Procedure and House Affairs Committee on Nov. 17th, 2020

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

That's a very fair question. The Right Honourable David Johnston was precisely the kind of person—and in this case, the precise person—to provide that confidence to Canadians that it was, indeed, independent from the government. Mr. Johnston would not accept to do this if the government or any other partisan actor were offering him direction in terms of how he should organize these debates. We had full confidence, as I think Canadians did, in his judgment. There were lessons learned, you're right, Karen, from the 2015 experience.

I would trust Mr. Johnston's judgment, and that was part of his lessons learned document that was made public in June, in terms of giving him the authority to determine who participates on the stage. It shouldn't properly be the subject of court litigation either, to your colleague's question, as that can use up a bit of money as well.

We would allow Mr. Johnston and the commission to make those decisions, but we think that basic platform should exist. As you say, the order in council is perhaps not the ideal mechanism.

To Mr. Blaikie's question, if we could get consensus in the House of Commons to pass very quickly—our House leaders might even agree to help us with this—legislation that would permanently create a debates commission, I would be the first one to be enthusiastic about that, but that consensus isn't there yet. That's why the order in council is the mechanism that sets this up. In our view, it is not the long-term solution, but it will be in place for the next election.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Ms. Duncan, you are next.

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you, Minister.

Mr. Sutherland, our officials and Ms. Paquet, thank you for joining us this morning to talk about protecting our democracy.

Since the minister has mentioned how to protect electors, election workers, candidates and all Canadians should there be an election, I am going to ask a few questions.

We have had a discussion about the regional nature of the COVID-19 pandemic, the increasing number of cases, and how to protect the health and safety of all involved: for example, having infection prevention and control experts; guidance to political parties; a review of party pandemic plans; cleaning, masking and social distancing at polling stations; infection audits during the election; a greater number of polling stations; more hours at polling stations; and a mock-up of polling stations before their implementation. These are jut a few of the ideas.

I'd like to ask Minister LeBlanc, does he have any ideas he would like to share now about protecting the health and safety of Canadians should there be an election during the pandemic?

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

Ruby, when people were talking, I was stuffing part of a grilled cheese sandwich into my mouth when Kirsty was asking the question. Was that visible on the screen?

[Todd Doherty, Conservative, Cariboo—Prince George, BC]

Yes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

No, but you have put it on the record now.

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

I don't look like somebody who has missed too many meals and that won't be a surprise. It's an hour later here in New Brunswick. I want to make sure I'm in great shape for question period. Kirsty, this didn't take away from your time.

Kirsty, as I mentioned in my opening comments to your chair, I am extremely interested in the work your committee is doing in looking at the Chief Electoral Officer's report about the context of a pandemic election. I like the idea very much of trying to find the appropriate legislative measures we can put in place with broad consensus in the House of Commons. Obviously, that would quickly give the Chief Electoral Officer the ability for the next general election.... I like his idea of sunsetted provisions that it would apply to the next election, which we fear may obviously be in the context of the ongoing pandemic.

Kirsty, your own professional experience around these issues: infection control measures, dealing with pandemics and viral transmissions probably makes your own thoughts much more valid than mine on this issue. I can tell you that in my conversation with the Chief Electoral Officer, probably already three months ago, one of his concerns was can the government help procure for Elections Canada all the personal protective equipment and extras they would need to ensure the safety of those people working in an election during a pandemic. Our answer obviously was yes. Any time Elections Canada has come to Privy Council, Allen Sutherland or others, with requests in getting ready themselves, based on the best public health advice they are getting from public health authorities, we obviously want to collaborate immediately. That was a commitment I made to Mr. Perrault and obviously that's an ongoing commitment.

Kirsty, you're right. For example, we finished an election in my province of New Brunswick, a provincial election during the beginning of the second wave, which we see tragically under way now, and I noted that the chief public health officer, Dr. Russell from my province, when she testified before your committee indicated that the provincial election in New Brunswick didn't have any direct incidents of COVID transmission, at least to the best of their information.

It's easy because for the moment the circumstances around communal spread in New Brunswick may be different from other parts of the country, although I don't pretend to think we're immune in any way from some of those challenges. I had a conversation with Premier Horgan after he was re-elected in British Columbia and he talked to me about some of the things their elections agency did with Dr. Henry and other local and regional public health officials, not simply the provincial public health officers. I think there is a body of best practices. Saskatchewan of course.... We have a body of best practices already and probably the committee can request this, but if you want, I can ask PCO if we can access those reports and make them available to your committee. I'm sure Elections Canada would share with you all of that as well. I would be happy to work on your suggestions.

