Procedure and House Affairs Committee on May 9th, 2017

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Okay, Filomena.

[Filomena Tassi, Liberal, Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Just stepping back from this particular case, because this is something where we want to go beyond the facts of this case, what I found when I was looking at the reports of the past and the cases that happened, there was some ambiguity as to where the onus lies with respect to identity. That's really the only question I have.

In the 26th report, there are mixed messages there. One says that the security official should be able to identify the member, that they should have a book. At the same time it says the member should have ID or a pin.

My question is, where does the onus lie with respect to identity? If you have a member.... In that particular case, in fact, there was knowledge that the member was a member, but there was refusal to let that person go because they did not actually have identification on their person.

My question is this: From the security perspective, where does the onus lie with respect to identifying a member? Is it with the security official? If the member has no identity, doesn't have a pin, doesn't have their card but they are in fact a member, and the security official blocks them, who's at fault there? Is it the security official who doesn't have the book and have the pictures memorized, or names and identity, or is it the member of Parliament who does not have ID?

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

I think I should take this for a moment. Normally, as I understand it, members of the PPS have with them, if they're at a point where members are going to be passing, the directory of members with their photographs. You'll recall that I said in my opening comments that it's up to members of the PPS to recognize members, to be familiar with them, and if they don't recognize a member, to look for the pin, and if they don't see the pin—because we don't always wear them, obviously, as you know—then to ask for ID. Frankly, I believe that at the same time, we as members ought to ensure that we either wear our pin or have a card with us. However, it is the responsibility of the PPS to recognize us, and I'd expect they would have that directory with them, but I'll let the superintendent better inform us on that.

[Supt Mike O'Beirne]

I'm not familiar with the exact circumstances that you outline of a few years ago, but what I can state, to reiterate Mr. Speaker's point, all efforts at any time are made to identify visually the members of Parliament. Again, it's kind of a sequential thing. If they don't readily visually recognize, then they try to look for a pin or they look for the ID card. If not that, then a respectful interaction takes place to determine who they might be. In the unfortunate circumstance that they wouldn't visually recognize them, the members are to have on their person a booklet that identifies the members of Parliament by picture and by name. That's a matter of course, and if that isn't happening I would turn myself to that and be very interested in resolving that issue.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

If it's okay with the members, Blake has a very short question.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

Thanks, Mr. Chair. I appreciate the indulgence there.

I have a number of questions for the other witnesses, but I'll save them for when they return.

Mr. Speaker, in your ruling you refer to a couple of reports you had received. One was from the deputy sergeant-at-arms, and I think the other one was from Mr. O'Beirne, the acting director of the parliamentary protective service.

Did you commission those reports, or were they provided to you unsolicited? Also, could you provide copies of those reports to the committee for our work here?

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

It's a normal procedure to provide those to the Speaker.

Did I hear you request that they be provided to the committee?

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

Correct.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

I would be happy to do that.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Thank you for coming.

I think we'll probably ask some of you to come back.

Mr. Bosc, could you get back to the committee in some way on Mr. Graham's question about whether buses could let members off at different locations on occasion?

[Marc Bosc, Acting Clerk, House of Commons]

We're happy to work with the PPS on that point, but I should point out that we want to keep members safe, and it's not always safe to let members off just in any old location.

This is a question that has arisen before, and drivers are very careful to keep people safe. We'll look at it for sure, but it's not a matter of stopping a bus any time a member wants to, unfortunately.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Thank you.

Thank you all for coming today. I know you're busy.

If we could quickly have our next witnesses, Ms. Raitt and Mr. Bernier, come so we don't lose any time, that would be great.

Thank you all.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Colleagues, so we don't lose any time for the witnesses who are very busy these days, we're continuing meeting 57 of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs. This meeting is being televised.

As we continue our study of question of privilege, we are pleased to be joined by Lisa Raitt, MP for Milton, and Maxime Bernier, député de Beauce.

I would like to thank you both for making yourselves available to the committee on short notice. Thank you very much for coming.

I'll now turn the floor over to Ms. Raitt, who moved the initial motion to refer the matter to PROC.

