould, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

—I did contact and asked my exempt staff if they knew anything about this. I was assured that they did not. I also contacted my deputy, who said the same.

There is no evidence of a breach coming from my department. By virtue of the lack of evidence, no investigation was done beyond what we did in terms of engaging with our staff.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Is that sufficient, though? The reason there's an investigation is it suggests something a little wider and further. You talked to the people who were around you. I used to be a provincial minister, so I know the kind of people who are around you on a day-to-day basis. But that's not the same as formally starting an investigation and asking for a report on it. Is there a reason you didn't go to that level? All your descriptive words have been “tremendous concern” and recognize the breach/leak as something that matters. Is there a reason, ma'am, that you didn't ask for a formal investigation, recognized that this very day could happen?

[Jody Wilson-Raybould, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

Absolutely. I have the utmost confidence and belief in my exempt staff, my deputy, and the public servants who work in the Department of Justice. They show the utmost of professionalism, and recognize the seriousness of ensuring that we maintain confidences and that confidential documents and security levels be adhered to. In this case, there was no evidence to necessitate an investigation, as I described in my remarks.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

All right. There are protocols for the release of bills, given the importance of making sure that Parliament hears it first, which is a right and a privilege of members of Parliament. The previous government, upon finding out there had been a leak, amended the protocol. I'm curious as to whether you're still following that same amended protocol from the previous government or whether you have a new one.

I went into cabinet after the government had been formed, so I wasn't there for the immediate hand-off of the previous government. I don't have any personal experience in this regard, so I'm just asking because I don't know. The protocol, were you using the last amended version that the previous government had as a policy—and that's not a criticism, it's just a question—or did your government come in and rewrite it for your own policy steps and guidelines for introducing legislation?

[Jody Wilson-Raybould, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

Thank you for the question.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Just briefly, Minister.

[Jody Wilson-Raybould, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

As I stated in my remarks, we followed the drafter's guide to cabinet documents and we followed the policy on the security of cabinet confidences. Both are located on the Privy Council Office website and are certainly accessible to determine the dates on which those were brought in.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Thank you.

Ms. Petitpas Taylor will be sharing with Ms. Vandenbeld for a seven-minute round.

[Ginette Petitpas Taylor, Liberal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

Thank you.

Thank you so much, Minister, for joining us this morning. As you are aware, PROC has been asked to investigate this matter. Part of our job is to collect as much information and facts as possible, so we appreciate your taking the time to meet with us this afternoon.

As my first question, Minister, do you feel you took the security matter seriously when you became aware of this potential situation?

[Jody Wilson-Raybould, Liberal, Vancouver Granville, BC]

Absolutely. When I became aware of this, as I stated, it concerned me greatly. It compelled me to almost immediately call my exempt staff, to engage with my deputy, to ask the question of whether we knew anything about it, to follow the procedures, and to confirm that my staff and departmental officials were not involved and followed all procedures.