Thanks, Madam Chair. I'm sorry I'm talking too long.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Thank you, Minister.

We're going into our third round. We have you for a little while longer.

Mr. Lukiwski, you have five minutes, please.

[Tom Lukiwski, Conservative, Moose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan, SK]

Thank you very much.

Minister, it's good to see you.

I do have a few questions. Much of the ground has been covered by my colleagues. But my first question, and I would suggest the most important question, Minister, is how is your health?

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

Tom, you're very generous. Thank you for asking. You and I have had a chance to serve together and become friends over many years so your question means a great deal to me.

The good news, Tom, is I think I'm one of the lucky Canadians. Over 15 months ago now, I had a stem cell transplant from an unrelated donor in Europe, imagine. My sister was not a match. The hospital in Montreal—they don't do these procedures in New Brunswick—found an unrelated donor who was a perfect genetic match with the same blood type as me and that wonderful gentleman gave me a completely new blood and immune system, which is functioning perfectly normally 15 months out.

I feel very lucky and the medical tests I keep going through are very encouraging so thank you for asking, Tom. Colleagues, when you are away from these jobs we have and from colleagues and friends whom we take for granted—I was away when I was sick—you have no idea how happy you are to see the familiar and friendly faces of people you like and worked with in the past. Tom, you're in that category for me. Thank you for that nice question.

[Tom Lukiwski, Conservative, Moose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan, SK]

You're very welcome. Just take care of yourself, Minister. We want to see you around for many more years.

Now I'll stop being Mr. Nice Guy and we'll get down to business.

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

You're always Mr. Nice Guy, Tom. That's one of the problems. Even when you pretend not to be, we know you are.

[Tom Lukiwski, Conservative, Moose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan, SK]

I'm just a big softie, like you, Minister.

I want to go back to the debates commission set-up for a moment. You have stated publicly, as has the Prime Minister in recent months, that you didn't want to see, and you still don't want to see, a snap election called. The NDP has indicated that they certainly don't want to see another early election called. Recent polling has indicated that most Canadians don't want to see an early election.

This is your opportunity, Minister, to put it on the record. Unless the government falls due to lack of confidence, are you committing today, because you referenced it earlier, that your government would not be going back to the polls early, that it would wait until October 21, 2023?

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

Tom, you've been around a long time. I recognize the trap that is that question. I had the privilege of being in Parliament for two parliaments where Mr. Harper led a minority government. It is a well-known constitutional convention in Westminster parliaments that the Prime Minister can determine what he or she considers to be the confidence of Parliament. Mr. Harper did it a number of times.

I remember those votes, Tom, as would you. I can say—

[Tom Lukiwski, Conservative, Moose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan, SK]

Minister, look, I did not try to trap you. I just wanted to see if you wanted to put on the record some sort of an official comment on the government's intentions.

Let me move on to another question—

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

Sure; then give me a chance to do that, Tom. I will put it on the record very clearly that the government has no intention to call a snap election. During the pandemic, our priority is to work with all parliamentarians, as we have since the beginning.

Tom, if somebody had said to you and me two years ago that we would be passing unbelievably important financial legislation with often unanimous consent in the House of Commons, we wouldn't have believed it. I think it says something great about our Parliament. We want that to continue, with people working collaboratively together as much as possible.

[Tom Lukiwski, Conservative, Moose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan, SK]

Thank you for that.

My last question goes back to the process of the debates commission itself. I agree wholeheartedly with your assessment that Mr. Johnston is an eminent Canadian. I believe he is completely independent and non-partisan. I look forward to him coming forward, hopefully in the near future, with a detailed proposal of what he would like to see in the set-up, perhaps the production side of things, for the next debate.

However, and I think you would recognize this as well as I do, political parties have a say, or at least I believe should have a say, in the set-up of the debates. Every single political party for the last two centuries has had debates, whether it be individual members of Parliament or leaders. I think it would be beneficial, frankly, to the commission if all of the registered political parties in Parliament would have an opportunity to at least give some suggestions to the commission on what they would like to see in terms of the set-up and production of a leaders' debate.