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Milton, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I appreciate the invitation to appear today. I will be brief because the facts are brief.

I did find it necessary and important to rise on the issue in the House, not only because it was about a vote, but also because it was budget day, and there was uncertainty as to whether or not I would be able to get to the House in a timely fashion.

I appreciate the committee taking this to consideration. I appreciate the Speaker's ruling as well.

The main reason is that I truly believe that if you don't measure something, then you can't manage it. What I see from the testimony this morning is that that's exactly what you are all doing. As a member of Parliament, I really appreciate what you're doing here.

I do know there is a balance that needs to be struck in terms of safety and security, and the ability for members of Parliament to move freely within the precinct. In this case, I do think it was imbalanced, and that's why I rose on a question of privilege. I hope that, having learned the lessons we may be learning now, we'll have a better outcome next time.

In short, I arrived at the foot of the Hill and waited in the bus shelter for a couple of minutes. I spoke to a member of House of Commons staff. My colleague from Beauce, Monsieur Bernier, came over, and we chatted a little bit more. We noticed that the buses were piling up at the checkpoint. They were not being released. Max said we should figure out what to do. He went over and inquired as to the reason why. A reason was given. He came back and said that they were not going to be moving the buses, and we ended up taking our leave and proceeding up to the Hill.

When we arrived, I was able to see the presentation of the budget, and after that I rose on the point of personal privilege. That's where it ended for me, except for what happened in terms of procedure in the House, and I'm grateful to be here today.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Thank you.

Mr. Bernier.

[Maxime Bernier, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

Thank you very much.

The facts are very clear, and our parliamentary privilege was breached on March 22. I completely agree with what my colleague, the member for Milton, said.

I arrived around 3:50 p.m. to take the bus to go vote. We waited for a few minutes and could see that there were many buses waiting at the gate before they could come through. I went to talk to a security officer, and I asked him what was happening. He told me that he was waiting for the escort of the Prime Minister's motorcade, which was coming in without passengers. Not knowing when the gates would be opened and realizing that time was running out, we decided, around 3:54 p.m., to walk to Parliament. We arrived late for votes, and that is why my colleague the MP for Milton and I rose on a question of privilege at the end of debates.

Today, I am very happy that you are assessing what happened to ensure that other colleagues of ours do not have the same experience in the future.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Thank you very much.

Ms. Sahota.

[Ruby Sahota, Liberal, Brampton North, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you for being with us today. It sheds a little bit more light on the facts of what happened that day. My question is about how we just heard from the director of the PPS that according to their information, they had no knowledge that there was anything to do with the Prime Minister's motorcade and the motorcade leaving, and that they are unaware of who may have told you about that, and that in fact it was actually a press bus that caused the delay in the VSF. Can you explain to this committee how you became aware that it was the Prime Minister's motorcade, or how you were informed of that, and why you were led to believe that and say it in the House that day?

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Milton, ON]

Max was the one who had the face-to-face conversation so I'll let him talk to what he heard directly.

[Maxime Bernier, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

Yes, absolutely.

When I talked to the security officer, he was not sure what was happening or why the gate had been closed for a while. I did not talk to the RCMP people; I really talked to the House of Commons officer. He was not sure what was happening and told me that it should be the Prime Minister's motorcade, which was empty, but he also told me that he would find out.

When we saw that the information on what was taking place was vague and that the gate was still closed, we decided to walk to the House of Commons.

However, you are correct in saying, after this morning's testimony, that we were rather made to wait because of journalists. However, according to the information given to me at that time—as the clerk clearly indicates in his decision—it was due to the Prime Minister's empty motorcade. But the employee was not 100% sure and told me that he would find out.

Since we had no further news, we left to go vote as quickly as possible, but we arrived late, as you know.

[Ruby Sahota, Liberal, Brampton North, ON]

Just to clarify, you were told this by an officer in the VSF area?

[Maxime Bernier, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

Yes.

[Ruby Sahota, Liberal, Brampton North, ON]

So they were uncertain and unclear as to why they were causing delay at that point.