Would you support that assessment, that you would encourage and allow political parties, who would have their own checks and balances, an opportunity to make some assessment and make some recommendations to the commission itself?

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

I don't disagree with the premise at all of what you're saying. I would have phrased it differently; I don't think it's that the government shouldn't “allow”, or I shouldn't “allow” Mr. Johnston or the commission to have what structures he thinks are appropriate. Your suggestion of the commissioner, of Mr. Johnston and his staff, having a structure where political parties can properly offer advice and input into the debates process is obviously something that makes eminent sense. That structure existed with previous consortia that were organizing debates in past elections.

Maybe Allen Sutherland can add to this. To be honest, I don't know if that structure existed, because during the 2019 election I was kind of out of commission for a good chunk of it; I was sick. I think Mr. Johnston would normally have an advisory group that would provide him that kind of input from recognized parties. I would certainly support that. I can't imagine the Liberal Party not participating if Mr. Johnston set up something with the recognized parties. If your committee suggested to him....

I just want to be careful that it's not a suggestion from the government. If your committee were to suggest that to him, if you're asking if the Liberals would participate, I cannot imagine we wouldn't. I personally think it's a good suggestion.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Thank you, Minister.

A yes or no from Mr. Sutherland...?

[Allen Sutherland]

Just to clarify, my understanding is that informally he did reach out to each of the parties. It would be best answered by the debates commission

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Yes. In the past, Mr. David Johnston has been before this committee, in the previous Parliament. To my recollection, there were discussions with all of the parties as to the production of the debate and the rules that were going to be followed.

I'm sure we can have Mr. Johnston here at some point as well in the future.

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

Madam Chair, I think it's a good suggestion that Mr. Lukiwski made. If your committee were to formally suggest it to Mr. Johnston, that perhaps is a better way than having a political party itself suggest it. If you wanted to formalize some structure, I can't imagine that the Liberals wouldn't participate with other parties in it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Absolutely. I think our committee is best suited to do that. Thank you.

Mr. Gerretsen, take five minutes, please.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Thank you, Minister LeBlanc, for taking the time today. I note that you are giving us a full two hours. I don't think I've been on a committee to which a minister has given a full two hours. If I didn't know any better, I would think you enjoyed this.

I must admit, I'm concerned about some of the comments that have been made. I think it's extremely important for a debates commission such as this to be completely independent so that we can reduce the level of partisan attacks as much as possible. I'm really concerned when I hear questions about whether the WE Charity received money from the commission. Likewise, in the States I know that the Republican candidate was extremely critical of their debates commission.

How do we set up a system, or where is the commission's accountability placed, such that we can reduce the amount of partisanship as much as possible, so that it can have its own independence and autonomy, especially in the context of what you described in your opening remarks as the misinformation and the concerns that exist in this day and age? Having this independence, completely autonomous and completely separate from partisan interests, government interests or individual political parties.... Is there a way that you can see doing that?

You talked about legislating the commission, as an example, but where can we move this to in order to give it an independence that separates it from these partisan attacks?

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

I'm glad you can see my enthusiasm to be here. I've missed some colleagues, and this is for me a chance to be back in the action with all of you. It's a privilege to be here.

I share entirely your concern. That's why, certainly as a starting point, having the Right Honourable David Johnston as the commissioner, as I think Mr. Lukiwski and others noted, sets up the commission, because of his role, to have a high level of independence and integrity. He, in my view, is absolutely the perfect person to fulfill that role.

He too has shared reflections exactly along the lines of what you've noted, concerning a greater legislated independence. Ultimately, in some future amendments of some elections act in some different parliament—or perhaps later in this parliament, if your committee and others want to work on that kind of change—that is in my view the ultimate assurance of independence: to legislate a structure, with the appropriate spending estimates to allow them to function independently.

The best way we could act, absent that legislation, is to use the order in council process in a transparent way to appoint Mr. Johnston, as I said, because I think doing so greatly improves the legitimate and perceived independence of the commission. It ensures also that we resist inadvertently making comments that would give the impression, as I've tried to be very precise not to do here, that the government is directing the commission, or would presume to direct him, for example, concerning what kind of advisory consultative structure he should have. Those questions should properly be left to the commissioner. He should receive advice and input, obviously, from a wide range of people, including your committee.

Again, I would welcome your ideas. If the committee has specific ideas about how we can further strengthen that independence both substantively and in the perception of it, I think it behooves all of us to try to do that work together.